Supporters of Egypt’s ousted President Mohammed Morsi, clash with Egyptian security forces in Ramses Square, downtown Cairo, Egypt, August. 16, 2013. Muslim Brotherhood protests plunged into violence across Egypt on Friday, with around 50 killed in Cairo alone on a “Day of Rage” called by Islamist followers of ousted President Mohamed Mursi to denounce a police crackdown. UPI/Ahmed Jomaa
The Egyptian army has taught the Muslim Brotherhood the meaning of putting the cart before the horse.
By JAMES ZUMWALT:
HERNDON, Va., Aug. 27 (UPI) – Unappreciative of Western philosophy, members of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood probably never heard an analogy first mentioned by Roman statesman Cicero — “putting the cart before the horse!” For more than two millennia, the phrase has applied to situations of misplaced priorities.
In the aftermath of the Egyptian military removing from office the country’s fifth — and first democratically elected — president, Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood is gaining an education about the phrase.
From its inception in 1928, the Muslim Brotherhood has been the subject of persecution due to its commitment to a single goal — transitioning the world into an Islamic empire.
Recognizing Islamism begins at home, the Brotherhood plodded along for more than eight decades under four presidents seeking to achieve the goal in Egypt. Like a race horse heading home, the Muslim Brotherhood’s pace quickened, sensing victory was near with Morsi’s election.
The Muslim Brotherhood saw its gains as “one small step” for Islam and “one giant leap” for Muslimkind.
Not content with small successful steps, it moved to take a giant leap in Egypt. It stumbled and seems headed back to its earlier days of harsh persecution under previous presidents.
A U.S. commercial claims four out of five dentists recommend its product, suggesting the four have superior knowledge to the one who doesn’t. Similarly, four out of five Egyptian presidents have sought to minimize the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence, suggesting they possess superior knowledge as to why it poses a danger — one clearly recognized by the Egyptian military.
That danger was set aside in 2011 by U.S. President Barack Obama, who announced the United States would work with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization seeking America’s long-term demise.
Morsi was the Muslim Brotherhood’s “poster boy,” coming to office because the Brotherhood was the only domestic organization with the infrastructure in place to support a candidate.
While proving inept as president, failing to act upon major domestic problems like the economy, Morsi chose to help the Muslim Brotherhood establish a stranglehold on the people. No attempt was made to lull the people into a false sense of security as Morsi put the cart before the horse, quickly seeking to impose the Muslim Brotherhood’s will upon them. Compared to the former Soviet Union, Morsi sought neither glasnost nor perestroika.
What the Muslim Brotherhood had planned for Egypt extended far beyond those borders.
In the early 1990s, the Brotherhood memorialized its strategy in a secret document — not discovered until 2004 — for spreading Islam’s reach to U.S. borders as well. In a game plan best described as “Shariah creep,” it sought to introduce Islamic law into the United States, gradually getting it to replace rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Sound absurd? We have already seen Shariah applied by U.S. state courts!
The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy mandated Muslims immigrate to the United States, ignoring its “mixing bowl” of cultures concept by non-assimilation. In this way, Muslims remained pure in their efforts to go forth and multiply, gaining more and more influence in the United States.
The idea of a large, non-assimilated Muslim population gaining influence on foreign shores has long been promoted by leaders such as Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan who once said, “The mosques are our barracks, the domes are our helmets, the minarets are our swords and the faithful are our army.”
There is little doubt what role such leaders envision for their “army.”
One example of a state court applying Shariah involved a Muslim husband accused of raping his Muslim wife. Arguing that Shariah allows a husband to forcefully impose himself upon a non-consenting wife, he was found not guilty.
One can only wonder how long it will be before such rationale is applied to Muslim defendants killing a family member, declaring their innocence under the Islamic concept of “honor killings.”
Read more at upi.com
A retired U.S. Marine, Lt. Col. James Zumwalt served in the Vietnam War, the U.S. invasion of Panama and the first Gulf War. He has written “Bare Feet, Iron Will — Stories from the Other Side of Vietnam’s Battlefields,” “Living the Juche Lie: North Korea’s Kim Dynasty” and “Doomsday: Iran — The Clock is Ticking.”