Monday, 17 September 2007

The Muslim Brotherhood, the Muslim Council of Britain and other matters jihadi

The Muslim Brotherhood is an organisation that has its origins in 1928 Egypt and a very questionable present but my attention has been drawn to this article that reminds me that in 1991 the FBI found out more than enough about the Muslim Brotherhood but took no action. The document they discovered 16 years ago was an "explanatory memorandum," which outlined the "strategic goal" for the North American operation of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan). Here's the key paragraph: "The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their 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 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 choose to slack."

The entire 18 page platform outlines a plan for the long haul. It sets out the Muslim Brotherhood's comprehensive plan to set down roots in civil society. Back to the Dallas News "It begins by both founding and taking control of American Muslim organizations, for the sake of unifying and educating the U.S. Muslim community – this to prepare it for the establishment of a global Islamic state governed by sharia.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory out of a bad Hollywood movie – but it's real. Husain Haqqani, head of Boston University's Center for International Relations and a former Islamic radical, confirms that the Brotherhood "has run most significant Muslim organizations in the U.S." as part of the plan outlined in the strategy paper."

"The HLF trial is exposing for the first time how the international Muslim Brotherhood – whose Palestinian division is Hamas – operates as a self-conscious revolutionary vanguard in the United States. The court documents indicate that many leading Muslim-American organizations – including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim American Society – are an integral part of the Brotherhood's efforts to wage jihad against America by nonviolent means.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an affiliation of at least 70 Islamist organizations around the world, all tracing their heritage to the original cell, founded in Egypt in 1928. Its credo: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." Sayyid Qutb, hanged by the Egyptian government in 1966 as a revolutionary, remains its ideological godfather. His best-known work, Milestones, calls for Muslims to wage violent holy war until Islamic law governs the entire world."

The key here is that it has taken many years of pressure by various experts on the Islamic threat to the West for the Main Stream Media to acknowledge that there are demands for a return to the caliphate in Muslim lands. Still interviewers and presenters fail to ask what is a Muslim land. They allow the Islamist interviewee to say Muslim lands and move on. The inconvenient truth is that Muslim lands are anywhere that has ever been Muslim territory. Just as no building that has ever been a Mosque can be used as anything other than a Mosque, so any land that has been ruled as Muslim land is considered as Muslim land.

At this point you might want to read an earlier article where I include Hassan Butt's explanation of what motivates British jihadis - "though many British extremists are angered by the deaths of fellow Muslim across the world, what drove me and many others to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain and abroad was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary worldwide Islamic state that would dispense Islamic justice."

"How do Islamic radicals justify such terror in the name of their religion?

There isn't enough room to outline everything here, but the foundation of extremist reasoning rests upon a model of the world in which you are either a believer or an infidel.

Formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion: they are considered to be one and the same.

For centuries, the reasoning of Islamic jurists has set down rules of interaction between Dar ul-Islam (the Land of Islam) and Dar ul-Kufr (the Land of Unbelief) to cover almost every matter of trade, peace and war.

But what radicals and extremists do is to take this two steps further. Their first step has been to argue that, since there is no pure Islamic state, the whole world must be Dar ul-Kufr (The Land of Unbelief).

Step two: since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they have declared war upon the whole world."

"Along with many of my former peers, I was taught by Pakistani and British radical preachers that this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief.

In Dar ul-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians. "

It is not enough to glibly say that Islam is the Religion of Peace. There are Islamists who use the Qur’aan to justify their murderous attacks, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel & the Palestinians, Chechnya are all red herrings - the truth is out there, go look.

This links in with another article I wrote about the language used by Inayat Bunglawala and Muhammad Abdul Bari of the Muslim Council of Britain (incidentally why not Great Britain and what about Northern Ireland?) when they are asked for their opinion or that of the Qur’aan on acts of terrorism. They say something along the lines of "We condemn the killing of all innocent people wherever they are" or "Those who seek to deliberately kill or maim innocent people are the enemies of us all. There is no cause whatsoever that could possibly justify such barbarity." The key word is "innocent" as we heard during the trial of the thwarted terrorist Jawad Akbar, who planned to commit slaughter on the Ministry of Sound's dance floor, "No one can turn around and say, 'Oh, they were innocent', those slags dancing around. Do you understand what I mean?" So in his view these were not innocent people, how about in the view of Inayat Bunglawala and Muhammad Abdul Bari? The follow-up question that is never asked of these representatives of the MCB is "are those people who don't pray to Allah five times a day and who don't follow the tenets of Islam, innocent?".

I am not saying that Muhammad Abdul Bari or Inayat Bunglawala are terrorists, I am not saying that they support terrorism within the UK; however I am saying that the question "in your view and in the word of the Qur’aan, what types of people are innocent and what types of people are not innocent?" should be asked of, and answered, by them.

No comments: