Sign of an Egyptian Election: Mass Arrests

How do you know when it’s election season in Egypt?  The arrests mount up.

In what has become a regular pre-election ritual, Egyptian police and security officials have arrested more than 150 members of the Muslim Brotherhood since the group announced that it will participate in Nov. 29 parliamentary elections.  More than 70 members were arrested just in the past few days.

It’s not just the Muslim Brothers feeling the crackdown.  In the past few weeks, other political opponents have been detained, including Gamila Ismail, wife of Ayman Nour, a former leader of the El Ghad party who was convicted and sentenced to jail after being the first runner-up in the 2005 presidential campaign. Ismail was released after being detained.

The pre-election arrests follow the pattern established in previous parliamentary and presidential elections, with the Muslim Brothers often taking the greatest brunt of the crackdown.  But if the arrests no longer surprise, the Egyptian government’s contempt for the basic premises of free and fair elections still brings outrage.

“If the forthcoming elections are to be fair and credible, the Egyptian government must ensure that they are conducted on a ‘level playing field’ and uphold the rights to freedom of association of all candidates and their supporters,” said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International’s director for the Middle East and North Africa.  (The complete Amnesty International statement can be found here.)

The arrests come at the same time that a ruling party official provided the strongest indication that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak will run for re-election in presidential race scheduled for 2011.  If the 82-year-old Mubarak runs again, the crackdown for this year’s parliamentary election has the potential to be a tune-up for a harsher effort next year.

What will the world’s response be?  In past years, allied governments have looked the other way as the Mubarak government has crackdown on election opponents.  These crackdowns make a mockery of the electoral process and the idea that the people should be free to elect their representatives.  If the world continues to be a silent audience, and is a mere onlooker to the injustices being committed in Egypt it will have betrayed the values of human equality and dignity that are at the core of all human rights.

AIUSA welcomes a lively and courteous discussion that follow our Community Guidelines. Comments are not pre-screened before they post but AIUSA reserves the right to remove any comments violating our guidelines.

30 thoughts on “Sign of an Egyptian Election: Mass Arrests

  1. HUMAN RIGHTS Now???

    What about the human rights of the entire world.

    The MB (muslim Brotherhood) are a vile menace to the world and number one promoters of radical islam.
    The MB are known for their extremist views and desire to Islamize the world and impose shariah laws.
    Groups like this need to be eradicated permanently.
    The egyptian government is very wise for rounding these barbaric group up.
    Politics should be dominated by any extremist religious party especially radical islam.

    I hope the MB are totally removed and disbanded as a united party.
    Let us not forget they were outlawed in 1954 for a good reason.
    Let's also recall they assassinated Anwar sadat in 1981.
    They are supports of Hezbollah and Hamas and encouraging resistance to a peace treaty in a hope of entering a war with Israel.
    Wake up world.

    Speaking of RIGHTS,
    what about the COPTIC minority daily persecuted at the hands of the MB and their supporters.
    There is something wrong with your representation of the MB in this article and appears based on ignorance.

  2. Interesting point, Ibby. If the MB are as bad as you say, I wonder that Amnesty International isn't decrying their treatment of women through shariah law.

  3. HUMAN RIGHTS Now???

    What about the human rights of the entire world.

    The MB (muslim Brotherhood) are a vile menace to the world and number one promoters of radical islam.
    The MB are known for their extremist views and desire to Islamize the world and impose shariah laws.
    Groups like this need to be eradicated permanently.
    The egyptian government is very wise for rounding these barbaric group up.
    Politics should be dominated by any extremist religious party especially radical islam.

    I hope the MB are totally removed and disbanded as a united party.
    Let us not forget they were outlawed in 1954 for a good reason.
    Let’s also recall they assassinated Anwar sadat in 1981.
    They are supports of Hezbollah and Hamas and encouraging resistance to a peace treaty in a hope of entering a war with Israel.
    Wake up world.

    Speaking of RIGHTS,
    what about the COPTIC minority daily persecuted at the hands of the MB and their supporters.
    There is something wrong with your representation of the MB in this article and appears based on ignorance.

  4. Interesting point, Ibby. If the MB are as bad as you say, I wonder that Amnesty International isn’t decrying their treatment of women through shariah law.

  5. Thanks for the reply Joe.

    Please find the complete report at http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wys

    What cannot credibly be denied, however, is that:

    1.Shariah is firmly rooted in Islam’s doctrinal texts, and it is favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, and academic centers (for example, the faculty at al-Azhar University in Cairo, for centuries the seat of Sunni learning and jurisprudence);
    2.Shariah has been, for over a half-century, lavishly financed and propagated by Islamic regimes (particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran), through the offices of disciplined international organizations (particularly the Muslim Brotherhood); and
    3.Due to the fact that Islam lacks a central, universally recognized hierarchical authority (in contrast to, say, the Roman Catholic papacy), authentic Islamic moderates and reformers have an incredibly difficult task in endeavoring to delegitimize shariah in the community where it matters most: the world’s Muslims.
    Consequently, regardless of what percentage of the global Islamic population adheres or otherwise defers to shariah (and some persuasive polling indicates that percentage is high in many Islamic countries), it is punching well above its weight. For that reason, it is a serious threat to the United States even if we assume, for argument’s sake, that hopeful pundits are correct in claiming that shariah Islam is not the preponderant Muslim ideology.

    A second point is that it is vital to the national security of the United States, and to Western civilization at large, that we do what we can to empower Islam’s authentic moderates and reformers. That cannot be done by following the failed strategy of fictionalizing the state of Islam in the vain hope that reality will, at some point, catch up to the benign fable. Empowering the condign elements of Islam requires a candid assessment, which acknowledges the strength of shariah — just as defeat of Twentieth Century totalitarian ideologies required an acknowledgment of, and respect for, their malevolent capabilities.

    To do this, it is paramount that we no longer allow those who mean to destroy our society — including to sabotage it from within — to camouflage themselves as “moderates.” The definition of moderation needs to be reset, to bore in on the shariah fault-line. Only by identifying those Muslims who wish to impose shariah can we succeed in marginalizing them.

    As this study manifests, the shariah system is totalitarian. It imposes itself on all aspects of civil society and human life, both public and private. Anyone obliged actually to defend the proposition that shariah should be adopted here will find few takers and be properly seen for what they are — marginal and extremist figures. That, and only that, will strengthen true proponents of a moderate or reformist Islam that embraces freedom and equality.

    Third, we have an obligation to protect our nation and our way of life regardless of the ultimate resolution of Islam’s internal strife. We can do a far better job of empowering non-shariah-adherent Muslims, who are our natural allies, but we cannot win for them — they have to do that for themselves. Irrespective of whether they succeed in the formidable task of delegitimizing shariah globally, we must face it down in the United States, throughout the West and wherever on earth it launches violent or ideological offensives against us.

    Shariah is Anti-constitutional

    If we are to face down shariah, we must understand what we are up against, not simply hope that dialogue and “engagement” will make the challenge go away. Those who today support shariah and the establishment of a global Islamic state (caliphate) are perforce supporting objectives that are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, the civil rights the Constitution guarantees and the representative, accountable government it authorizes. In fact, shariah’s pursuit in the United States is tantamount to sedition.

    Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as “dawa“ (the “call to Islam”), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

    1.The bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;
    2.The republican democracy governed by the Constitution;
    3.Freedom of conscience; individual liberty (including in matters of personal privacy and sexual preference);
    4.Freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah)
    5.Economic liberty (including private property);
    6.Equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);
    7.Freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate “resistance”); and
    8.An abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of federalism and democracy, not wanton violence.
    The subversion campaign known as Civilization Jihad must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework. In fact, we get this concept of “civilization jihad” from, among other sources, a document that was entered into evidence in the 2008 United States v Holy Land Foundation terrorist finance trial titled the An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group.

    The Explanatory Memorandum was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the U.S. and a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America (MB, also known as the Ikhwan). The document makes plain that the Islamic Movement is a MB effort, led by the Ikhwan in America. The Explanatory Memorandum goes on to explain that the “Movement” is a “settlement process” to establish itself inside the United States and, once established, to undertake a “grand jihad” characterized as a “civilization jihadist” mission that is likewise led by the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, the document describes the “settlement process” as a “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….”

    To put it simply, according to the Muslim Brotherhood, the civilization jihad is the “Settlement Process” and the “Settlement Process” is the mission of the “Islamic Movement.” And that mission entails “eliminating and destroying” our way of life. Author Robert Spencer has popularized this concept with a term that captures both the character and deadly purpose of the Ikhwan’s efforts in America: “stealth jihad.”

    The “Explanatory Memorandum” — the Holy Land Foundation smoking gun — is the key document in the case against “moderate” Muslims in America. It exposes more than 90% of their organizations as fronts and shell groups for al-Ikhwan al-Muslimeen, the Muslim Brotherhood, whose publicly-stated aim is to overthrow by subversion the secular constitutional government of the United States and replace it with Islamic law.

    They have succeeded very well so far in their efforts, thanks to penetration, disinformation, the co-optation of existing organizations, and the willing collaboration of the Socialist Left.

    The Team B II document will shine a major light into those dark corners of our national political process which the Left and the Ikhwan would prefer to remain hidden.

  6. Thanks for the reply Joe.

    Please find the complete report at http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wys

    What cannot credibly be denied, however, is that:

    1.Shariah is firmly rooted in Islam’s doctrinal texts, and it is favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, and academic centers (for example, the faculty at al-Azhar University in Cairo, for centuries the seat of Sunni learning and jurisprudence);
    2.Shariah has been, for over a half-century, lavishly financed and propagated by Islamic regimes (particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran), through the offices of disciplined international organizations (particularly the Muslim Brotherhood); and
    3.Due to the fact that Islam lacks a central, universally recognized hierarchical authority (in contrast to, say, the Roman Catholic papacy), authentic Islamic moderates and reformers have an incredibly difficult task in endeavoring to delegitimize shariah in the community where it matters most: the world’s Muslims.
    Consequently, regardless of what percentage of the global Islamic population adheres or otherwise defers to shariah (and some persuasive polling indicates that percentage is high in many Islamic countries), it is punching well above its weight. For that reason, it is a serious threat to the United States even if we assume, for argument’s sake, that hopeful pundits are correct in claiming that shariah Islam is not the preponderant Muslim ideology.

    A second point is that it is vital to the national security of the United States, and to Western civilization at large, that we do what we can to empower Islam’s authentic moderates and reformers. That cannot be done by following the failed strategy of fictionalizing the state of Islam in the vain hope that reality will, at some point, catch up to the benign fable. Empowering the condign elements of Islam requires a candid assessment, which acknowledges the strength of shariah — just as defeat of Twentieth Century totalitarian ideologies required an acknowledgment of, and respect for, their malevolent capabilities.

    To do this, it is paramount that we no longer allow those who mean to destroy our society — including to sabotage it from within — to camouflage themselves as “moderates.” The definition of moderation needs to be reset, to bore in on the shariah fault-line. Only by identifying those Muslims who wish to impose shariah can we succeed in marginalizing them.

    As this study manifests, the shariah system is totalitarian. It imposes itself on all aspects of civil society and human life, both public and private. Anyone obliged actually to defend the proposition that shariah should be adopted here will find few takers and be properly seen for what they are — marginal and extremist figures. That, and only that, will strengthen true proponents of a moderate or reformist Islam that embraces freedom and equality.

    Third, we have an obligation to protect our nation and our way of life regardless of the ultimate resolution of Islam’s internal strife. We can do a far better job of empowering non-shariah-adherent Muslims, who are our natural allies, but we cannot win for them — they have to do that for themselves. Irrespective of whether they succeed in the formidable task of delegitimizing shariah globally, we must face it down in the United States, throughout the West and wherever on earth it launches violent or ideological offensives against us.

    Shariah is Anti-constitutional

    If we are to face down shariah, we must understand what we are up against, not simply hope that dialogue and “engagement” will make the challenge go away. Those who today support shariah and the establishment of a global Islamic state (caliphate) are perforce supporting objectives that are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, the civil rights the Constitution guarantees and the representative, accountable government it authorizes. In fact, shariah’s pursuit in the United States is tantamount to sedition.

    Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as “dawa“ (the “call to Islam”), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

    1.The bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;
    2.The republican democracy governed by the Constitution;
    3.Freedom of conscience; individual liberty (including in matters of personal privacy and sexual preference);
    4.Freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah)
    5.Economic liberty (including private property);
    6.Equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);
    7.Freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate “resistance”); and
    8.An abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of federalism and democracy, not wanton violence.
    The subversion campaign known as Civilization Jihad must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework. In fact, we get this concept of “civilization jihad” from, among other sources, a document that was entered into evidence in the 2008 United States v Holy Land Foundation terrorist finance trial titled the An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group.

    The Explanatory Memorandum was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the U.S. and a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America (MB, also known as the Ikhwan). The document makes plain that the Islamic Movement is a MB effort, led by the Ikhwan in America. The Explanatory Memorandum goes on to explain that the “Movement” is a “settlement process” to establish itself inside the United States and, once established, to undertake a “grand jihad” characterized as a “civilization jihadist” mission that is likewise led by the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, the document describes the “settlement process” as a “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….”

    To put it simply, according to the Muslim Brotherhood, the civilization jihad is the “Settlement Process” and the “Settlement Process” is the mission of the “Islamic Movement.” And that mission entails “eliminating and destroying” our way of life. Author Robert Spencer has popularized this concept with a term that captures both the character and deadly purpose of the Ikhwan’s efforts in America: “stealth jihad.”

    The “Explanatory Memorandum” — the Holy Land Foundation smoking gun — is the key document in the case against “moderate” Muslims in America. It exposes more than 90% of their organizations as fronts and shell groups for al-Ikhwan al-Muslimeen, the Muslim Brotherhood, whose publicly-stated aim is to overthrow by subversion the secular constitutional government of the United States and replace it with Islamic law.

    They have succeeded very well so far in their efforts, thanks to penetration, disinformation, the co-optation of existing organizations, and the willing collaboration of the Socialist Left.

    The Team B II document will shine a major light into those dark corners of our national political process which the Left and the Ikhwan would prefer to remain hidden.

  7. Thanks for the reply Joe.

    Please find the complete report at http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wys

    What cannot credibly be denied, however, is that:

    1.Shariah is firmly rooted in Islam’s doctrinal texts, and it is favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, and academic centers (for example, the faculty at al-Azhar University in Cairo, for centuries the seat of Sunni learning and jurisprudence);
    2.Shariah has been, for over a half-century, lavishly financed and propagated by Islamic regimes (particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran), through the offices of disciplined international organizations (particularly the Muslim Brotherhood); and
    3.Due to the fact that Islam lacks a central, universally recognized hierarchical authority (in contrast to, say, the Roman Catholic papacy), authentic Islamic moderates and reformers have an incredibly difficult task in endeavoring to delegitimize shariah in the community where it matters most: the world’s Muslims.
    Consequently, regardless of what percentage of the global Islamic population adheres or otherwise defers to shariah (and some persuasive polling indicates that percentage is high in many Islamic countries), it is punching well above its weight. For that reason, it is a serious threat to the United States even if we assume, for argument’s sake, that hopeful pundits are correct in claiming that shariah Islam is not the preponderant Muslim ideology.

    A second point is that it is vital to the national security of the United States, and to Western civilization at large, that we do what we can to empower Islam’s authentic moderates and reformers. That cannot be done by following the failed strategy of fictionalizing the state of Islam in the vain hope that reality will, at some point, catch up to the benign fable. Empowering the condign elements of Islam requires a candid assessment, which acknowledges the strength of shariah — just as defeat of Twentieth Century totalitarian ideologies required an acknowledgment of, and respect for, their malevolent capabilities.

    To do this, it is paramount that we no longer allow those who mean to destroy our society — including to sabotage it from within — to camouflage themselves as “moderates.” The definition of moderation needs to be reset, to bore in on the shariah fault-line. Only by identifying those Muslims who wish to impose shariah can we succeed in marginalizing them.

    As this study manifests, the shariah system is totalitarian. It imposes itself on all aspects of civil society and human life, both public and private. Anyone obliged actually to defend the proposition that shariah should be adopted here will find few takers and be properly seen for what they are — marginal and extremist figures. That, and only that, will strengthen true proponents of a moderate or reformist Islam that embraces freedom and equality.

    Third, we have an obligation to protect our nation and our way of life regardless of the ultimate resolution of Islam’s internal strife. We can do a far better job of empowering non-shariah-adherent Muslims, who are our natural allies, but we cannot win for them — they have to do that for themselves. Irrespective of whether they succeed in the formidable task of delegitimizing shariah globally, we must face it down in the United States, throughout the West and wherever on earth it launches violent or ideological offensives against us.

    Shariah is Anti-constitutional

    If we are to face down shariah, we must understand what we are up against, not simply hope that dialogue and “engagement” will make the challenge go away. Those who today support shariah and the establishment of a global Islamic state (caliphate) are perforce supporting objectives that are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, the civil rights the Constitution guarantees and the representative, accountable government it authorizes. In fact, shariah’s pursuit in the United States is tantamount to sedition.

    Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as “dawa“ (the “call to Islam”), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

    1.The bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;
    2.The republican democracy governed by the Constitution;
    3.Freedom of conscience; individual liberty (including in matters of personal privacy and sexual preference);
    4.Freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah)
    5.Economic liberty (including private property);
    6.Equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);
    7.Freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate “resistance”); and
    8.An abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of federalism and democracy, not wanton violence.
    The subversion campaign known as Civilization Jihad must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework. In fact, we get this concept of “civilization jihad” from, among other sources, a document that was entered into evidence in the 2008 United States v Holy Land Foundation terrorist finance trial titled the An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group.

    The Explanatory Memorandum was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the U.S. and a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America (MB, also known as the Ikhwan). The document makes plain that the Islamic Movement is a MB effort, led by the Ikhwan in America. The Explanatory Memorandum goes on to explain that the “Movement” is a “settlement process” to establish itself inside the United States and, once established, to undertake a “grand jihad” characterized as a “civilization jihadist” mission that is likewise led by the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, the document describes the “settlement process” as a “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….”

    To put it simply, according to the Muslim Brotherhood, the civilization jihad is the “Settlement Process” and the “Settlement Process” is the mission of the “Islamic Movement.” And that mission entails “eliminating and destroying” our way of life. Author Robert Spencer has popularized this concept with a term that captures both the character and deadly purpose of the Ikhwan’s efforts in America: “stealth jihad.”

    The “Explanatory Memorandum” — the Holy Land Foundation smoking gun — is the key document in the case against “moderate” Muslims in America. It exposes more than 90% of their organizations as fronts and shell groups for al-Ikhwan al-Muslimeen, the Muslim Brotherhood, whose publicly-stated aim is to overthrow by subversion the secular constitutional government of the United States and replace it with Islamic law.

    They have succeeded very well so far in their efforts, thanks to penetration, disinformation, the co-optation of existing organizations, and the willing collaboration of the Socialist Left.

    The Team B II document will shine a major light into those dark corners of our national political process which the Left and the Ikhwan would prefer to remain hidden.

  8. Thanks for the reply Joe.

    Please find the complete report at http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/upload/wysiwyg/article%20pdfs/Shariah%20-%20The%20Threat%20to%20America%20(Team%20B%20Report)%2009142010.pdf

    What cannot credibly be denied, however, is that:

    1.Shariah is firmly rooted in Islam’s doctrinal texts, and it is favored by influential Islamic commentators, institutions, and academic centers (for example, the faculty at al-Azhar University in Cairo, for centuries the seat of Sunni learning and jurisprudence);
    2.Shariah has been, for over a half-century, lavishly financed and propagated by Islamic regimes (particularly Saudi Arabia and Iran), through the offices of disciplined international organizations (particularly the Muslim Brotherhood); and
    3.Due to the fact that Islam lacks a central, universally recognized hierarchical authority (in contrast to, say, the Roman Catholic papacy), authentic Islamic moderates and reformers have an incredibly difficult task in endeavoring to delegitimize shariah in the community where it matters most: the world’s Muslims.
    Consequently, regardless of what percentage of the global Islamic population adheres or otherwise defers to shariah (and some persuasive polling indicates that percentage is high in many Islamic countries), it is punching well above its weight. For that reason, it is a serious threat to the United States even if we assume, for argument’s sake, that hopeful pundits are correct in claiming that shariah Islam is not the preponderant Muslim ideology.

    A second point is that it is vital to the national security of the United States, and to Western civilization at large, that we do what we can to empower Islam’s authentic moderates and reformers. That cannot be done by following the failed strategy of fictionalizing the state of Islam in the vain hope that reality will, at some point, catch up to the benign fable. Empowering the condign elements of Islam requires a candid assessment, which acknowledges the strength of shariah — just as defeat of Twentieth Century totalitarian ideologies required an acknowledgment of, and respect for, their malevolent capabilities.

    To do this, it is paramount that we no longer allow those who mean to destroy our society — including to sabotage it from within — to camouflage themselves as “moderates.” The definition of moderation needs to be reset, to bore in on the shariah fault-line. Only by identifying those Muslims who wish to impose shariah can we succeed in marginalizing them.

    As this study manifests, the shariah system is totalitarian. It imposes itself on all aspects of civil society and human life, both public and private. Anyone obliged actually to defend the proposition that shariah should be adopted here will find few takers and be properly seen for what they are — marginal and extremist figures. That, and only that, will strengthen true proponents of a moderate or reformist Islam that embraces freedom and equality.

    Third, we have an obligation to protect our nation and our way of life regardless of the ultimate resolution of Islam’s internal strife. We can do a far better job of empowering non-shariah-adherent Muslims, who are our natural allies, but we cannot win for them — they have to do that for themselves. Irrespective of whether they succeed in the formidable task of delegitimizing shariah globally, we must face it down in the United States, throughout the West and wherever on earth it launches violent or ideological offensives against us.

    Shariah is Anti-constitutional

    If we are to face down shariah, we must understand what we are up against, not simply hope that dialogue and “engagement” will make the challenge go away. Those who today support shariah and the establishment of a global Islamic state (caliphate) are perforce supporting objectives that are incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, the civil rights the Constitution guarantees and the representative, accountable government it authorizes. In fact, shariah’s pursuit in the United States is tantamount to sedition.

    Whether pursued through the violent form of jihad (holy war) or stealthier practices that shariah Islamists often refer to as “dawa“ (the “call to Islam”), shariah rejects fundamental premises of American society and values:

    1.The bedrock proposition that the governed have a right to make law for themselves;
    2.The republican democracy governed by the Constitution;
    3.Freedom of conscience; individual liberty (including in matters of personal privacy and sexual preference);
    4.Freedom of expression (including the liberty to analyze and criticize shariah)
    5.Economic liberty (including private property);
    6.Equal treatment under the law (including that of men and women, and of Muslims and non-Muslims);
    7.Freedom from cruel and unusual punishments; an unequivocal condemnation of terrorism (i.e., one that is based on a common sense meaning of the term and does not rationalize barbarity as legitimate “resistance”); and
    8.An abiding commitment to deflate and resolve political controversies by the ordinary mechanisms of federalism and democracy, not wanton violence.
    The subversion campaign known as Civilization Jihad must not be confused with, or tolerated as, a constitutionally protected form of religious practice. Its ambitions transcend what American law recognizes as the sacrosanct realm of private conscience and belief. It seeks to supplant our Constitution with its own totalitarian framework. In fact, we get this concept of “civilization jihad” from, among other sources, a document that was entered into evidence in the 2008 United States v Holy Land Foundation terrorist finance trial titled the An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group.

    The Explanatory Memorandum was written in 1991 by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas leader in the U.S. and a member of the Board of Directors for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America (MB, also known as the Ikhwan). The document makes plain that the Islamic Movement is a MB effort, led by the Ikhwan in America. The Explanatory Memorandum goes on to explain that the “Movement” is a “settlement process” to establish itself inside the United States and, once established, to undertake a “grand jihad” characterized as a “civilization jihadist” mission that is likewise led by the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, the document describes the “settlement process” as a “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….”

    To put it simply, according to the Muslim Brotherhood, the civilization jihad is the “Settlement Process” and the “Settlement Process” is the mission of the “Islamic Movement.” And that mission entails “eliminating and destroying” our way of life. Author Robert Spencer has popularized this concept with a term that captures both the character and deadly purpose of the Ikhwan’s efforts in America: “stealth jihad.”

    The “Explanatory Memorandum” — the Holy Land Foundation smoking gun — is the key document in the case against “moderate” Muslims in America. It exposes more than 90% of their organizations as fronts and shell groups for al-Ikhwan al-Muslimeen, the Muslim Brotherhood, whose publicly-stated aim is to overthrow by subversion the secular constitutional government of the United States and replace it with Islamic law.

    They have succeeded very well so far in their efforts, thanks to penetration, disinformation, the co-optation of existing organizations, and the willing collaboration of the Socialist Left.

    The Team B II document will shine a major light into those dark corners of our national political process which the Left and the Ikhwan would prefer to remain hidden.

  9. What ho.

    Sound the alarum.

    The Muslims are coming !!

    THe existence odf Western civilization itaelf is at stake !!

    Are we serious ?

    Scream softly, or the Muslims will hear you.

    & a billion Muslims around the world will rock with laughter at what has been said here above.

    The Muslim Brotherhood ( MB ) is not a fearsome clandestine stealth jihad dragon waiting under the sewage in the West to overthrow the entire superstructure.

    On the contrary..

    The MB is an 81year old , moribund, toothless beast, slow to move, even slower to act to solve its problems.

    It's severely stricken with disension & disunity.

    It's deputy has recently rebelled against his chief…. who is an aged vet.

    By vet i mean not an Afghanistan vet, but a veterinarian, old * blind of political vision.

    Ibby has mixed everything together… MB with jihadists with fundamentalists.

    They are all very different creatures.

    Let's start with Sadat, whose murder ibby put at MB's door.

    Sadat actually was killed by Islamic Jihad, an offshoot of MB.

    Sadat was himself an old MB member. He used the MB to counteract the Nasserists, who were resisting his radical changes.

    With Sadat's protection Egypt became a hotbed of fundamentalism in the 70s.

    Just as Sadat used fundamentalism for domestic purposes, the US used it in the Cold War against the Soveit Union.

    The MB collaborated with the US in this Great Game.

    Its leader Said Ramadan was a longtime CIA asset. The Muslim World League charity he helped found funded alQaida in turn.

    Through the years, the MB lost the fire of its youth, its militancy, like so many other organizations before it.

    It became institutionalised.

  10. Yes they are all very different creatures.

    They are different creatures that follow the path of
    Mohammed and the koran.
    They are all different creatures of the arab race
    they are all different creatures of islam.

    What part did I mix up??

  11. The groups the Mulim Brotherhood set up in Europe were not 5th columns of subversion & conquest but stepping stones facing the other way — their aim, to foster influence back over the Muslim heartlands of North Africa & the Middle East.

    Today's Muslim youth in Europe scoff at the MB for its middle class ways & its accomodation with the Western authorities.

    Tariq Ramadan, a popular leader, lost his appeal among these young in 2005 when he formed a working party commisioned …… by Tony Blair's government to investigate religious extremism !!

    The same year the MB's Union of Islamic Organizations in France , UOIF, issued a fatwa calling for … jihad ? No ! Calling for calm against the backdrop of the Muslim youth riots of 2005. The fatwa went unheeded.

    Today the MB groups in Europe are loosely linked under an even more loose & lax ideology.

    Shariah as ideology? All Muslims acknowledge Shariah.It by itself is not a sign of radicalism or anything else. In MB"s case, it doesn't amount to much.The MB has no new radical vehicle to convey Shariah anew to the young, like the jihadists do.

    Soime MB groups work within traditional Western political parties, right & left.

    The MB today restricts itself to calling for rights for Muslim immigrants as a matter of their cultural & secular identity.

    When asked to deal with internal problems, the MB groups' response is sluggish & inefficient.

    Al Qaida & the jihadists are different.

    They're not institutionalized.

    Nor even politicized, at least in the West — they don't seek to seize or overthrow political power.

    Their ethos is one of spiritual purity & violent martyrdom.

    The aging MB is long past its prime for such youthful visions.

  12. "They're all different creatures of the arab race", Ibby?

    i emphasised "different", you stress "arab race".

    But i confess i wasn't thinking of "race", but of politics, ideology, agenda.

    That's what we don't mix up — race, & the rest.

    i think the danger in question here has already been illuminated by you, just now.

  13. Joe raised the women's issue alongside that of the Muslim Brotherhood ( MB ), & i'll link that to what Amnesty is talking about when it asks that the rights of the opposition including the MB be respected.

    Arrested MB members have been tried in Egypt by secret military tribunals, with no press or human rights observers allowed in.

    The point is, they are civilian opposition leaders who should be tried in civilian courts

    As for Egypt, the MB is useless against Mubarak's dictatorship, they won't help the rest of the opposition usher in reform.

    Their "stand" is defined by their leader Md. Badie when he states," We reaffirm that the Brotherhood is not an adversary to the regime."

    In other words, this obsolete organization is paralyzed besides being blind.So much for the fearsome Ikhwan.

    As for the women's issue, consider Mona Eltahawy.

    She is someone whom an MB leader denounced for not wearing the veil, calling her "naked".

    This is what Mona Eltahawy has to say about the MB:

    "I will stand up for the Muslim Brotherhood…. i believe I must defend the Brotherhood's presence on Egypt's political stage. If I don't , I believe i am as guilty as the regime that has for decades sucked oxygen out of the body politic — & with Gamal Mubarak being groomed to take over the presidency, … the regime seems set to rule for another generation.

    "Besides the state, the Brotherhood is the last man standing in Egypt. We are down to the state & the mosque. The Muslim Brotherhood must remain on Egypt's political stage, not least so that its ideas are out in the open & can be challenged."

    Ms. Eltahawy believes that if the MB is legalized, & free & fair elections allowed in Egypt, both the MB as well as Mubarak's autocracy will be among the casualties on election day.

    Which leaves us with the question : Who benefits from the MB's continuing illegalization ?

    One, Mubarak.

    Two, the entity that stands behind his throne.

    USrael.

  14. Fairdinkum, talk about a spin doctor.

    The Mb are a MOB an unrly MOB.

    The MB are a scurge on the earth.

    And Yes Mohammed was an arab, mulsims are arabs.
    Muslim arabs took islam to all corners of the globe.
    Non arabs muslims had islam introduced by the ARABS. FACT!!!!

    Egyptians are a classic example.
    Arabs brought islam to egypt.

    They forced conversion of countless copts,
    they they introduced "Dihema" for the non muslims.

    The Brotherhood's ancestors are ARABS not egyptians.
    It is extremely odd that every where Islam goes trouble follows,
    violence follows and shariah hovers like a cloud in the shape of a sharpened sword. Then we have child brides in yemen, we call it Pedophila in the WEST, it is illegal, but islam thinks its ok. Mohammed a 54 year old man had such a child bride, AISHA she was 9 when he consumated the marriage. A 54 year old man having intercourse with a 9 year old girl. Where are the HUman rights.
    Then we have Iran, bury the women to their chests and stone them to death for allegedly commiting adultery. Where are the human rights.
    Then we have the apostate, if you leave islam according to the koran you have 3 days to revert or be executed, where are the human rights?
    I could go on but why bother.
    The common denomination is ISLAM, the Koran, the Hadith, Mohammed.
    That my friend is the ideology the MB adhere too.

    To support or promote or defend any organisation that recognises anything less than accepted human rights and the Un charter of Human rights is derelection of conviction.
    Basic issues like freedom of religion are denied in islamic countries and supported by the MB.

  15. What ho.

    Sound the alarum.

    The Muslims are coming !!

    THe existence odf Western civilization itaelf is at stake !!

    Are we serious ?

    Scream softly, or the Muslims will hear you.

    & a billion Muslims around the world will rock with laughter at what has been said here above.

    The Muslim Brotherhood ( MB ) is not a fearsome clandestine stealth jihad dragon waiting under the sewage in the West to overthrow the entire superstructure.

    On the contrary..

    The MB is an 81year old , moribund, toothless beast, slow to move, even slower to act to solve its problems.

    It’s severely stricken with disension & disunity.

    It’s deputy has recently rebelled against his chief…. who is an aged vet.

    By vet i mean not an Afghanistan vet, but a veterinarian, old * blind of political vision.

    Ibby has mixed everything together… MB with jihadists with fundamentalists.

    They are all very different creatures.

    Let’s start with Sadat, whose murder ibby put at MB’s door.

    Sadat actually was killed by Islamic Jihad, an offshoot of MB.

    Sadat was himself an old MB member. He used the MB to counteract the Nasserists, who were resisting his radical changes.

    With Sadat’s protection Egypt became a hotbed of fundamentalism in the 70s.

    Just as Sadat used fundamentalism for domestic purposes, the US used it in the Cold War against the Soveit Union.

    The MB collaborated with the US in this Great Game.

    Its leader Said Ramadan was a longtime CIA asset. The Muslim World League charity he helped found funded alQaida in turn.

    Through the years, the MB lost the fire of its youth, its militancy, like so many other organizations before it.

    It became institutionalised.

  16. Time for a reality check!!!

    The aftermath of World War I, with the defeat of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, saw the destruction of the Islamic political authority called the “caliphate.” Mustapha Kemal Ataturk established post-Ottoman Turkey as a secular westernized state and abolished the caliphate. Among his reforms to dismantle the shariah system, Ataturk banned the tradition of growing beards by men and wearing headscarves by women, banned the call to prayer from the mosques, abolished the Turkish language’s script and replaced it with the Latin alphabet, and made the Turkish military the custodians of a new secular tradition.

    This did not sit well with Islamic traditionalists. Some became determined to restore the caliphate, if not in Turkey, then somewhere else. One such individual was Hassan al Banna, the son of a Muslim imam who lived outside Cairo, Egypt. In 1928, al Banna founded an organization called the al-Ikhwan al-Musilmin, known in English as the Society of Muslim Brothers or the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

    The purpose of the MB or Ikhwan was to unify the predominantly Islamic countries under a new caliphate and subordinating all lands to the rule of a single caliph, under shariah law.

    The Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws make clear the organization’s objectives and how it intends to achieve them:

    “The Muslim Brotherhood is an International Muslim body which seeks to establish Allah’s law in the land by achieving the spiritual goals of Islam and the true religion which are namely the following: . . . (F) the need to work on establishing the Islamic State; [and] (G) The sincere support for a global cooperation in accordance with the provisions of the Islamic Sharia.”

    Chapter II, Article 3 of the MB’s bylaws states:

    “The Muslim Brotherhood in achieving these objectives depends on the following means: . . . (D) Make every effort for the establishment of educational, social, economic, and scientific institutions and the establishment of mosques, schools, clinics, shelters, clubs, as well as the formation of committees to regulate zakat affairs and alms; (E) The Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing the Islamic state.”

    By the early 1930s, the Brotherhood had developed a formal organizational structure around groups of men with special spiritual and physical training called “Battalions.” By 1940, the MB created the “secret apparatus” which was the Ikhwan’s military wing, abandoning the Battalions in 1943. The Ikhwan developed a relationship with the Nazis during the war. The MB’s military wing continues to operate today and is called the “Special Chapter.” The Special Chapter’s operations are known as “special work,” meaning military fighting or covert operations.

    During World War II and the years that followed, the MB became increasingly aggressive and violent. It called for the removal of all British forces (“non-Muslim Forces”) from Egypt (“Muslim Lands”) as required by shariah or Islamic law.

    During the late 1940s, the MB targeted Egyptian officials (including Muslims), British soldiers and their families, and in December 1948, a Muslim Brother assassinated Egyptian Prime Minister Mahmud Fahmi al-Nuqrashi. In February 1949, Egyptian security forces killed MB founder Hassan al Banna in Cairo.

    The period following the assassination of al Banna was marked with significant MB violence against the Egyptian monarchy and the British. After a ban on MB activities was lifted in 1951, the Ikhwan coordinated actively with Gamal Abdel Nasser and the young officers who overthrew King Farouk in 1952. As soon as the Ikhwan felt powerful enough to confront the government on its own, however, it turned against the new President Nasser.

    Nasser, in turn, launched a crackdown against the MB in 1954 that accelerated an exodus of many top Brothers and the expansion of the organization around the world, including into the West.

    The Team B report lists prominent Ikhwan members during this transitional period who played vital roles in transforming the MB into the international Muslim mafia it is today. One of those figures was Said Ramadan, who was al Banna’s assistant for years and married his daughter. The history of their penetration of Western societies in Europe is instructive for those seeking to understand how and the extent to which similar influence operations are being run against the United States.

    Said Ramadan’s son and al Banna’s grandson Tariq Ramadan is a member of the MB leadership and one of the most skillful practitioners of the stealth jihad. In January 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reversed a six-year ban on his entry into the United States. Tariq Ramadan has used his renewed access to American audiences to advance the Brotherhood’s civilization jihad

  17. Yes they are all very different creatures.

    They are different creatures that follow the path of
    Mohammed and the koran.
    They are all different creatures of the arab race
    they are all different creatures of islam.

    What part did I mix up??

  18. The groups the Mulim Brotherhood set up in Europe were not 5th columns of subversion & conquest but stepping stones facing the other way — their aim, to foster influence back over the Muslim heartlands of North Africa & the Middle East.

    Today’s Muslim youth in Europe scoff at the MB for its middle class ways & its accomodation with the Western authorities.

    Tariq Ramadan, a popular leader, lost his appeal among these young in 2005 when he formed a working party commisioned …… by Tony Blair’s government to investigate religious extremism !!

    The same year the MB’s Union of Islamic Organizations in France , UOIF, issued a fatwa calling for … jihad ? No ! Calling for calm against the backdrop of the Muslim youth riots of 2005. The fatwa went unheeded.

    Today the MB groups in Europe are loosely linked under an even more loose & lax ideology.

    Shariah as ideology? All Muslims acknowledge Shariah.It by itself is not a sign of radicalism or anything else. In MB”s case, it doesn’t amount to much.The MB has no new radical vehicle to convey Shariah anew to the young, like the jihadists do.

    Soime MB groups work within traditional Western political parties, right & left.

    The MB today restricts itself to calling for rights for Muslim immigrants as a matter of their cultural & secular identity.

    When asked to deal with internal problems, the MB groups’ response is sluggish & inefficient.

    Al Qaida & the jihadists are different.

    They’re not institutionalized.

    Nor even politicized, at least in the West — they don’t seek to seize or overthrow political power.

    Their ethos is one of spiritual purity & violent martyrdom.

    The aging MB is long past its prime for such youthful visions.

  19. “They’re all different creatures of the arab race”, Ibby?

    i emphasised “different”, you stress “arab race”.

    But i confess i wasn’t thinking of “race”, but of politics, ideology, agenda.

    That’s what we don’t mix up — race, & the rest.

    i think the danger in question here has already been illuminated by you, just now.

  20. Joe raised the women’s issue alongside that of the Muslim Brotherhood ( MB ), & i’ll link that to what Amnesty is talking about when it asks that the rights of the opposition including the MB be respected.

    Arrested MB members have been tried in Egypt by secret military tribunals, with no press or human rights observers allowed in.

    The point is, they are civilian opposition leaders who should be tried in civilian courts

    As for Egypt, the MB is useless against Mubarak’s dictatorship, they won’t help the rest of the opposition usher in reform.

    Their “stand” is defined by their leader Md. Badie when he states,” We reaffirm that the Brotherhood is not an adversary to the regime.”

    In other words, this obsolete organization is paralyzed besides being blind.So much for the fearsome Ikhwan.

    As for the women’s issue, consider Mona Eltahawy.

    She is someone whom an MB leader denounced for not wearing the veil, calling her “naked”.

    This is what Mona Eltahawy has to say about the MB:

    “I will stand up for the Muslim Brotherhood…. i believe I must defend the Brotherhood’s presence on Egypt’s political stage. If I don’t , I believe i am as guilty as the regime that has for decades sucked oxygen out of the body politic — & with Gamal Mubarak being groomed to take over the presidency, … the regime seems set to rule for another generation.

    “Besides the state, the Brotherhood is the last man standing in Egypt. We are down to the state & the mosque. The Muslim Brotherhood must remain on Egypt’s political stage, not least so that its ideas are out in the open & can be challenged.”

    Ms. Eltahawy believes that if the MB is legalized, & free & fair elections allowed in Egypt, both the MB as well as Mubarak’s autocracy will be among the casualties on election day.

    Which leaves us with the question : Who benefits from the MB’s continuing illegalization ?

    One, Mubarak.

    Two, the entity that stands behind his throne.

    USrael.

  21. Fairdinkum, talk about a spin doctor.

    The Mb are a MOB an unrly MOB.

    The MB are a scurge on the earth.

    And Yes Mohammed was an arab, mulsims are arabs.
    Muslim arabs took islam to all corners of the globe.
    Non arabs muslims had islam introduced by the ARABS. FACT!!!!

    Egyptians are a classic example.
    Arabs brought islam to egypt.

    They forced conversion of countless copts,
    they they introduced “Dihema” for the non muslims.

    The Brotherhood’s ancestors are ARABS not egyptians.
    It is extremely odd that every where Islam goes trouble follows,
    violence follows and shariah hovers like a cloud in the shape of a sharpened sword. Then we have child brides in yemen, we call it Pedophila in the WEST, it is illegal, but islam thinks its ok. Mohammed a 54 year old man had such a child bride, AISHA she was 9 when he consumated the marriage. A 54 year old man having intercourse with a 9 year old girl. Where are the HUman rights.
    Then we have Iran, bury the women to their chests and stone them to death for allegedly commiting adultery. Where are the human rights.
    Then we have the apostate, if you leave islam according to the koran you have 3 days to revert or be executed, where are the human rights?
    I could go on but why bother.
    The common denomination is ISLAM, the Koran, the Hadith, Mohammed.
    That my friend is the ideology the MB adhere too.

    To support or promote or defend any organisation that recognises anything less than accepted human rights and the Un charter of Human rights is derelection of conviction.
    Basic issues like freedom of religion are denied in islamic countries and supported by the MB.

  22. Time for a reality check!!!

    The aftermath of World War I, with the defeat of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, saw the destruction of the Islamic political authority called the “caliphate.” Mustapha Kemal Ataturk established post-Ottoman Turkey as a secular westernized state and abolished the caliphate. Among his reforms to dismantle the shariah system, Ataturk banned the tradition of growing beards by men and wearing headscarves by women, banned the call to prayer from the mosques, abolished the Turkish language’s script and replaced it with the Latin alphabet, and made the Turkish military the custodians of a new secular tradition.

    This did not sit well with Islamic traditionalists. Some became determined to restore the caliphate, if not in Turkey, then somewhere else. One such individual was Hassan al Banna, the son of a Muslim imam who lived outside Cairo, Egypt. In 1928, al Banna founded an organization called the al-Ikhwan al-Musilmin, known in English as the Society of Muslim Brothers or the Muslim Brotherhood (MB).

    The purpose of the MB or Ikhwan was to unify the predominantly Islamic countries under a new caliphate and subordinating all lands to the rule of a single caliph, under shariah law.

    The Muslim Brotherhood’s bylaws make clear the organization’s objectives and how it intends to achieve them:

    “The Muslim Brotherhood is an International Muslim body which seeks to establish Allah’s law in the land by achieving the spiritual goals of Islam and the true religion which are namely the following: . . . (F) the need to work on establishing the Islamic State; [and] (G) The sincere support for a global cooperation in accordance with the provisions of the Islamic Sharia.”

    Chapter II, Article 3 of the MB’s bylaws states:

    “The Muslim Brotherhood in achieving these objectives depends on the following means: . . . (D) Make every effort for the establishment of educational, social, economic, and scientific institutions and the establishment of mosques, schools, clinics, shelters, clubs, as well as the formation of committees to regulate zakat affairs and alms; (E) The Islamic nation must be fully prepared to fight the tyrants and the enemies of Allah as a prelude to establishing the Islamic state.”

    By the early 1930s, the Brotherhood had developed a formal organizational structure around groups of men with special spiritual and physical training called “Battalions.” By 1940, the MB created the “secret apparatus” which was the Ikhwan’s military wing, abandoning the Battalions in 1943. The Ikhwan developed a relationship with the Nazis during the war. The MB’s military wing continues to operate today and is called the “Special Chapter.” The Special Chapter’s operations are known as “special work,” meaning military fighting or covert operations.

    During World War II and the years that followed, the MB became increasingly aggressive and violent. It called for the removal of all British forces (“non-Muslim Forces”) from Egypt (“Muslim Lands”) as required by shariah or Islamic law.

    During the late 1940s, the MB targeted Egyptian officials (including Muslims), British soldiers and their families, and in December 1948, a Muslim Brother assassinated Egyptian Prime Minister Mahmud Fahmi al-Nuqrashi. In February 1949, Egyptian security forces killed MB founder Hassan al Banna in Cairo.

    The period following the assassination of al Banna was marked with significant MB violence against the Egyptian monarchy and the British. After a ban on MB activities was lifted in 1951, the Ikhwan coordinated actively with Gamal Abdel Nasser and the young officers who overthrew King Farouk in 1952. As soon as the Ikhwan felt powerful enough to confront the government on its own, however, it turned against the new President Nasser.

    Nasser, in turn, launched a crackdown against the MB in 1954 that accelerated an exodus of many top Brothers and the expansion of the organization around the world, including into the West.

    The Team B report lists prominent Ikhwan members during this transitional period who played vital roles in transforming the MB into the international Muslim mafia it is today. One of those figures was Said Ramadan, who was al Banna’s assistant for years and married his daughter. The history of their penetration of Western societies in Europe is instructive for those seeking to understand how and the extent to which similar influence operations are being run against the United States.

    Said Ramadan’s son and al Banna’s grandson Tariq Ramadan is a member of the MB leadership and one of the most skillful practitioners of the stealth jihad. In January 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reversed a six-year ban on his entry into the United States. Tariq Ramadan has used his renewed access to American audiences to advance the Brotherhood’s civilization jihad

  23. Dear Ibby.

    Peace be unto you.

    Aisha, by the way, was not a child when she married him, but a mature adult, most beauteous & graceful.

    His devoted love for her is one of the more marvellous chapters of his life.

    Nor is he the old lech you paint, but a great Seer & visionary, extremely restrained, judicious, & wise, the unifier of his peoples.Regarding women, he was a man to the full, strikingly handsome & magnetic, an unabashed celebrator of the sublimest qualities of the opposite gender, in no need of being a hypocrite like Rightwing US politicians.Most definitely he wasn't reduced to marrying minors.There was almost always a balance & harmony between him & womankind, both ways.He was most sensitive & attentive towards them & matters relating to them & their own will, their own space.

    But he is NOT the point here.

    AntiArab racism & Islamophobic bigotry & intolerance go beyond the particular issue at hand ( the MB ) &, in general, HELP FOMENT a climate that in turn EXACERBATES the existing problems in Islamic societies you pointed out — problems of tremendous reactionary & repressive thinking & practices within branches of Islam.

    These problems themselves were & are created, encouraged & reinforced by a whole history, past & present, of Western / USraeli interventions in as well as military invasions, demographic colonizations, & economic exploitation of Islamic lands.

    So, outside intervention can only cause & inflame these problems. Not cure them.

    Only Islamic peoples can cure Islamic ills.

    As for the MB, you've grossly overestimated their power & zeal.

    If Tony Blair's collaborator Tariq Ramadan is your idea of "stealth jihadist", i have nothing further to say than that both Mr Blair & Mrs Clinton know him better.

    i wish you continued studies in the subject you love, history.

    From Muhammad to the moment.

    i wish you peace in yourself & love all around you.

  24. Dear Ibby.

    Peace be unto you.

    Aisha, by the way, was not a child when she married him, but a mature adult, most beauteous & graceful.

    His devoted love for her is one of the more marvellous chapters of his life.

    Nor is he the old lech you paint, but a great Seer & visionary, extremely restrained, judicious, & wise, the unifier of his peoples.Regarding women, he was a man to the full, strikingly handsome & magnetic, an unabashed celebrator of the sublimest qualities of the opposite gender, in no need of being a hypocrite like Rightwing US politicians.Most definitely he wasn’t reduced to marrying minors.There was almost always a balance & harmony between him & womankind, both ways.He was most sensitive & attentive towards them & matters relating to them & their own will, their own space.

    But he is NOT the point here.

    AntiArab racism & Islamophobic bigotry & intolerance go beyond the particular issue at hand ( the MB ) &, in general, HELP FOMENT a climate that in turn EXACERBATES the existing problems in Islamic societies you pointed out — problems of tremendous reactionary & repressive thinking & practices within branches of Islam.

    These problems themselves were & are created, encouraged & reinforced by a whole history, past & present, of Western / USraeli interventions in as well as military invasions, demographic colonizations, & economic exploitation of Islamic lands.

    So, outside intervention can only cause & inflame these problems. Not cure them.

    Only Islamic peoples can cure Islamic ills.

    As for the MB, you’ve grossly overestimated their power & zeal.

    If Tony Blair’s collaborator Tariq Ramadan is your idea of “stealth jihadist”, i have nothing further to say than that both Mr Blair & Mrs Clinton know him better.

    i wish you continued studies in the subject you love, history.

    From Muhammad to the moment.

    i wish you peace in yourself & love all around you.

  25. A,Savage,

    What koran are you reading. The prophet (SWU) married Aisha when she was 6 and consumated the marriage when she was 9. Have you read the Hadith?

    Blogging Egypt, The Muslim Brotherhood have been detained, I suggest you visit their web site. http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=26999 (nice picture) http://bikyamasr.com/wordpress/?p=19341

    Why do you people LIE???. (the Koran says we can lie to the infidels for the sake of islam)…

    Have a magic Day boys, enjoy enjoy enjoy with love from USA

  26. There is incorrect information in this post. Gameela Ismail was never detained by police in recent months. She was stopped from attending a protest by police, but she was NOT detained. I was with her.

  27. A,Savage,

    What koran are you reading. The prophet (SWU) married Aisha when she was 6 and consumated the marriage when she was 9. Have you read the Hadith?

    Blogging Egypt, The Muslim Brotherhood have been detained, I suggest you visit their web site. http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=26999 (nice picture) http://bikyamasr.com/wordpress/?p=19341

    Why do you people LIE???. (the Koran says we can lie to the infidels for the sake of islam)…

    Have a magic Day boys, enjoy enjoy enjoy with love from USA

  28. A,Savage,

    What koran are you reading. The prophet (SWU) married Aisha when she was 6 and consumated the marriage when she was 9. Have you read the Hadith?

    Blogging Egypt, The Muslim Brotherhood have been detained, I suggest you visit their web site. http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=26999 (nice picture) http://bikyamasr.com/wordpress/?p=19341

    Why do you people LIE???. (the Koran says we can lie to the infidels for the sake of islam)…

    Have a magic Day boys, enjoy enjoy enjoy with love from USA

  29. There is incorrect information in this post. Gameela Ismail was never detained by police in recent months. She was stopped from attending a protest by police, but she was NOT detained. I was with her.

  30. A,Savage,

    What koran are you reading. The prophet (SWU) married Aisha when she was 6 and consumated the marriage when she was 9. Have you read the Hadith?

    Blogging Egypt, The Muslim Brotherhood have been detained, I suggest you visit their web site.
    http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=26999 (nice picture)
    http://bikyamasr.com/wordpress/?p=19341

    Why do you people LIE???. (the Koran says we can lie to the infidels for the sake of islam)…

    Have a magic Day boys, enjoy enjoy enjoy with love from USA