One Nation Under Islam

By Scott Wheeler

 

The Obama administration’s handling of Egypt reveals a level of incompetence that renders the U.S.—and the entire world— a more dangerous place.  In the early days of the protests in Egypt, the terrorist group Muslim Brotherhood stayed on the sidelines.  This was out of fear that Mubarak would come for them, and well he should have, considering the Brotherhood has tried to assassinate him in the past.  The moment Obama turned on Mubarak, the Muslim Brotherhood officially joined the protests and began organizing the opposition.

Meanwhile, Leftist groups in the U.S., which are allied with Obama, were already angling to help the Muslim Brotherhood in its quest for at least a share of the power in Egypt.  In the days before Mubarak stepped down, the White House and other administration officials gave confused and conflicting accounts about Mubarak’s intentions and the timing of events.  Indications were that the Obama administration was taking its cues from the news media – our intelligence community was forced to admit that it had relied upon cable television for the “analysis” the CIA chief offered in Congressional hearings— and did not have an open diplomatic channel to the Egyptian leadership.  Deep chagrin aside, it’s alarming that Mubarak, a longtime U.S. ally, was not listening to or talking with Washington, but the Muslim Brotherhood was.

Now the power vacuum in Egypt creates a deeper, more complex problem for the West:  how do we handle the resurgence of radical Islam with Egypt in play?  If the “democratic” movement slides into chaos, gives birth to factions, and leads finally to extremist Islamist government (the Sunni version of the Iran-ruling mullahs), then the Israeli-Palestinian problem will soon seem trivial in the shadow of the new threats that Israel and the U.S. would likely face.

Mubarak’s departure represents the loss of a strategic ally and the end of a stabilizing force in the Middle East.   The U.S. now has the opportunity —and the obligation— to transform the way in which we deal with Islam.   And deal we must.  I propose something straightforward, totally unambiguous: treating the global culture of Islam as a nation in and of itself.

Islamists, or what I call political Islam, already behaves as a nation.  The Muslim Brotherhood serves as the executive branch, while non-violent Islamist activists that campaign for “Muslim rights” are its department of state, and violent jihadists are its military.

Islamists will hate this idea because as they have spread out around the world they have strived mightily to cloak themselves in the protections of their host country even while refusing to assimilate to its customs, and in many cases, actively undermining the security of those nations. European leaders have recently become sharply aware of the consequences.  British Prime Minister David Cameron called the UK’s accommodating of Muslim extremists a mistake.  “The idea that we should respect different cultures within Britain to the point of allowing them – indeed encouraging them – to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream…is wrong headed,” Cameron said to a European commission.

While working under-cover, I have sat in Islamist training sessions (run in some cases by Muslim leaders that many in the West might call “the moderate voices”) and have been lectured on how Muslims “must blend in.”  Not for the purposes of assimilation, but for the purpose of deception: “call yourself American, call yourself Canadian,” we were instructed.  It is the logical way to acquire political power to advance the Islamist agenda.

The Islamists have been practicing Fourth Generation Warfare against the West for years. They have waged war as an organization rather than as a nation, thus making counter-measures extremely difficult.  It is a strategy designed specifically to obscure who is an enemy and who isn’t.

We are constantly admonished by the news media –and the administration– not to “indict a whole religion based on a few fanatics” who carry out deadly terrorist attacks.  But when the military of a nation-state attacks U.S. interests, isn’t that what we do? When Iraq merely posed a threat to stability by attempting a weapons-of-mass-destruction-program, coalition nations fought a war that not only devastated Iraq’s military, but also killed civilians and eliminated civilian infrastructure. Those are the unintended consequences of wars to preserve liberty and Western Civilization.  Stated crassly, that is the cost to Iraqis of not overthrowing their maniacal tyrant, Saddam Hussein, who was not only terrorizing their country, but also threatening other nations.

Wars waged by Islamic organizations, such as al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah are in essence the same as wars waged by nation-states.  Non-violent members of the organization may pay a price for the crimes of other members of the organization who use them as human shields.  As harsh as that seems, perhaps we in the U.S. have made life too easy for Muslims who allow themselves to be used in that way.  Do those who simply ignore violent jihadists and say, “well, I am not one of them,” while never divorcing themselves from the violent community as a whole, not earn some culpability?

Allowing the global Islamic community to remain intact hampers our ability to distinguish between those with a violent or anti-West agenda from those who respect freedom and religious liberty.  How can we tolerate it?

 

Advertisements

4 Comments on “One Nation Under Islam”

  1. Bob says:

    Are you stupid or just narrow-minded?

  2. “Wars waged by Islamic organizations…”
    .
    .
    .
    .
    What like the Iraq/Afghanistan/Yemen/Pakistan war???

    THOSE ARE AMERICAN WARS BELIAL!

    ——————————————
    “Stated crassly, that is the cost to Iraqis of not overthrowing their maniacal tyrant, Saddam Hussein, who was not only terrorizing their country, but also threatening other nations.”
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Lets talk about context, the country which invaded Iraq is USA, right? I’m sure even thru the haze of your deceptiveness you can see this.

    Well guess what Belial…

    CIA Director George Tenet says Iraq was never a “threat”, go look up his Georgetown University speech.

    ——————————————-
    “While working under-cover…”
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Come on. Name names, don’t just lie like that.

    ——————————————-
    “and have been lectured on how Muslims “must blend in.””
    .
    .
    .
    .
    What a loser. You can’t even keep track of your own deception.

    See this: “even while refusing to assimilate to its customs”

    —————————————-
    “When Iraq merely posed a threat to stability by attempting a weapons-of-mass-destruction-program, coalition nations fought a war that not only devastated Iraq’s military, but also killed civilians and eliminated civilian infrastructure.”
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Weapons of mass destruction were never found and thus the blame for the destruction of a nation on the false pretense, i.e. blatant jewish/ christian authored lies (as revealed by Center for Public Integrity)

    UN weapons inspector Hans Blix also said that Iraq has no chemical or biological program since 1998, and no nuclear program since the first Gulf war of 1991.

    ——————————————
    “Do those who simply ignore violent jihadists and say, “well, I am not one of them,” while never divorcing themselves from the violent community as a whole, not earn some culpability?”
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Do those who simply ignore violent jewish, christian terrorists (Israel who has attacked many of its neighbours and America which has attacked over 30 countries in the past 20 years) and say, “well, I am not one of them,” while never divorcing themselves from the violent community as a whole, not earn some culpability?

  3. Eddie says:

    I do not think that Obama has our best interests in mind. He is siding on fronts not friendly to America. We need a President that is for this country, does everything in his power to help our country and not talk negatively about America; and above all to create jobs here in the USA so our citizens can have a better life instead of going backwards. I don’t see any of our politicians hurting for money. The middle income is getting devastated by taxes and freezes. Obama put a tax incentive for those making up to $200,000 a year, and that is too much. If they can’t make it on that amount there is definitely something wrong with them. I know most persons don’t make that.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s