You are here:   al-Qaeda > Time to Wise Up to the Muslim Brotherhood
 

Zionism, Ghannouchi has written, is "hostile to every element rooted in ethical and religious principles", spreading godlessness, greed and materialism. "The Islamic Project, by contrast, is its polar opposite representing the hope that human civilisation can be rescued from this new worship of the golden calf."

It's hard to believe that such an admired scholar and leader would have wished to conjure up a 21st-century echo of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the notorious early-20th-century anti-Semitic fraud. And yet some leading Muslim Brothers clearly still do believe in the authenticity of the Protocols. Listening to one of Qaradawi's fatwa council meetings in Watford in 2004, Steven Merley nearly fell off his stool when he discovered that the Protocols had been introduced in the proceedings as a serious reference source.

This is no aberration. In 2009, Sheikh Qaradawi thanked Hitler for having "managed to put Jews in their place . . . Allah willing, the next time will be at the hand of the (Muslim) believers."

Ghannouchi has served alongside Qaradawi as a member of both his European Council for Fatwa and Research and his International Union of Muslim Scholars. They and leaders of the designated terrorist group Hamas were also joint signatories to a 2004 jihadi declaration in support of Iraqi fighters attacking UK and US forces in Iraq — despite the UK having provided Ghannouchi with sanctuary from his oppressors in the former Tunisian regime. 

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Christopher C.
July 2nd, 2013
4:07 AM
"Let me be clear: followers of the Brotherhood in Britain are not advocating violent jihad here. They condemned the beheading in May of Drummer Lee Rigby by two Muslims on a London street in broad daylight. Their organisations have civic-sounding names; they emphasise human rights, respect for democracy and integration." There is a good Islamic word for those public pronouncements. It is taqqiya - religiously-sanctioned misrepresentation (to say it most politely). But "ordinary" Muslims - are they representative of Islam? Here's a suggestion - what if Hassan al-Banna and others like him are the leaders of an Islamic Reformation. The original Reformation, after all, followed Gutenberg, and the much greater availability of the Bible. Luther and thousands of other Christians went to the source and made their own judgements about the Bible's meanings. So, is there a parallel between post-Gutenberg Europe and the Middle East of the early 20th C.? I suggest that Hassan al-Banna and those of his ilk were, for perhaps the first time, a critical mass for the study of the Koran and the adhadith. And they took the exhortations of both seriously. The language is plain. And it is aggressive. It demands the imposition (not the free acceptance) of sharia. In other words, it demands of Muslims that they be total in their acceptance of Islam, and to ensure that everybody else submit as well (after all, that is what Islam means - submission). The point? "Ordinary" Muslims, in the sense that such persons present no threat to post-Judeo Christians, do not really exist. Those who do not wish to compel others to follow Islam are not really Muslims. The West is in very great trouble that even writers such as Mr Ware can part-recognise the danger, but not travel the last, few necessary steps to describe what we are really faced with.

truthseeker
July 1st, 2013
12:07 PM
The article says the Muslim Brotherhood has made Islam political instead of only religious. In fact, Islam makes no distinction between the political and the religious, as sharia law demonstrates. There is no Islamism, there is only Islam.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.