Why Is America Midwiving a Muslim Brotherhood-Ruled Syria?
Viewed from this historical perspective, Farouk Tayfour’s effort to recast the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood as innocent, unprovoked victims of the Assad dynasty’s aggression, is a transparent whitewashing of the organization’s violent legacy of jihad terror, aimed at enforcing its Sharia supremacist Weltanschaaung. Tayfour’s and the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood’s broader contemporary apologetics — designed for Western consumption — strive to portray the organization’s modern, “secular” and pluralistic outlook. But even these public attempts, both the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood’s April 25, 2012 “Pledge and Charter,” and Tayfour’s statements, invoke Syrian Muslim Brotherhood founder Mustafa al-Sibai’s example — Tayfour explicitly citing al-Sibai as a paragon of “democratic partnership.”
A Wise, Prescient U.S. State Department Assessment of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood — Circa December, 1947
Fortunately, during the era before cultural relativism hopelessly muddled the perceptions of U.S. diplomats, a confidential State Department analysis, filed December 19, 1947 (Despatch # 883, Subject: “The Moslem Brotherhood in Syria”; recently obtained by the author via a Freedom of Information Act request), captured in real time the ideology and commensurate activities of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, and its founder, Mustafa al-Sibai.
The December 1947 State Department report opens with these general, introductory observations:
The Brotherhood is an increasingly important organization in Syria and is of vital interest to the American observer because it plays a leading part in hammering anti-foreign sentiments into a population already basically suspicious of Western “Colonizers.” The organization cannot merely be called conservative; the recently overused word “reactionary” accurately applies. It demands for Moslems to return to the old customs and traditions of Islam. Although recognized by the Government as a non-political association, in practice it [the Brotherhood] illustrates its strong opposition to the separation of state and religion by actively participating in politics…The Ikhwan al-Muslimin [Muslim Brotherhood] is dedicated to reversing [the] secular trend and its success has not been negligible. The Brotherhood in Syria is a growing organization with an apparently assured future. The hysteria surrounding Palestine and the deep-seated popular dissatisfaction with the proposed United Nations settlement, supported by European and Western Powers, of that troublesome problem is exploitable by the Brotherhood. It has already been so exploited.
The section of the report entitled “History,” summarized the Syrian Brotherhood’s origins and concerns, particularly its anti-Westernism, anti-Communism, opposition to women’s rights, and obsessive emphasis on neighboring Palestine. Evidence for the movement’s popular appeal to the Syrian Muslim masses was also provided:
Representatives sent by Sheikh Hassan al-Banna from the already flourishing Egyptian branch of the Moslem Brotherhood arrived in Syria shortly after the French bombarded Damascus in May, 1945. They laid the groundwork for the Syrian society, reportedly gave it financing and promised support until the Syrian branch could get on its own feet…On June 22, 1946 the first issue Al-Manar (The Beacon), the Brotherhood’s press organ, appeared in Damascus under the editorship of Mustafa Sibai…From the start, Al- Manar has been extremely xenophobic, but certain changes in the pattern of its attack have been visible in the past 18 months. One of those is the gradual increase given to abuse of the United States. Vehemently anti-British from the beginning, the paper slowly devoted more attention to America. This was not unconnected with America’s Palestine policy.
The Communists also have received harsh treatment at the hands of Mustafa al-Sibai and his fellow writers [at Al-Manar]; never so harsh, however, as in the days following the [Palestine] partition vote of the United Nations when the Communists were castigated as “traitors, spies, and assassins.” Brotherhood hatred of the Communists, heartily reciprocated, has resulted in series of clashes between these left and right groups. In Homs and Damascus on more than one occasion there has been bloodshed. Beyond the mutual antagonism of any two rival extremist factions, Brotherhood antipathy was based on a firm anti-foreign stand reinforced by the belief that the Communists were representatives of the “irreligious” Soviet Union. Ikhwan members were an important if not the predominant part of a mob which on November 30, 1947, the day after the United Nations voted to partition Palestine, attacked Communist headquarters in Damascus. At least one student and one Communist Party member were killed in the resulting melee, numerous other persons were badly injured, and Communist headquarters was burned. Al-Manar claimed a victory…
The role of the Brotherhood in stirring the masses to concern over Palestine has been an important one, since no other group has so consistently emphasized the importance of the coming struggle. Following release of the UNSCOP [United Nations Special Committee on Palestine] Report, the Ikhwan organized political meetings to follow each week the important Friday morning prayer sessions at the principal mosques throughout Syria. These sessions were usually fight talks urging the faithful to lay down their lives and fortunes to defeat Zionism. The Brotherhood was probably the first organization in Syria to register volunteers for action in Palestine. It is believed that the Society actually gave some military training to its members at two camps, one near Haffe, in the Allouite [Alawite] Mountains and the other near Hama.
[T]the Brotherhood also stands against sin. Sin in fanatical Moslem eyes includes the exercise by women of freedoms taken for granted in other societies. For example, a public incident of early Brotherhood history in Syria was an attack by turbaned Brothers on the Roxy theater in Damascus. Sheikhs stoned the building, broke glass, and threatened the audience. Provocation for this outburst was the “ladies day” attendance promotion scheme of the theatre manager. The idea of unattended women viewing Clark Gable or even Mickey Mouse is apparently revolting to devout Moslems.
The strength of the Ikhwan al-Muslimin is difficult to estimate but there are perhaps 10,000 active members. Potentially every devout Moslem is a member, for no other political group in Syria has the same religious appeal. It is thought that many “true believers” holding Government jobs and so barred by law from political activity are sympathizers, if not secretly members…The showing of the Brotherhood in the July, 1947 parliamentary elections was impressive, especially in the free and relatively honest balloting of the first day. Many observers believe the Brotherhood list would have swept the field had not Minister of Defense Ahmad [al-]Sharabati and others taken “steps” to assure the election of National Party candidates in the run-off election.
The report’s concluding section summarizes a Brotherhood pamphlet entitled, “Aims and Principles of the Moslem Brotherhood,” which elucidates the organization’s program. Five salient features are highlighted — Islamic globalism, totalitarianism and anti-secularism; female inequality, and limitations on freedom of conscience and speech; Islamic morality; xenophobia; and obsession with the “Palestine question”:
The general philosophic and religious principles of the Moslem Brotherhood are in places so much gibberish, but the doctrines of “Pan-Islamism” and of the unity of state and religion are clearly discernible. One of several definitions of Islam reads: “Islam is improving spirit, manners, and character. It has all provisions and regulations for social life. It is a belief, worship, character, and religion. It is religion and state. Any attempt to separate it from public life is a deprivation of society of its greatest weapons and of medium reform and organization.” (Article 7) Finally, unity of the Arabs and Islam is declared, “The Arab nation is one nation…” (Article 8) and “Islam is the Arab nation’s mission…” (Article 9)
Article 17 states that “all persons are equal before the law,” but from other references to the place of women it is almost possible to conclude that females are not persons. “Freedom of thought and speech is a steady right…provided…it does not conflict with social regulation.”
On questions of morality, the Brotherhood lays down the law. Liquor, prostitution, gambling, indecency in films, papers, magazines, and popular music are attacked and women are enjoined “to dress decently.” A man who is not virtuous may not hold public office. Co-education is flatly forbidden.
If any one impression is gained by a perusal of the “Aims and Principles” it is that the Brotherhood is completely and determinedly committed to an anti-foreign campaign. Foreigners may have no economic concessions (Article 24), they may not own property or real estate (Article 25), Syrians who have ever served foreigners must be dismissed from teaching posts (Article 40) and foreign schools are absolutely prohibited (Article 46). The pre-judgment of the situation which underlies this basic policy is indicated in Article 12: “Colonization is evil. We fight it in all shapes and forms. Our attitude toward foreign states is caution. We keep peace with them as long as they keep peace with us: we fight them when they injure our interest or affect our sovereignty; and we consider any propaganda of a foreign state or its doctrine and regulations which contradict our principles as evil imperialist propaganda.” Employing a narrow view of “our interest” and “our sovereignty” and sprinkling the indictment with Communist terminology as the Brothers do the Ikhwan is led to practically absolute xenophobism.
This then is the Moslem Brotherhood, an organization determined to reform the Arab World, built on faith in Islam, dedicated to the defeat of secularism and convinced that direct intercourse with foreigners is evil. It opposes and will continue to oppose Soviet Communism, British Imperialism, and American colonization believing these derogatory words to reflect the true aims of the powers and acknowledging no good from any of them. Growing rapidly, capitalizing on the Palestine hysteria, and respected by the populace, the Brotherhood is a force to watch in Syrian politics.
An additional section of the 1947 report entitled, “Organization and Leadership,” includes biographical details about Syrian Brotherhood founder Mustafa al-Sibai. This section opens with an introductory comment about the Brotherhood’s leadership “triumvirate” which reinforces the report’s earlier observation explaining the movement’s mass appeal to traditionalist Syrian Muslims:
One of the strong points of the Brotherhood is the fact that its leaders, dangerous fanatics in American eyes, are respected by the Syrian people. Unwavering in purpose, the top men are all “good” Moslems and far more honest than most Syrian politicians.
[Al-]Sibai, not quite forty, comes from an impoverished branch of a large and influential Homs family. As a student he showed considerable ability and when he became interested in religious studies, he was sent to the oldest and most dignified center of Islamic religious learning, Al-Azhar College [University] in Cairo. While in Cairo studying theology and jurisprudence, Sibai presumably made the contacts that resulted in his selection as first Chairman of the Moslem Brotherhood in Syria some fifteen years later. Possibly key to the success of Mustafa Sibai is his acknowledged ability to sway an audience. In a country where the power of oratory is highly valued, Sibai ranks with the best. When in October, 1947 he toured north Syria demanding action in Palestine, the turnout was startling. His regular speeches at the Ommayad [Ummayad] Mosque in Damascus following Friday prayers leave the audience virtually frothing; such is the state of exultation he creates.
Finally, elsewhere in a comment from the report section “History,” it was noted:
Sibai and some of his cohorts spent part of the war [World War II] in British concentration camps for suspected pro-Nazi sympathies.
Mustafa al-Sibai’s Sharia-Supremacist “Democratic” Vision
Two episodes from al-Sibai’s biography (1915-1964) which took place after the December, 1947 State Department report was filed, capture his defining, obsessive Islamic Jew-hatred. Under al-Sibai’s personal leadership (as the General Overseer), the Syrian Muslim Brothers sent a jihadist battalion which fought the beleaguered Jews of Palestine at the battles for Jerusalem, and neighboring al-Qastal, in May, 1948. Two years later, in 1950, al-Sibai achieved notoriety for suggesting Syria re-align its foreign policy (then) and seek diplomatic support from the Soviet Union for the expressed purpose of countering Western support of Israel.
Mustafa al-Sibai’s Islamic supremacist Weltanschauung can be gleaned in specific detail from his most important writings. However, in essence, al-Sibai shared with great fidelity his colleague and Egyptian (and international) Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna’s ideology. Immediately after his election as General Overseer of the nascent Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, al-Sibai celebrated this achievement with a message (on May 23, 1946) to al-Banna, which stated:
How wonderful it is for names to merge after goals and programs have been united. If we could not manage, because of official obstacles and current circumstances to complete our link with the leadership and with the organizational structure, let us hope that God will bring the day when this is achieved in the near future.
Al-Banna, on September 5, 1948, writing in the Egyptian Brotherhood daily al-Ihkwan al-Muslimin, expressed, unabashedly, the movement’s global aspirations, consistent with the traditional hegemonic goals of Islam:
The Ikhwan is not a regional movement, but it is indeed an international one, because Islam is an international religion.
Subsequently, Mustafa al-Sibai, reiterated this formulation, stating:
The Call of the Muslim Brothers is not a narrow party political call. We are not a localized organization, the function of which is restricted to narrow local or national boundaries…But we are an international movement.
These clearly expressed ideals contextualize Al-Sibai’s 1960 essay “Mutual or Joint Responsibility,” (translated here, pp. 151,54,61) which discussed jihad as a “nation’s,” or “state’s,” or “country’s” shared obligation.
To fight for Allah (al-jihad) with money and self…The paying of part of a citizen’s money for a holy war (jihad) is preserving all his money from being taken by the enemies if they win…[Mutual] responsibility with respect to defense states that every Muslim in the state must cooperate with the rest of his fellow citizens in defending the security of the country. It is his duty to sound a general alarm if an enemy raids any part of the nation such that a state of panic is caused. In this regard, the saying of Allah is (Koran 9:41), “Go ye forth, (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of God.”
When viewed in the very specific context of his bellicose words and aggressive deeds vis a vis the jihad against the Jews of historical Palestine (i.e., fiery sermonizing, raising funds, and organizing and leading a jihadist battalion), it is quite clear that Al-Sibai’s use of the terms “nation,” “state,” or “country,” referred to at least the regional Arab Muslim (and more likely, global Pan-Islamic) umma. Al-Sibai’s understanding of “defense” was equally elastic—consistent with the classical Islamic jurisprudence on jihad war.
In an earlier 1938-39 essay, “Ulama and Politics” al-Sibai had emphasized the significance of foundational Islamic theologians and jurists as prototype jihadists:
Regarding their jihad for Allah and for achieving victory for His religion, this is a long story and suffice if I cite several episodes. Abd Allah b. Al Mubarak [d. 797; a merchant and transmitter of hadith, who was a disciple of the seminal jurist Abu Hanifa, founder of the Hanafite school of jurisprudence], the God-fearing imam and scholar, who was in the habit of alternating between making a pilgrimage to Mecca one year and taking part in holy war [jihad] the next year, until he dies on the way back from a holy war. Imam al-Shafii (d. 820; founder of the Shafiite school of jurisprudence] traveled to Alexandria, and for several days was stationed at its shore, facing the sea, prepared to forestall any danger. Imam al-Bukhari (d. 870; compiler of the most important of the six canonical hadith collections), the commander of the faithful in compiling the Hadith, was stationed in an outlying called Firrir [a village in Bokhara, now modern Uzbekistan], and at nightfall, he would begin to gather hadith and begin to worship his God. Imam Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328; the famous Hanbali jurist) rode from Damascus to Cairo in order to call for its help against the Tatars, returning after he recruited fighting forces, and standing at their forefront. There are many other examples of such imams, for whom the jihad for religious knowledge did not divert them from the jihad to spread the word of Allah…
Why can’t you accept MObama is really a Sunni and is enabling the Ikhwan Khilafah by using the office of the POTUS? All signs point to this Rome. Why the denial? see the pattern. MObama is not a fool, he is using the USA to “fundamentally transform the world” – eliminate Israel, by using Israel to go after Shiite Iran. Both degrade and the Sunnis/Ikhwan finish them both.
Here’s the paranoia thought: MObama IS the Mahdi.
Nope, he’s just one of those “Western Orientalists”. He sees no threat in Islamism, because he’s too busy dreaming of a world run by the likes of the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi- which he considers all “mystical, Eastern” leaders to be.
But to be truly mystical and Eastern, they must hate the West. Every bit of it. Especially that “beachhead” of Western materialist imperialism in the Mideast- Israel. That is the centerpiece of his MidEast policy, such as it is; everything is Israel’s fault, and once it’s gone, we can all sing “Kumbaya”.
Don’t be fooled by lines like “the Muslim call to prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world.” He will say anything to anybody to get their support, and he’s only occasionally even close to sincere.
The Philosopher King of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue wants the world ruled by other Philosopher Kings. But to be “authentic”, they also have to be primitivists with the urge to solve things he defines as “problems” quickly and violently.
He defines Israel- and the United States- as “problems”.
clear ether
eon
to himself, because he is an Islamist. Wake up.
Almost..B. Hussein O is a sociopath and megalomaniac, true, but, perhaps just as importantly, a tool of the Council on Foreign Relations, that collocation of globalist satanics which owns the Fed and runs the world of international finance. BHO may, indeed, see himself as the islamic mahdi, but part of the globalist program is to eliminate all nonwhites when they reduce world population to about 15% of its present size. BHO is not very bright- one reason his school records have been hidden. But he and his have succeeded in introducing control by islamic jihad into several mideastern countries this year, and soon Syria will be included. He hates America, he hates Freedom, he hates Good. As a practicing satanist he loves Evil, Slavery(Sharia) and Islam.
And sixtysome million Americans are stupid enough to want him to lead their cowardly, greedy, lemminglike souls straight into the hell of the FEMA concentration camps and the cremation furnaces. They volunteered for their own holocaust. Perhaps some of us won’t go quite as easily?
Oh, and a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Those that purely say that Obama is doing all of this because he is a Muslim are missing the bigger picture: its not about Islam. It is about America. Obama’s enemy is America. Specifically its about White Imperialism. Whiteness.
I watched Michelle Obama give a speech from back in 1995-6 talking about how evil Middle-class Whiteness was in the world. She spoke of how it was basically a fact that white people could not help but oppress other races by their very nature and how the only way to secure freedom and safety for all the rest of mankind was to end Middle-class Whiteness once and for all.
Moreover, she stated that it was impossible to accomplish this goal while their was a sufficient economic and population base of white people to resist the necessary changes and that Demographic Justice required not only using economic redistribution to remove the economic basis of the oppressive group but also using immigration laws and healthcare regulations to reduce the population base to insignificance.
Creating hostile powers of sufficient economic and military might to resist the Imperialist white power is also a part of this program …. to create a world that will come together and work to eliminate the white threat once and for all time.
Ask Hillary WTF Huma’s doing on her staff.
If my suspicions are correct, does it rise to the level of treason on Huma’s part?
Huma should be put in the back room with lights in her eyes regarding Benghazi.
/Occam’s Razor
Hillary is.
not Huma. Huma’s loyal to her kind.
It’s Hilly who should be put in the back room with lights in her eyes regarding Benghazi.
That’s why she says her stomach’s bothering her and why she says she has a concussion.
That’s why she won’t show up for questioning. Everybody knows that, including Obama.
Shine the lights in his eyes too, and watch the habitual liar start to talk his way out of it.
It isn’t only Hillary’s Muslim Brotherhood paramour/”body woman” Huma Abedin. Washington DC is crawling with Muslim Brotherhood moles.
I remember when treason was a capital offense, and enforced as such.
Problem is, these days, there wouldn’t be enough lampposts and trees in DC to go around. We would run out of rope long before we would run out of traitors.
you can switch to piano wire
“Why Is America Midwiving a Muslim Brotherhood-Ruled Syria?”
Because it is integral to Obama’s agenda to do everything possible to weaken and destroy, the United States of America.
the caliphate, next is Jordan and King Abdullah, i think he should get the Kurds to ally with him. the free Syrian forces are a joke, with threats about Syria becoming an American graveyard if we get involved, only if the rules of engagement continue in the same pattern. i refer to how those badass jihadis fared in Fallujah. the caliphate is coming into existence only because Americas government has facilitated it. when you deal with cannibals you’re only good till the next meal.
it’s cannabis Our Leader is dealing with.
Delusional, dangerous
Two words that aptly describe, the present U.S. administration.
delusional, no. They know what they’re doing. Get that straight, once and for all.
Are they not delusional in supposing that there is an allah and that it is the creator of the cosmos? Are they not delusional in the notion that they will succeed in destroying America, slaughtering and imprisioning our people and structuring a feudalistic society consisting of themselves as a privileged elite served by a relatively small class of serfs? Read the CFR Foreign Affairs back issues as far as you want to go in order to confirm the above. Read Servando Gonzalez for the details. These bozos serve their lord, satan; thus their hatred for christianity, even in its watered down forms. These bozos are psychopaths, criminal mentalities, and they are close to their putsch; their Reichstag may burst into flame at any moment.
why not? because the psychopaths, as you do rightly call them, know we ‘re scared shitless of them.
we’d have kicked them out of here already if we weren’t so scared, but no, we kiss their asses instead
For a good perspective on this question, ask the Russians.
This is the same question some unenlightened people asked when we were busy undermining Mubarak, and carrying out a war against Libya.
No one has ever articulated the US strategy in the middle east. Maybe some smart spooks are settng up workable governments. Or maybe we are just getting played.
At some point is it patriotic to ask, is there not some war somewhere on the planet that the US does not have to take part in?
– Jordan and Arabia? Israel outnumbered.
Why? Because the insane, criminal, commie koranimal in the WH is muslim brotherhood.
Why are we even in the middle east to begin with? Supporting Islamists is hardly a new thing, we’ve been doing it for years. We supported the Saudis forever, and they are as Islamist as they come. But they are “our” Islamists, so somehow it’s okay, even though they’re a big source of the radical strain of Islam.
Your questions are just answered. Obama is sending American troops to 35 african countries to “keep the peace”. Next he will invite NATO or UN troops HERE to “keep the peace”, knowing that US forces will not attack our civilian population. Foreigners will. Congressmen let him do whatever he wants, because they are lazy, ignorant, stupid, greedy and cowardly.That is because the electorate which put them in office possesses the same qualities. An effect cannot possess a quality not found in its cause. Our downfall lies in deviating from Originalism. Had we retained the exact same system devised by the Founders we would not be at the brink of destruction today. The solution is obvious. Return to the Constitution as originally and correctly perceived by Washington and Jefferson and, by the late Robert Bork. Picture, if you will, a nation captained by the virtuous, the talented, the patriotic and compare that vision with the slimy, satanic perversions of the Obamanites. Then choose.
WHY IS AMERICA MIDWIVING A MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD RULED SYRIA? that might be a valid question to ponder over if one just woke up from a 50 year coma. possibly for the same reason clinton sent our troops to kill bosnians and enforce islamid jihad? possibly the same reason george w bush, in response to the islamic murder of 3000 americans, branded islam “the religion of peace”? possibly for the same reason ghw bush sent our troops to free kuwait’s approved murderous muslims from saddam hussein’s unapproved murderous muslims? possibly for the same reason that our population voted for a muslim president? maybe the same reason that that self avowed “i will stand with the muslims” traitor used our military power to convert acceptable, in egypt, to unacceptable, and converted bad to as bad as it can get, in libya? the motives for these shocking crimes are obvious, in the case of hussein obama—pure treason. the motives for others vary: stupidity, ignorance, laziness, greed, malice, hatred, as well as treason come to mind, but above all, nose cutting face spiting stupidity. the criminally stupids in power hate patriotic citizens more than they fear the proven malice of islam.
why?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/12/bill-whittle-the-obama-administration-is-deliberately-attempting-to-destroy-this-economy-video/
The Obama administration is deliberately trying to destroy the economy
that’s why!
I tried telling people four years ago he was out to destroy the economy and the country
and when it happens, stupid americans still won’t believe it
Personal, I prefer that the U.S. simply withdraws from Middle-eastern politics and let the chips fall as they will. It think such isolationism is far superior to any current suggested approach.
First, new technological developments such as fracking as well as the discovery of huge new hydrocarbon reserves (both conventional and non-conventional) makes the middle-east far less relevant to the future of the rest of humanity than in the past.
Second, this Islamist ideology that is currently sweeping the middle-east is clearly unsustainable in the long term. It offers no viable solutions for the region’s social-economic problems. Thus, it will ultimately lead to a Soviet Union style meltdown, probably by 2030. The Arabs, for cultural and cognitive reasons, lack the organizational capacity to become a genuine threat to the rest of the world in the manner of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Thus, allowing the region to fester in Islamism for a few decades prior to final meltdown, does not represent a credible threat outside the immediate region.
Thirdly, I think Islamism represents a phase the region must pass through, much like Communism was to East and Southeast Asia during the 60′s and 70′s. The reason why I think this is because Islamism (as a “modern” ideology, not traditional tribal Islam) has yet to be discredited as a functional worldview, at least in the minds of the Middle-eastern people. They have to be allowed to experience this, followed by the inevitable social and economic collapse that will follow. There is no other way around it. When the Soviet Union collapsed and China instigated another round of reform, the Economist magazine described Communism as that hard road from Capitalism to Capitalism. Of course it did not work. But people believed it would at the time and had to be allowed to try, if for no other reason but to disabuse them from the belief that it could ever work again.
I see the middle-east as experiencing the same dynamic as East Asia in the 60′s and 70′s. They must be allowed to try and fail on their own. There is simply no other alternative.
Another reason why I do not consider Islamism sustainable is the experience of Iran. Iran, under its Islamic government, has more vice, drug addiction and prostitution today than it ever did during the time of the Shah. It appears that Islamism is not effective at preventing vice, even though it is one of the purposes of the religion/ideology in the first place. Also, Iran’s birthrate has collapsed and very few of its young people still believe in the worldview. I predict that Islamism will produce similar results (and thus discredit itself) in Egypt and other places in the Arab world where it takes hold.
Lastly, one very good reason why Islam is not the ideological threat that communism was during the 50′s through 70′s is that it has no appeal to the young people around the world. In it heyday, Communism was popular in university campuses from Lima to Berlin, from Tokyo to Bangkok, even among U.S. college campuses (and ex-60′s people here can confirm this). I see no similar popularity for Islam or Islamism among the world’s college campuses today.
Hence, I see no viable reason for the U.S. to continue its involvement in middle-eastern politics, nor to commit the vast sums of taxpayers’ money to the region that it has over the past decades.
But it was never a purpose of Islam to institute morality.
From the very first, Mohammed was a murderer, robber, rapist and child molester. A psychopath, pathological liar and sadist,he led his murderous, arsonist robber gangs in countless raids on innocents. He refused to follow Jesus Christ, and advocated the enslavement or murder of all who refused to convert to his insane sharia way of law and life, in which men may have concubines and temporary wives, and wives are but chattel.
Do’t credit islam with anything good, because it is evil through and through.It is not really a religion; but a totalitarian political system masquerading as a religion. We need to terminate islam. It is a criminal enterprise.
We need to terminate islam. It is a criminal enterprise.
No we don’t. It will terminate itself over time.
and save a whole lot of lives
if we don’t terminate it now, it’ll terminate us instead
Uploaded on Sep 11, 2011 General Wesley Clark: Because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Swfeature=player_embedded
Because the Obama Administration adopted the Bush Administratin’s foreign policy, which the Bush Administration itself adopted from the Left.