Analyst's note:  Absolutely must read.  If Dr. Hamid is correct, and I have every reason to believe he is, the current U.S. foreign policies and statements are driving Egypt farther under the oppression of the Muslim Brotherhood.  One can only wonder what part of "e-n-e-m-y" they don't understand as we observe our current federal government operate in the Muslim world following the advice and consent of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Read on and see why this is true. 

By way of a reminder [...] the Muslim Brotherhood's mission in America is "destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

These "progressive" mental pigmies in Washington and our Department of State must come to understand that today, the United States faces an insidious ideological threat -- the totalitarian socio-political doctrine that Islam calls shariah. Translated as “the path,” shariah is a comprehensive legal and political framework. Though it certainly has spiritual elements, it would be a mistake to think of shariah as a “religious” code in the Western sense because it seeks to regulate all manner of behavior in the secular sphere – economic, social, military, legal and political.

Shariah is the crucial fault line of Islam’s internecine struggle. On one side of the divide are Muslim reformers and authentic moderates – figures like Abdurrahman Wahid, the late president of Indonesia and leader of the world’s largest libertarian Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama – whose members embrace the Enlightenment’s veneration of reason and, in particular, its separation of the spiritual and secular realms.

On this side of the divide, shariah is a reference point for a Muslim’s personal conduct, not a corpus to be imposed on the life of a pluralistic society. By contrast, the other side of the divide is dominated by Muslim supremacists, often called Islamists.  Like erstwhile proponents of Communism and Nazism, these supremacists – some terrorists, others employing stealthier means – seek to impose a totalitarian regime: a global totalitarian system cloaked as an Islamic state and called a caliphate. On that side of the divide, which is the focus of a recent study and this statement, shariah is an immutable, compulsory system that Muslims are obliged to install and the world required to adopt, the failure to do so being deemed a damnable offence against Allah. For these ideologues, shariah is not a private matter. Adherents see the West as an obstacle to be overcome, not a culture and civilization to be embraced, or at least tolerated. It is impossible, they maintain, for alternative legal systems and forms of governments peacefully to coexist with the end-state they seek.

All this faux “love and respect” we observe from far too many of the world’s adherents of Islam is killing those who are not, and far too many Islamist want to add to that number killed. Lets be specific with each Muslim who professes love for our Constitutional Republic and its citizens …… where do you stand on the following. Can you clearly, unambiguously and publically denounce each one of the following concepts?

* Apostates killing
* Beating women and stoning them to death for adultery.
* Calling Jews pigs and monkeys.
* Declaring war on Non Muslims to spread Islam after offering Non * Muslims three options - subjugate to Islam, pay Jizia (a humiliating tax), or be killed.
* Enslavement of Other Human Beings.
* Fighting and killing Jews before the "End of Days".
* Gay Discrimination and Hostility.

As American citizens, and certainly our leaders must also understand some of the basic tenets of Islam. For example:

• Abrogation [verses that come later in the Quran, chronologically (not necessarily sequentially), supersede, or abrogate, the earlier ones. In effect, this results in the more moderate verses of the Meccan period being abrogated by the later, violent, Medinan verses. “When we cancel a message, or throw it into oblivion, we replace it with one better or one similar. Do you not know that God has power over all things?” (Quran 2:106)],
• Under "taqiyya," It is permissible for a Muslim to lie, especially to non-Muslims, to safeguard himself personally or to protect Islam
• Any system of man-made law is considered illicit under Islamic law, for whose adherents Allah already has provided the only law permitted, shariah. Islam and democracy can never co-exist in harmony
• Apostasy under the established ruling of shariah is that apostates are to be killed wherever they may be found.
• Understanding that jihad is warfare to spread Islam
• There is the belief that Islam is superior to every other culture, faith, government, and society and that it is ordained by Allah to conquer and dominate them. We must understand that in shariah law, slander means anything that might offend a Muslim.
• Antisemitism is intrinsic to shariah and is based on the genocidal behavior of Mohammed himself in wiping out the entire Jewish population of the Arabian Peninsula
• Shariah explicitly relegates women to a status inferior to men
• We must come to understand all these things and much, much more.

 

Now for the words of Dr. Hamid. Dr. Tawfik Hamid (aka Tarek Abdelhamid), is an Islamic thinker and reformer, and one time Islamic extremist from Egypt. He was a member of a terrorist Islamic organization JI with Dr. Ayman Al-Zawaherri who became later on the second in command of Al-Qaeda. Dr. Hamid is currently a Senior Fellow and Chair of the study of Islamic Radicalism at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. 

 ===================================================================================================

"The United States urged Egypt's military to move swiftly on plans to transfer full power to an elected civilian government and suggested failure to do so would prompt a review of U.S. ties, which includes billions of dollars in military and civilian aid.

This step from the US administration and Congress could actually made things worse for the Egyptian people and could hamper US interests in the region as well. These interests include keeping the peace treaty with Israel, cooperation in counter terrorism efforts, smooth transportation through the Suez Canal, assistance in possible military operations against Iran, and respect for human rights.

The more pressure the US exerts on the Egyptian Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), the more the chance an Islamist regime such as the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) will control all the affairs of the country. The implications of an Islamist government's control of power will be against these formerly mentioned US interests.

First, it is very unlikely that an organization that avoids mentioning the name "Israel' on its website and organizes huge celebrations to promise the Egyptian people that the MB presidential candidate will declare war on Israel will respect any peace treaty with Israel.

Second, it is also very unlikely that the MB that praises Said Qutb -who is the one who inspired Ayman Al Zawahiri with the ideas of violent Jihad- to cooperate with the US in counter terrorism efforts against their fellow 'Muslim brothers' in radical Islamic groups.

Third, allowing an Islamist regime to have control over the Suez Canal will give a global Islamic movement such as the MB more ability to manipulate world trade and politics, as well have undue influence on US actions, such as its Navy ships transiting between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea.

Fourth, Unlike the SCAF, the MB will never cooperate with the US when it comes to launching any military actions against another Muslim country like Iran. Relying on a Shia-Sunni divide in this case is a very primitive way of thinking as Muslims irrespective of their sectarian differences can easily unite once one of them fights anon-Muslim enemy. The Iranian support (Shia) to the Hamas group (Sunni) against Israel is just one of the examples to illustrate this phenomenon.

Fifth, when it comes to human rights it is important to realize that one of the earliest laws that the Islamist Parliament in Egypt discussed was to banning demonstrations, permitting female genital mutilation, and stopping punishing men for sexual harassment against women. The aim of the latter law was to force women to wear the Hijab to avoid sexual harassment. In this case, the MB can say to the world that they did not issue a law to force women to wear the Hijab - and at the same time 'indirectly' achieve their aim of making women wear the Hijab via such a law. This illustrates the very tricky ways the MB operates to deceive others. Is this the kind of people that the US wants to see controlling the power in Egypt?

The US pressure on the SCAF is actually turning many Egyptians against the US as at least 50% of those who choose Shafik (the former member of Mubarak regime) and most of those who stayed at home are likely to be against the Islamist agenda of the MB. Pushing toward delivering full power to the MB will be against the will and 'aspirations' of most Egyptian people and will ruin the relationship between the US and one of its allies in the area namely the SCAF. This does not mean that the SCAF is perfect, but at this stage in the history of Egypt, the SCAF attaining a share in political power is vital to the stability of the country and to keep its international commitments.

Additionally, observing the election trends of the Egyptian people since the election of the Parliament after the revolution till the latest presidential race showed clearly that Islamists are losing their public support. Initially, Islamists won nearly 80% of the seats in the Parliament and currently their presidential candidate (Mursy) barely won the election with 51>7 %. This decline in popularity was partially because of a wave of reform that started to spread against the Islamists and their Sharia agenda. This initial wave of reform which used both traditional and social media is likely to be aborted if the secular military lost its power completely to an Islamic regime.

Interfering in Egypt politics at this stage should be limited to general statements that encourage respect of Law and peaceful co-existence."