Listening to analysis of the protests in Egypt, one might get the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization similar to Al-Qaida. It is not.
Unlike Al-Qaida, the Brotherhood is not listed as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. Department of State. In fact, the 83-year-old organization officially disavowed violence back in the 1970Â’s, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. Statements posted on the group's official English website, Ikhwanweb.com, condemn recent terrorist attacks against Christians in the Middle East.
Many also fear that a Muslim Brotherhood takeover could bring an end to Egypt’s recognition of Israel as a legitimate state. In reality, at least some of its leaders appear willing to embrace their Jewish neighbors. “If we come to power, we will recognize Israel and respect all treaties,” Dr. Essam El-Erian said in October of 2007. Current group Chairman Dr. Mohamed Badei made El-Erian his auxiliary spokesmen in 2010, suggesting a tolerance for moderate voices.
There is certainly reason to believe that Egypt wonÂ’t be as buddy-buddy with Israel in the post-Mubarak era as it has been since the signing of the Camp David Accords in 1979. Still, there is reason to hope that sane minds will prevail even if the Muslim Brotherhood is to become the new dominant force in Egyptian politics, which is far from definite. Even the group's leaders acknowledge that the Brotherhood is a minor player in the protests, the Washington Post reports.
Photo of the protests in Egypt by Muhammad Ghafari
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 81
During the trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation a sixteen-page Arabic document was reveled that admitted: "The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within."
Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the mastermind of the 9/11 attack is a fierce proponent of his membership in The Muslim Brothehood since he was a boy.
The Muslim Brotherhoods official publication, Risalat al-Ikhwan ran the with the cover slogan the slogan, "Our mission: world domination" until it drew too much negative attention after 9/11 and quietly removed it. However the official Muslim Brotherhood website isn't so squeamish about their mission and proudly proclaims "Jihad is our path." even today.
Abdullah Azzam, the teacher and mentor of Osama bin Laden, was a member of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood. Bin Laden's current deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, was heavily influenced by the ideology of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood
While Al-Qaeda favors an implacable jihad to destroy the economies of the Western countries, The Muslim Brotherhood supports terrorism and jihad against foreign presence in the Islamic world, but its top priority is constructing a Muslim infrastructure in the West which will slowly but surely enable it to rule during the 21st century. As far as the final goal is concerned, there are no policy differences between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. The two organizations have the same objective: to place the entire world under an Islamic caliphate.
As for the Muslim Brotherhood's members who are openly calling for the destruction of Israel today, there's not enough room to list them here. Using words like "hope" and ""appear" are no comfort when dealing with an organization that has a 83 year history of supporting any terrorist group that will help it achieve it's goal of global domination for Islam and uses the the principle of lying as a calculated strategy. But, fel free to keep on believing these guys are just misunderstood. It's not like anyone is going to die if you're wrong...............
right?
Some that I have read fear they are secretly stirring discontent throughout the area countries with overthrow of governments as their goal. That would be a powerful group
Hi David. Don't think I've met you before.
I think want you wrote is certainly what they are at first sight. It is getting familiar with their history that tells a different tale.
Possibilities are moving in so fast with all this financial upheaval and now gov't discontent. It will be a different world perhaps when these quakes begin to settle :)
You Can View It By CLicking HERE.
Congratulations!
if these guys take power.
a Sharia law Caliphate, where all live and die
under their harsh interpretation of the Koran.
Preaching Christianity carries the death sentence
Does the Muslim Brotherhood advocate these kinds of abuses, and, if so, which ones?
for adultery, blasphemy and many other crimes,
which must be proved against a man but accusation
is sufficient proof against a woman.
The Triumph of the "pro-democracy" insurgengy
currently sweeping Egypt will result in "the triumph
of the Muslim Brotherhood and the institution
of brutally repressive theocratic rule,
in accordance with the totalitarian Islamic
politico-military-legal program known as shariah."
The Muslim Brotherhood spreads false tales
of their own moderation to "Useful Idiots
and Apologists:" Read "Shariah: The Threat to America"
•“The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt in 1928. Its express purpose was two-fold: (1) to implement shariah worldwide, and (2) to re-establish the global Islamic State (caliphate).
•“Therefore, Al Qaeda and the MB have the same objectives. They differ only in the timing and tactics involved in realizing them.
•“The Brotherhood’s creed is: ‘God is our objective; the Koran is our law; the Prophet is our leader; jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.’”
•It is evident from the Creed, and from the Brotherhood’s history (and current activities)…that violence is an inherent part of the MB’s tactics. The MB is the root of the majority of Islamic terrorist groups in the world today.
"Apart from Iran, none of a handful of countries where Islamic sharia law is practised, including ultra-conservative Saudi Arabia, has implemented the punishment in recent years." (AFP 2011)
Just as people here in the U.S. interpret the Constitution differently, there are many interpretations of Sharia law. Not all are bad.
Allen: If you are going to directly quote a source, please provide a citation.
Death of a Princess was set in Saudi Arabia, and Christians are regularly executed in Pakistan for the crime of "Blasphemy", meaning they refuse to believe that the words of Muhamed over-rule those of Christ. That is listed by Amnesty International, but in any case is common knowledge.
I fear that political correctness is leading you to view the world through tinted glasses, and you end up defending the indefensible.
Islam-ism has many facets ... to put them into better perspective one should read the following: an austere form of Islam that insists on a literal interpretation of the Koran. Strict Wahhabis believe that all those who don't practice their form of Islam are heathens and enemies
It is best to NOT conflate Egypt with Saudi Arabia ...
>> In fact, the 83-year-old organization officially disavowed violence back in
>> the 1970’s, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.
Founded in 1929, that means it took them 41 years to realize it is better marketing
to say you renounce violence.
The Muslim Brotherhood is not what is driving Egypt's turmoil right now. It is
unlikely they are going to take over. At least I hope so. Younger Egyptians are not
America haters or Muslim Brotherhood embracers.
I wonder what the purpose of this "article" is supposed to be anyway. Are you a
member of the Muslim Brotherhood David, or a supporter or something?
But they all came out of the Muslim Brotherhood at some point. Yassir Arafat and his "uncle" Haj Amin Al-Husayni both were associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Virtually all the terrorist groups came out of the Muslim Brotherhood.
I still wonder what is your point here? To say that the Muslim Brotherhood is the group to trust, or believe is moderate?
They have to have a group like this that claims at least to renounce violence so that their headquarters don't get bombed and raided.
I heard an American guy who was in Egypt interviewed the other day. He said that this is against Mubarek. American icons in Egypt are not getting stormed and destroyed .... like McDonald's, Starbucks, etc. This may well be a popular revolt that is not militant Islamic, but the Muslim Brotherhood is on the wrong side of that and will try to make of it something that is in their interest.
I think it would be a mistake for the US to be associated with the Muslim Brotherhood in any way. There is no upside to doing that.
Hopefully, this is a situation that will not arise. If Elbaradei becomes Egypt's next president, the country will be led by someone with a history of successfully negotiating with Israel on one of the region's key issues - nuclear weapons.
My purpose is to point out that the inclusion of the Muslim Brotherhood in the protests does not guarantee that the worst case scenarios that are being floated in the media will play out. We need to look at all the facts, not just the bad.
>> declare Egypt's new government as an enemy and cut
>> off negotiations before they can even take place.
Silly me, I thought the question was "Is Egypt's Muslim
Brotherhood a Terrorist Organization", not "if the MB
take over Egypt should the US cut off negotiations with
Egypt" ... I saw what you did there David ... nice try! ;-)
If we need to look at the facts, then, the MB has a history
of terrorism, expanding and associating with terrorists, and
it is pointless to deny if out of some misguided attempt at
political correctness.
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/
I did pop over to read and then decided to come back and ask you. I'm going back over there. I think this is one of the first sites I pulled up after hearing discussion of them in Egypt. Thanks for giving it to us.
I'm anxious to hear what you say. Please answer me. Thank you.
That would be like believing that Republicans want to actually want to help the American people, instead of just regaining power.
Hello micky.
The Koran allows followers to lie to non believers. Do not take anyone's word for it, there are numerous free online english versions of it available.
The koran starts off with a lets all get along writting then roughly halfway through the writting changes into ignore everything that is written before if it is in conflict with anything in the last half and go with what is in the last half.
This half is not very nice for others and not suprisingly different parts get quotes depending on what the speaker is trying to accomplish.
Just remember lying is not only permitted but encourged for dealing with non believers who in the end when Shari'ah law is the only law everywhere those non believers and apostates must die.
Do not take my word on it, get a copy of the Qur’an and read it yourself.
http://quran.com/
http://islam.about.com/od/qurantranslations/tp/english_quran.htm
http://www.analyst-network.com/article.php?art_id=2972
I don't believe much good will come out of the MB being in any positions in Egypt. Just my opinion.
It's not clear that what is happening in Egypt is Islamic related. In Egypt and in Iran there are quite a few people who reform, to get the Mullahs out of power. I don't know if that can work, but what is the alternative. We cannot keep installing, supporting and taking the blame for all the harm that these dictators do to their people in our name while they rob their countries blind. Same in Saudi Arabia.
That said, radical or political Islam is evil and does not look like in its present belief system it can ever coexist peacefully with the rest of the world, particularly when being funded by radicals like the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia.
Just because they are evil does not mean we have to fight them only with military power, it is breaking our own countries. We need to scale down the wars, and look carefully for another way.
There is a risk here that America may be seen as interfering, but I think there might be a way to interfere constructively, especially if we see no other choice. Egypt is certainly way way more important than Afghanistan ... although the good thing about Afghanistan is that it encircles Iran.
The conservative David Brooks writes in the NYTimes:
Policy makers always underestimate the power of the bottom-up quest for dignity, so they are slow to understand what is happening. Last week, for example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that the Egyptian regime was stable, just as it was falling apart.
Then their instinct is to comfort the fellow members of the club of those in power. The Obama administration was very solicitous of President Hosni Mubarak during the first days of the protests and of other dictators who fear their regime may be next.
Then, desperately recalibrating in an effort to keep up with events, they inevitably make a series of subtle distinctions no one else heeds. The Obama administration ended up absurdly calling on Mubarak to initiate a reform agenda. Surely there’s not a single person in the government who thinks he is actually capable of doing this. Meanwhile, the marchers heard this fudge as Obama supporting Mubarak and were outraged.
The Obama administration’s reaction was tardy, but no worse than, say, the first Bush administration’s reaction to the uprisings in the Baltics and Ukraine. The point is, there’s no need to be continually wrong-footed. If you start with a healthy respect for the quest for dignity, if you see autocracies as fragile and democratic revolts as opportunities, then you’ll find it much easier to anticipate events.
The Working Group on Egypt, co-led by Michele Dunne and Robert Kagan, has outperformed the U.S. government by miles. For months, they’ve been warning of Mubarak’s fragility. As the protests started, they issued a smart and concrete set of policy recommendations.
Over the past decades, there has been a tide in the affairs of men and women. People in many places have risked their lives for recognition and respect. Governments may lag, and complications will arise, but still they will march. And, in the long run, we should be glad they do.
Many major Revolutions--and it most certainly looks as if we are looking at a Revolution, in Egypt--are particularly vulnerable to radical and violent political takeovers.
It is these extreme groups that can eventually take power--under the conditions that we may be looking at, in Egypt.
This was true in Iran, in 1979 and it was true with the Bolshevik Revolution.
While it's not necessarily likely that Egypt would be vulnerable to an Al Qaeda takeover--it may be expedient for us to believe that this country-wide Protest is going to end in a solution that is sympatico with US foreign policy.
And, the final result, may, indeed, endanger world peace--perhaps, almost immediately.
Would women get the right to hold office? Own property? Attend school?Vote?
Women in Egypt do have the right to vote, hold office, attend school, own property.
Happened in Iran, will happen in Egypt.
Most Islamic political parties are national ones. Non-national groups like al-Qaeda in Iraq mostly came there after we invaded in 2003 from other countries to fight.
The conservative, fundamentalist Islamic and anti-secular rhetoric of the Muslim Brotherhood that we read should be viewed as political in the case of Egypt. Not so with the extremist groups in Pakistan. I wouldn't take the notions of a seeking a Caliphate literally. It expresses in part a natural empathy Muslims the world over feel for other Muslims . Many are enraged by Western invasions and support of corrupt dictators.
It is interesting that in Britain , which has many more Muslims than the US, the majority of British converts are women.
Most Muslim countries are democracies and there are many more Muslims living outside the Middle East. There are different versions of shariah law in different countries.
In contrast, Iran is a stable democracy with a theocratic overlay - the clerics can cancel legislation they don't like but they have to deal with many parties and classes to stay in power: Egypt has no democratic tradition, while Iran's Constitution from 1905 to 1979 was like that of European social democracies with the same legal and political institutions. It has a free press and regular elections. Also, the population is more literate than Egypt's and the majority of university graduates are women.
At the beginning of the revolution, high-profile women, including leaders of the women’s rights movement they were belittled, discredited and smeared; many activists were accused of prostitution.
Ironically, the massive participation of women in the 1978-79 revolution was in part a result of the mobilization efforts of women’s organization in the preceding decades, including the WOI’s activities in the late sixties and seventies during which women had gained consciousness of their own collective political power, and understood the need for women to assert themselves. Women marched in support of a freer, more egalitarian government.
After the Iranian revolution in 1979, the status of women quickly deteriorated. Before long, many of the rights that women had gained under the Shah were systematically abolished: the new family law was annulled (on grounds of being "against Islam"), veiling became obligatory, women barred from many areas of work and gender inequality was again institutionalized.
Farrokhrou Parsa, the first woman to serve in the Iranian cabinet, was executed.
In her last letter from prison, Farrokhroo Pārsā wrote to her children: "I am a doctor, so I have no fear of death. Death is only a moment and no more. I am prepared to receive death with open arms rather than live in shame by being forced to be veiled. I am not going to bow to those who expect me to express regret for fifty years of my efforts for equality between men and women. I am not prepared to wear the chador and step back in history."
This would be the "stable democracy' you are talking about?
I spent years in Iran before 1979 and lost many friends - high school teachers, civil servants, poets, writers, intellectuals, military, Bahai, just all kinds - to these horrible people. When I say a stable democracy, I am serious, too. A paranoid, corrupt clerical clique are not the whole story or the future.
Al Qaeda's second in command belonged to the Muslim Brotherhood.
That ought to raise a couple of warning flags.