The Muslim Brotherhood "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." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.
But no doubt in Britain their goal is different!
This story is, like the Nixon Center's stateside love affair with the Brotherhood, a prime example of the official myopia that assumes that an organization that is not preaching violent jihad (at least not directly) is ipso facto "moderate," tolerant, pluralistic, modern, and not given to any desire to impose Sharia by whatever means. But that thesis is, at the mildest, unproven.
Absurd Britannia Alert: "£48,000 Goes to the Muslim Brotherhood," by Alexander Meleagrou-Hitchens for the Centre for Social Cohesion, September 9 (thanks to Weasel Zippers):
The Tax Payer's Alliance (TPA) has released figures today on every local authority that has received Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) funding and what organisations have benefited from it. The PVE fund has so far given out £12 million in tax payer money to projects aimed at preventing radicalisation.One organisation, the Muslim Welfare House (MWH), has received just under £50,000 in PVE funds over the last two years. The MWH is a member of the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe (FIOE), which represents the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Europe. The FIOE has very close ties with Holocaust promoter and leading MB scholar Yusuf al-Qaradawi, and his European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) was founded by the FIOE. This year, the FOIE commissioned Qaradawi to author a report entitled 'The Nation and Citizenship in Light of the Origins of Islamic Doctrine and the Intentions of Shari'ah'. On their website, the FIOE claims that it wishes to ensure 'an accurate introduction of Islam' in Europe. That the FIOE consider Qaradawi as the best candidate to represent an accurate picture of Islam is a testament to how the organisation itself sees the religion.
Yeah, and maybe if I hit my head harder with this hammer it will stop hurting.
Sheesh, what a bunch of drooling idiots.
I wonder how long it will take the UK to figure out that apeasement does not work.
. . . say, wasn't there something about that at the beginning of World War II?
It's the lack of understanding of Islam and the concept of Taqiyya by British officials (most of whom are Common Purpose-indoctrinated multikulti myopics) that keeps the Jizya flowing to Freeloaders4Allah Inc. in the UK.
How much did the Obamahdi give to ACORN? Not that they are equivalent to the Muslim Brotherhood, but still........
Does the British government believe that one way to promote policies that make sense, in the war of self-defense against the Jihad, is to educate the public about Islam? If so, should it not start by explaining that violence, or one variety of it, terrorism, is not the only nor even the main way, at present, by which Muslims in the West are attempting to weaken the resistance of host countries, and to gain strength, steadily, inexorably? Should it not be pointed out, again and again, that other weapons are even, at present, more effective, because less obvious, and that among those weapons of Jihad (which can best be defined as "the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam," and that these include deployment of the Money Weapon, carefully-targetted non-stop campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest of Western lands from within, as any study of the spectacular rise in the Muslim populations throughout the Infidel lands, and all the while, in lands where Muslims rule, Christians and Hindus and Buddhists suffer discrimination, humiliation, persecution, and a general physical insecurity that has led, in many places, to a steady outflow of those non-Muslims from their homes, in lands where, not infrequently, they were the indigenes and Muslims the outside conquerors. Think of Christians in North Africa and the Middle East, and in particular of the Copts, the Maronites, the Chaldeans and Assyrians. Think of Hindus in the subcontinent (Pakistan and Bangladesh), or Buddhists in Bangladesh (the Chittagong Hills area) and in the islands, other than Bali which is their redoubt, of Indonesia. Surely the steady outflow of non-Muslims from Muslim-ruled lands, and the worsening of conditions for them, as Muslims have gained a sense that, through OPEC trillions, and Muslim-immigrant millions in Europe, and the spectacle of non-Muslim attempts to appease Muslims on every front, even pretending that the best way to defend the Infidel world against Muslims is by building up Muslim military capability (in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan) and transferring, from Infidels, hundreds of billions of dollars in aid, to every Muslim state or Muslim people on the theory that not Islam but "poverty" causes "extremism." That there are billions of very poor non-Muslims who do not engage in similar "extremism," because they are not prompted by the texts and tenets of Islam, is apparently a fact to be obstinately ignored. And the very idea that the Western world has a stake in preventing, rather than encouraging (or at least doing nothing to discourage), ethnic and sectarian and economic divisions within what, for Infidels, can accurately be described as the Camp of Islam (even if within that camp there are rivalries, hatreds, even internecine warfare).
The Western world has to figure out what, among its generous and naive policies, have allowed such a spectacular increase in the Muslim populations, and further allowed those Muslims to think they can, virtually unopposed, continue to make aggressive demands, on every front, for changes in the social arrangements, and legal and political institutions, and foreign policies, that would transform non-Muslim nation-states into places where, inexorably, the Muslim presence, and hence Muslim power, would inexorably expand. And how is it that so many remain so unaware, with all the day's daily Jihad News from everywhere, of what the texts of Islam say, what the Islamic scholars and clerics say, what the defectors from the Army of Islam, the articulate apostates, say, while a treacly gruel continues to be served up at every Interfaith Healing event, where the heedless, self-assureldy ignorant presume to tell us how wonderful Islam is, without ever bothering to have studied those texts, those tenets, those attitudes, those atmospherics of Islam, that help to make a great deal clear, to lift the confusion, to allow one to see how ill-informed, how needlessly squandering of men, money, materiel, and morale, how relentlessly ineffective, the policies in place in the West to "combat extremism" -- whether in Muslim countries, by lavishing aid and building up their military (as in Iraq, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan), or in our own, non-Muslim lands, which were in every important respect entirely the creation of non-Muslims, and whose achievements -- in political liberty, in individual autonomy, in economic development, in the pursuit of science, in the varieties of art -- have nothing to do with Islam and, in fact, are flatly contradicted by the spirit and letter of the Shari'a, the Holy Law of Islam, the imposition of which, everywhere, remains the goal of Muslims who take their Islam most seriously.
Why do our immigration policies continue to be based on an ignorance of Islam, a pretense that there is nothing particularly worrisome about Muslims who come to settle within our lands, behind what Muslims themselves are taught to regard as enemy lines, and are further taught that they must owe their sole loyalty to Islam itself, must work for its furtherance and its dominance, and must be loyal, inwardly (whatever outwardly must be done to protect Believers and the Interests of Islam in Infidel lands, as long as Muslims are still relatively weak and must still worry about winning over, or at least lulling into continued inattention, the non-Muslims into whose countries -- which particular Infidel land does not matter, as they are all part of Dar al-Harb -- they have so negligently been allowed to settle in large numbers.
The policies of the United Kingdom, in particular, in dealing with a Muslim population that has been allowed to rise and rise, as Muslims fiddle the welfare-state for every benefit, and as the Pakistanis, in particular, bring over as many relatives as they can, often sending both males and females of marriageable age back to Pakistan to be married to some villager, and then to return, with that villager as their spouse, swelling the ranks of Muslims in Great Britain. And since that welfare state makes possible, makes easy, the production of large Muslim families, with every sort of benefit (free and advanced medical care, free education, free or heavily-subsidized housing, family allowances, the works -- with the government bureacuracies related to all this now full of Muslims intent on extracting the last bit of Infidel-funded support for their co-religionists), the problem can only worsen. Islam does not change. What has changed over the past few decades is the ability of Muslims to promote the Jihad world-wide, to carry it, through OPEC trillions and Muslim-migrant millions or even tens of millions, to every part of the globe.
This isn't complicated. We make it so, by refusing to recognize the obvious.
I think this is just another effect of the post-modern, materialist worldview that has poisoned the West in the last 50 years. While preventing physical violence may indeed be a worthy goal, it's now become the singlemost, paramount value of the West. Any type of appeasement will be offered on the altar of this supreme goal, and the elites in the West will gladly kneel to any despicable group like the Muslim Brotherhood as long as they just PROMISE us that they won't support violence. And this is all the better for the Islamists, as they don't really want to be violent if they don't have to---their real goal is our submission to Islam.
You know, the idea of placing physical safety as one's highest value isn't new at all. And way back in our history we even had a name for it: cowardice.
Gah!
This kind of idiocy defies my making a printable comment.
UK gives $80,000 to Muslim Brotherhood...to fight extremism
....................
Oh, that's no different than our giving the German-American Bund money to fight Fascism--oh, wait...
Then by this logic they should give a few thousand pounds to the BNP to fight soccer hooliganism. But no, he doesn't fit the ethnic class which in their perception privileges the Muslims.
No doubt to help defend themselves against the 4 Conservatives left in Britain