By Robert Spencer:
On my regular weekly Jihad Watch segment on Michael’s Sun TV program, we discussed the jihad in Iraq and the Obama Administration’s naivete regarding the Muslim Brotherhood.
Video thanks to AlohaSnackbar01.
By Robert Spencer:
On my regular weekly Jihad Watch segment on Michael’s Sun TV program, we discussed the jihad in Iraq and the Obama Administration’s naivete regarding the Muslim Brotherhood.
Video thanks to AlohaSnackbar01.
Published June 16, 2014 by AlohaSnackbar01
In the wake of a decision by Britain to accept the rulings ofIslamic sharia law in matters of inheritance, Arutz Sheva spoke with Ari Soffer, the Managing Editor of Arutz Sheva English and a former resident of London who is familiar with the on-the-ground political situation in the United Kingdom.
According to Soffer, not all British Muslims support the “creeping Islamization” that the UK has been undergoing, in which Islamic law takes its place among the laws of the land. That process is being pushed by Muslim organizations in Britain, but a large number of Muslims in the country would prefer to keep such laws as a private matter between themselves.
UK law already has provisions for the implementation of Sharia law on an individual basis, with decisions handed down by Islamic courts enforced in the country’s courts. Thus, the only purpose for the legislation, he said, was for Islamist radicals to promote their agenda of installing Islamic law in the daily life of Britons.
Soffer added that the British government has only itself to blame for the situation. It was the government that promoted the idea of a “dialog” with what turned out to be a set of radical groups, convinced they were a positive alternative to Al Qaeda. There was a need to create such a dialog in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, it was felt.
The groups encouraged the government to see them as an “Islamic alternative” to Al Qaeda, even though theologically they had much in common. “This was the main reason the governments of Europe enhanced the status of these groups, and now their agenda is clear,” he said. However, he added, most Britons were puzzled at what to do about the situation. “They do not to deal with the new reality because they don’t know how to,” he added.
By Daniel Greenfield, Jan. 6, 2014:
Both of the suicide bombers who struck in Russia were Muslim converts. They follow a long string of Muslim terrorist converts, including the murderers of British soldier Lee Rigby who were sentenced last month and Terry Lee Loewen who plotted to car bomb the Wichita Mid-Continent Airport that same month.
The popular theory is that Muslim terrorist groups use converts because they blend in better. But in most Western countries, screening by race is nearly illegal and in even in targeted countries where it isn’t, there are usually many members of Muslim ethnic groups in most major cities.
There are four reasons for the rise of the Muslim Suicide Convert. Muslim converts are gullible, fanatical, suicidal and expendable.
Let’s start with the last one first. Muslims usually come from tribal cultures with extended family groups. Despite its claims of transnationalism and multiculturalism, Islam is an ethnic religion with the descendants of Mohammed elevated over everyone else, the families in the region of his first conquests elevated over other Arabs, Arabs elevated over non-Arabs, Asian Muslims over African Muslims and African Muslims over Western converts to Islam.
A convert to Islam is lowest on the totem pole because he has no family group. In a tribal society, not having a family connection makes you an outsider and expendable. A Muslim who Jihads himself to death creates a hole in the tribal network of arranged cousin marriages, illegal business arrangements and other extended family support structures. A Muslim convert was never part of the network unless he married into it. And even then he can easily be unplugged because he has no common ancestry with them.
In a Muslim country, he can be killed without having to pay blood price. In a Western country, he can be sent off to die without the “tribe” of Pakistanis or Egyptians who built the mosques and hired the Imams who converted him and convinced him to kill non-Muslims being affected by his death.
He is expendable.
Converts are not part of the family networks of the Muslim settlers in their Western diasporas. That makes them useful cannon fodder. If they are captured, the mosque denies all responsibility and blames the internet even though most mosques and Muslim student groups host those same speakers who “radicalize” converts over the internet at their own facilities and events.
Muslim converts are also suicidal.
The act of conversion is a form of death. It destroys the entire cultural and faith background of the individual. It cuts him off from his family, his people and his way of life. Conversion can be constructive, but it should never be forgotten that it is also destructive.
The Muslim convert has been trying to kill himself all his life to some degree, to destroy the essence of what he is to overcome that perceived flaw preventing him from being happy and living a worthwhile life. Islam is his drug and alcohol abuse, his meaningless sex and his cult. It is how he punishes himself hoping to find redemption in self-destruction and meaning in the sacrifice of the self to the first utterly devouring and consuming thing that comes along.
The Muslim convert finds Islam in a search for fulfillment and then still feeling unfulfilled, seeks out its “purer” forms whose commitment to Jihadist violence is more overt. The violence of their rhetoric and the force of their commitment briefly feel like fulfillment, but then dissatisfaction sets in again. Told to blame himself for this final failure, the Muslim Suicide Convert is encouraged to make his final kamikaze run hoping to find the meaning and fulfillment in the afterlife that evaded him in this life.
Muslim converts have personal problems that they try to treat with Islam the way that sufferers from conventional diseases try to treat their illnesses with phony cures. Muslim clerics promise that Islam will solve the personal problems of non-Muslims and non-Muslim societies, but like so many criminal gurus, they are peddling phony cures that kill the patient.
That is one reason why Muslim converts are fanatical. Another reason is that they have no baseline. Converts plunge into another religion and culture as into deep water.
Muslims have learned to make the necessary compromises with their fanatical religion that make their lives livable. That is why most of them do not go out and blow themselves up; instead they undermine Western societies in slower and steadier ways through demographics, disinformation and political influence.
The Muslim Suicide Convert seeks an uncompromising purity. He rejects the compromises that Muslims have learned to make over the centuries. Seeking the core revelation in a religion of death; he finds that revelation only in death. The truth of Islam is in its killing fields. It preaches war for power and paradise. The Muslim convert who searches for its essence finds a grinning skull in the desert sands and hurries to emulate its terrible example.
Finally, Muslim converts are gullible. The natives of every land have games that they play with tourists, relying on their unfamiliarity with another culture to mislead them and trick them. Muslim converts are strangers in a strange land, slowly learning a foreign way of life and pathetically eager to be accepted by another culture. It is all too easy for Muslim clerics to lead them down the garden path to the suicide bomber’s paradise by offering and withholding affection until they are willing to do anything to belong.
Muslim Suicide Converts are enlisted in a war the way that men have been enlisted in wars throughout the ages with appeals to patriotism, strategic shaming, tales of outrageous atrocities and myths of incredible heroism. The Muslim clerics, like so many military recruiters before them, tailor their pitch to the disposable people who are least likely to question orders and the least likely to be missed.
Muslim recruiters thrive on campus for the same reasons as cult recruiters and leftist academics.
The modern university is a good place to find insecure young people questioning everything that they believe in and unsure of what to do when they have destroyed everything they were and found that their impulse to ridicule and tear down everything does not fulfill the human need for something to believe in. It is where young men and women seeking to find something beyond their limits, experimenting with and becoming someone they are not and feeling inward guilt and loss at the abandonment of their old selves and their old values can be hunted and trapped.
Into this universe of doubt, the Muslim cleric intrudes with his false offer of certainty, with the air of the victim, the badge of the underdog, the mysticism of the east and the romance of the grass, that like the terrorist flags that wave among it, always grows greener on the other side of the world.
Westernized Muslims are urged to recommit to Islam, to steel themselves for the coming conflict between the civilizations of the sword and the microchip, to purge themselves of Western culture, embrace the black flags and atone for their beers they drank, the girls they kissed and the songs they sang with the death screams of sirens and the blood of their non-Muslim friends and neighbors.
The seduction of the non-Muslim runs more slowly but surely. The dissatisfied and unhappy, those trained by a liberal culture contemptuous of its own values and traditions to instinctively value non-Western spirituality over their own “materialistic” and “imperialistic” religions, are lured in.
Read more at Sultan Knish
“Ask why so many psychotic and murderous people embrace not peaceful Christianity or pluralistic Hinduism but the colossal abattoir of violence of Islamic fundamentalism.”
– Michael Coren
Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. ..Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously, by licensing and prohibiting, to misdoubt her strength. Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse, in a free and open encounter? Milton
by Andrew Bostom:
Last week I noted how Michael Coren of Canada’s Sun TV was far bolder than any of his US television network colleagues in dealing with Islam’s threat to Western free speech, epitomized by Coren’s interview of Danish journalist and historian Lars Hedegaard, who survived an assassination attempt by a likely Muslim assailant, still at large. No such interview with public airing on television was conducted by any major US television network—ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, CNN—not even the self-proclaimed “alternative” to “stultifying political correctness,” and “champion” of free speech, The Blaze TV.
Emphasizing, yet again, the ongoing, complete dereliction of duty of not only the mainstream legacy media, but so-called conservative outlets such as Fox News and The Blaze, Michael Coren opened his follow-up interview of Lars Hedegaard, yesterday (2/15/13), with this observation:
You [Hedegaard] should be on every single TV show. This should have been [on] the front page of every newspaper in the civilized world.
To add insult to bitter irony, as described in this news item Friday (2/15/13)from Dispatch International, which Lars Hedegaard continues to edit while in protective seclusion, and reiterated during Coren’s latest interview, Hedegaard has been compelled to sue several Swedish media (including Aftonbladet, Svenska Dagbladet, Sveriges Television, Sydsvenskan and Helsingborgs Dagblad) for libel. The libel charge was filed with Allmänhetens Pressombudsman, (the Press Ombudsman) as well as the Chancellor of Justice.
For background on the assassination attempt see my previous post – Another Attempt to Murder Free Speech in Denmark
The following is our response to an article on The Copenhagen Post website entitled Hedegaard lashes out following failed assassination attempt.
My organisation the International Civil Liberties Alliance (ICLA) awarded Mr Hedegaard our Defender of Freedom Award last year in the European Parliament.
Unlike many newspapers, he is willing to stand up and speak truth to power. Newspapers tend to no longer do their job of informing the public and challenging the powerful. Instead they provide a skewed ideologically driven picture of the world. Rather than report the facts they choose to demonise individuals like Mr Hedegaard and in doing so deliberately put them in danger.
Lars Hedegaard has shown willingness even to put his life on the line in the cause of freedom. How many newspaper editors can say the same thing?
ICLA supports Mr Hedegaard’s call to remove the blasphemy clause. Indeed we call for the abolition of all blasphemy laws worldwide. This includes laws that are effectively blasphemy laws that are dressed in the clothes of secularism. For instance the United Kingdom abolished its blasphemy law but incorporated similar restrictions in other laws. It is the freedom to talk freely about all philosophies that needs to be protected by law. Blasphemy laws stifle freedom of speech and prevent the progressive development of our society.
Lars, we salute your bravery and your continuing commitment to freedom.
International Civil Liberties Alliance
Lars Hedegaard speaks with Michael Coren about surviving an assassination attempt:
Swedish journalist Ingrid Carlqvist and the great Dane Lars Hedegaard of the Free Press Society join Michael Coren to discuss their new enterprise, Dispatch International:
Support Freedom of Speech
Why Dispatch International?
The mainstream media has deteriorated to a point where it constitutes a threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The fourth estate was supposed to act as corrective to the legislative, judicial and administrative powers but has in fact become a part of the ruling elite. It no longer considers it its duty to criticise or expose.
One survey after another shows that the vast majority of Western journalists suffer from groupthink. They do not inform the public about what is happening in the real world but want to educate and mould the citizens to conform to their own preconceived ideas of what ought to be.
Vast swathes of reality are brushed under the carpet because the mainstream media considers them antithetical to the multiculturalist, cultural relativist, “green” and anti-Judean-Christian ideologies they strive to impose on the public.
This cannot be allowed to stand. The time has come to publish a real newspaper.
On 30 August we will issue a test issue of Dispatch International. It will appear as a print paper in Danish and Swedish with e-versions in Danish, Swedish, English and German.
More languages will be added as the need arises.
If the test issue is all well received as we antitipate, we will commence regular, weekly publication on Thursday, January 3, 2013.
In the meantime, click onto our website: http://www.Dispatch-International.com.
Chief editors are Ingrid Carlqvist, former news editor of the Swedish daily Kvällsposten, and Lars Hedegaard, former editor-in-chief of the Copenhagen daily Information. Ingrid is Chair of the Swedish Free Press Society and Lars of the Danish Free Press Society.
Together with Canadian free speech activist and board member of the Canadian Free Press Society Bjorn Larsen we have set up a company that is protected from any attempt at a hostile take-over.
We can neither be bought, nor will we be dependent on public subsidies or advertising income.
Dispatch International is your paper. We have no other purpose than to keep you informed of all the news that is fit to print – but rarely is.
Let us make this a success.
Michael Coren interviews Ayaan Hirsi Ali:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali Responds to Questions at Ohio University:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an outspoken defender of women’s rights in Islamic societies, was born in Mogadishu, Somalia. She escaped an arranged marriage by immigrating to the Netherlands in 1992 and served as a member of the Dutch parliament from 2003 to 2006. In parliament, she worked on furthering the integration of non-Western immigrants into Dutch society and defending the rights of women in Dutch Muslim society. In 2004, together with director Theo van Gogh, she made Submission, a film about the oppression of women in conservative Islamic cultures. The airing of the film on Dutch television resulted in the assassination of Mr. van Gogh by an Islamic extremist. At AEI, Ms. Hirsi Ali researches the relationship between the West and Islam, women’s rights in Islam, violence against women propagated by religious and cultural arguments, and Islam in Europe.
Michael Coren: It’s not just what happened last week and it’s still continuing to happen all over the world, it’s also the reaction of people you think should know better to this. They, they’re blaming the, that idiot who made this stupid film. That’s not the issue, for goodness sake! The issue is mass violence murder, hostility, craziness, and …. Steve Emerson has been writing and commenting, commentating on these issues for so long now and really predicted this would happen. Steve, welcome to you. It’s always good to have you on the show.
Steven Emerson: Hi, Michael. Good to be here with you, and you’re right, and actually, in the 17 years I’ve been working on, I did a documentary in 1994 called “Jihad in America” and in 1996 I got my first death threat. This is way before today. Today’s New York Times, you know, gave all the grievances; why Muslims are angry. None of the grievances happened in the 1990’s and yet the ’93 World Trade Center bombing happened, you know, 17 years ago. So, the bottom line here is the issue is not the film. The issue is the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood and their like don’t believe in the First Amendment., don’t believe in free speech, and the irony of course is that the, the liberal pundits in this Administration said, “Well, if we have democracy in the Muslim world, it’ll satiate their political anger. They’ll chatter within the political system. What they’re doing is they’re imposing a totalitarian system on their own people, and now they’re imposing it on us.
COREN: Yes. This is so significant. We may never win over people in the Middle East. The Islamic World may always believe that censorship is the order of the day, but it’s beginning, as you say, to influence people in the West. People who have called themselves liberals for so long, are saying, “Well, you shouldn’t provoke them, that the moviemaker was in the wrong. We should change our way of life to accommodate theirs.
EMERSON: This is, listen, Michael. This is big. Hollywood now feature any more Islamic terrorists or protagonists. In fact, they submit their scripts to Muslim Brotherhood front groups. Publishing houses, like the one doing on the one on the Danish cartoons, won’t republish the Danish cartoons, right? So, we’re self censoring ourselves. We have this culture or relativism that Western values are no longer superior, that the First Amendment, I mean that the way we reacted was, we regret the fact that we have a First Amendment, and then most reporters started investigating the crazy guy that did the film., when the real investigation should have been about the fact that these people insist that their values which is, are totalitarian should be applied to our system, and the President should have stood up, and instead of saying, demanding that our diplomats be protected, should have said, “We have the First Amendment, that’s a sacred right of this country, of the West. It’s the bedrock of Western civilization, and unless you respect tha, t we’re not going to deal with you.
COREN: You mentioned, and for those who are not aware of this, you mentioned the Danish cartoon. There is an entire book written about the Kurt Westergaard cartoon of Muhammad. The entire book is devoted to that subject. There is not one single cartoon in the entire bloody book.
EMERSON: Yeah, well, that’s right, I mean. And in this country, by way. And in Europe, in sympathy to the Danish cartoonists,. newspapers around Europe published the cartoons. In this country, out of the 300 newspapers, only two newspapers republished the cartoons. And the book that’s being published, of course, you know about South Park, the televisions comedy series. They censored, you know, a whole series that featured a satire on Muhammad. They satire all religions. The reality is that, that they, empowering them now has given them the right to basically impose values and also it has stoked new violence that we’ve never seen before. This is not going away. This is the beginning of a new chapter, and in fact in the next four years, I’m going to predict this right now: that you, that we will now see the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, a whole, it’s going to take away. It’s going to replicate the sphere of influence that the Soviet Union once had. It’ll be the Muslim Brotherhood Union. They’ll have Iran on their side. They’ll probably have nuclear weapons. And, and the world will be a much more dangerous place
COREN: Well, it’s interesting that you say that because the Soviets were who they were, we knew, and there was a certain consensus of, of aspiration if you like. And they probably also acknowledged that their sphere of influence stopped at a certain place. They did want to survive. They didn’t want Armageddon. They valued life over death as opposed to the Muslim Brothers. This is a very, very different confrontation now. And they are winning. And we have this Fifth Column that is incredibly large. Are there are liberal journalists, any journalists on the left who are standing up and saying, “Hey, guys, what are you doing here? We believe in freedom of speech.”
EMERSON : Well, there are some, interesting enough, there are some. Well, there aren’t many. I’ll tell you the truth. I mean, you won’t find in the New York, the irony of course is that liberals and the ACLU should be standing. The ACLU for example, the American Civil Liberties Union, was founded on the basis that there shouldn’t be any blasphemy laws, and yet in the last ten years they’ve appointed members of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. to all their boards, who believe in blasphemy laws. And the reality is, we are essentially implementing them, although we don’t admit it, these type of self censorship, blasphemy laws. People won’t publish books. People are, I’m doing a new documentary. It’s coming out in the next week, it’s called “Jihad in America: The Grand Deception.” It’s about the Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the United States. I cannot tell you the reactions I’ve gotten from major cable channels who are afraid to air it. They won’t admit it, but they’re afraid, right? And that’s affecting our freedom of speech already, without openly admitting that they’re being intimidated. So we’re already being affected by it.
COREN: Of course, and it does come down to this. It really does. Blasphemy laws. People will try and twist and turn and say, “Well, provocation and offense, Many things which are offensive and provocative. We have certain laws such as
EMERSON: You know what? Being not a Muslim, being not a Muslim is offensive. I was just reading a transcript – and we do a lot of undercover work – and I was reading a transcript of a group based in New York, but they’re Jamaat e Islami, called the Islamic Circle of North America, and they admitted their entire mission in North America and around the world is Da’wa, to convert others to Islam and they freight it however in the cultural neutral term of trying to be, to open people eyes to another religion, but they admit in this conference that, our purpose here is to convert everybody to Islam, and in fact Islam was on top of the world until they lost at the gates of Vienna, and then they’ve been on the bottom of the world. And how do they explain this? The West and the United States now is, has been involved in a conspiracy to subjugate Islam. So no matter what we do, Michael. No matter what year, they’ll always have grievance. OK? And they believe we are at fault for the fact that they are at the bottom of the totem pole in the world today. And the reality is, you know, the great scholar Bernard Lewis wrote a great piece after 2011, after 2001, called “The Roots of Muslim Rage.” And I recommend that for everybody. And it shows that, that, you know, the New York Times story that they’re angry about Gitmo. They’re angry about the Iraq War. They’re angry about Afghanistan. I tell you, those things are, yes, they’re angry about that. They’re also angry about the fact that the United States, you know, has freedom of speech.
COREN: You know, I wish we had more time. Saddam Hussein was hated by Islamic Fundamentalists. He was a secularist who dealt with fundamentalists in a way, well, maybe others should have, but hey had no time for him at all. This nonsense about conspiracy and persecution. What you say, it comes down to blasphemy. The very people who consummate dramas about how evil the Medieval Church was and blasphemy, are the very same people who just open the door to Islamic fanatics and say, “You have more blasphemy laws, we’ll accept them because we’re too frightened and intimidated to actually stand up to these people, and say, ‘Enough is enough.'”
EMERSON: Michael, when was the last time a Westerner or US mob or Canadian mob attacked a, embassy, Muslim embassy or consulate for the tens of thousands of videos on YouTube and on Internet site with Islamic clerics calling for the killing of Christians and Jews? I can’t remember one.
COREN: It’s never happened, and it never will. Steve, a great pleasure as it was We’ll have you back in the show very soon. Thanks so very much.
EMERSON: You’re very welcome.
Michael Coren, one of the very few journalists willing to discuss jihad honestly, interviews Pamela Geller on death threats they have both recently received and other jihad matters.
By Steve Emerson, IPT:
MICHAEL COREN: Steve Emerson is one of North America’s most eminent and respected commentators. He is the author of six books and his television documentary, if you haven’t seen it, you have to, “Jihad in America” won the 1994 George Polk award for best TV documentary. Very early to have covered this sort of stuff. And top prize for the best investigative reporting from Investigative Reporters and Editors. He is also the executive director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism and he frequently testifies before Congressional committees and other related organizations. A great pleasure to welcome you back on the show. How are you?
STEVEN EMERSON: Hard to answer that question. I have become a dysfunctional workaholic, working 14 hours a day, but that is normal in DC. And the only problem is that I am reading emails until four in the morning and it gets me so stressed out that I don’t sleep till six. I’m fine, thanks.
COREN: I will take that as a, yeah, very well, thanks very much. I know because I’ve had some of the emails back from you in the middle of the night. I don’t know when you actually do sleep. Of course those who plot against us don’t sleep very much either. The real problem for me at least is not that the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups are organizing; it is that so few people in the west seem to understand it and are willing to stand up and fight back.
EMERSON: Well, it is not just willing. There is cognitive dissonance or witting collaboration. There are various motivations. They range from naiveté to our belief that if we don’t lie, others don’t lie. But the reality is that the Muslim Brotherhood is a fascist group and it is based on fascist principals founded in 1928. And even the presidential candidate Morsi, who just won; two hours before President Obama called him to congratulate him for transitioning to democracy, he stated in a speech in Cairo that the shariah will run Egypt from now on. The shariah implements second class codification for women, allows the beating of wives, allows the stoning of women, killing of apostates. And this obviously is going to cause major problems of persecution and even murder of Christians and other minorities in Egypt. Number two, in the United States and in Europe there is an equal problem, that the Muslim Brotherhood front groups, and there are many, and this was documented by the FBI in a raid in 2004 where they found a treasure trove of internal MB documents. There is a whole [Muslim Brotherhood ]structure in the United States and yet this Administration is dealing only with those [very same MB ] groups that believe that there is a “war against Islam”, that Israel should be destroyed, that support [or rationalize] suicide bombings; and [moreover, this Administration won't]… don’t deal with the genuine moderate Muslims who are so courageous because they know they will get shot at when they stick their necks out of the foxhole.
COREN: The question is why because this is abundantly true. We know there are moderate Muslims, probably not as well organized, in fact certainly not as well organized, but they are crying out to be heard and they are being rejected, dismissed, by the very people that they want to help.
EMERSON: Well first of all you are right, they are not as well organized and the Saudi charities and the Islamic billion dollar charities in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf don’t go to American Muslims for Peace Now, they go to the Muslim Brotherhood groups. In fact, the Muslim Brotherhood groups get the lion’s share of the Saudi moneys, of the Persian Gulf moneys and now they are so well endowed that they have a monopoly, not just in the Middle East, on the education system, on the media system, on the religious system but they have a monopoly here in the United States as well. And you are right. When there was just a hearing the other day by the House Committee on Homeland Security, Democrat after Democrat dissed and made outrageous insults against the three moderate Muslims who courageously testified and [who] admitted there is a problem within Islam that they want to correct; …that [stated is imperative]… to admit that radical Islam does exist, it doesn’t mean that all Muslims are terrorists, but the [prohibition] of even uttering the term “radical Islam” is part of the edict issued by this administration.
COREN: For those out there who say well I know Muslims and they are nice people, we are not attacking Muslims. If we look at the Russian revolution, the Bolsheviks never represented more than maybe 10% at most of the population, but they controlled an entire empire eventually. The Muslim Brotherhood speaks for more than 10%. They are heavily organized, they have been working for generations now, they now have Egypt, they could well have Syria by the end of the year. This is very worrying.
EMERSON: They could have Syria, they could have Libya. Ultimately they could have Iraq. There is already a different variety [of radical Islam] that controls Iran. Look, there is another problem here. The Muslim Brotherhood is not a democratic system. We equate democracy with civil society so when we allowed elections in Gaza, they elected Hamas, a terrorist government. Democracy didn’t moderate them. The notion that we believe that direct elections and democracy are going to moderate the Muslim Brotherhood is absolutely insane. The reality is totally different. They are deceptive. They use deception. We [the Investigative Project on Terrorism] publish all the time, and so does MEMRI.org, all of their radical statements, but no one takes them seriously and then we buy into the naiveté. In the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure has a monopoly on the Islamic communities. Most Muslims, I don’t believe, support the radical ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, but the Muslim Brotherhood groups themselves control the leadership of the organizations. They have infiltrated, and I am not being conspiratorial, they have penetrated the media; they have penetrated law enforcement and I can document that. In fact, [if I may], just a plug, [we have] a new documentary coming out in September is called “Jihad in America: Grand Deception” and it is about the stealth Jihad. That means it is about the Jihad waged legally in terms of infiltrating what they [the Muslim Brotherhood in their own documents obtained by the FBI] call a “civilizational Jihad process.” That is a quote used from an internal MB document in the U.S.
COREN: Steve, we will have to have you back on the show. In fact, I promise we will have you back on the show. Thank you so very much indeed.
EMERSON: You’re very welcome.
by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Michael Coren: Islam Is A Religion Both Bad & Mad