Heeding the Times from Harry Antonides' Desk
Middle East Politics
Politics -West
Review Articles
What Happens to Truth

What Happens to Truth in an Age of Delusion (Part 15)
lslamization of America by Stealth Jihad

August 27, 2014


The lkhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the 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 religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for jihad yet. (Mohammad Akram Adlouni, An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America, 1991; quoted in Erick Stakelbeck, The Brotherhood; America's Next Great Enemy, 2013, p.46)


What remains, then, is to conquer Rome. This means Islam will  come back to Europe for a third time, after it was expelled from it twice. We will conquer Europe.  We will conquer America. Not through the sword but through our Dawa [proselytizing]. (Yusuf  al-Qaradawi, Muslim Brotherhood's Spiritual Guide)

The immigration of millions of Muslims into the West is in the process of fundamentally changing the recipient countries. Why is that so different from previous immigration flows, and why is it that political correctness makes it very risky to start a public discussion about this topic?

Muslim immigrants to the West are from a very different background and culture than that of their host countries. Whereas most previous immigrants want to assimilate into their newly adopted home country, many Muslims, though not all, refuse to do that. Instead, they want to remain aloof and  to replicate the traditional living arrangements of their home countries. It is not uncommon for them to settle in a section of major Western cities where they are forming their own enclaves under the rule of Islamic law (sharia). In some instances, they declare their territory to be "no-go zones," that is, non- Muslims are not welcome. Ditto for the police and other local authorities. Why would they do that?

A Kind of Grand Jihad

The answer lies in their Islamic faith. The Koran and the Hadith teach that a faithful Muslim is called to help spread the rule of Allah over the entire world, as spelled out in the opening paragraph above taken from an important Muslim Brotherhood document. Muslims  also are taught that the world is divided into two parts, a world at peace that is ruled by Islamic law (dar al-lslam), and the rest of the world that is at war (dar al-Harb).

 This is why the influx of Muslim immigrants to the West is seen by the Muslim leadership as a golden opportunity to expand the influence of Islam by infiltrating the major Western institutions, notably the schools, universities, the media, and politics.

 One reason that the Muslim faith is a puzzle to most Westerners is that their religion is not distinguished from any other sector or institution of society. In other words, the mosque and state are conflated. It means that Islamic law (sharia) is the final authority in every detail of life including politics. This is why the Muslim Brotherhood's flag shows two crossed swords, and why the  leadership of radical Islam takes seriously this  command  of Muhammad:   

I have been sent with a sword in my hand  to command people to worship Allah and associate no partners with him.  I command you to belittle and subjugate those  who disobey me, for whoever  imitates a people is one of them. (Quoted in  markdurie.com blog, August 12, 2014) 

Mohammad assumed the dual role of warlord and religious leader. Combining political/military power and religious authority makes for a system that is all powerful. This is what makes Islam different from all  other religions; it functions more like a political ideology. This merging  of  mosque and  state inevitably  result in a totalitarian dictatorship which leaves no space for any freedom. 

The Islamic immigration into the West comes at a time when the West is spiritually and morally in severe decline, so that it does not have the conviction and confidence to counteract a fanatical, supremacist religion such as Islam. In fact, the Western leadership does not understand and therefore is feeble in its reaction to Islam. Regrettably, the West has adopted an attitude of craven inferiority in its dealings with Islam. 

The combination of inner defeatism in the West (Mark Steyn called it “civilizational exhaustion") and its failure to grasp the imperialistic intentions of Islam is a ready-made soil for the Muslim Brotherhood to pursue its goal of establishing the worldwide caliphate. Al-Qaradawi and a host of like-minded Islamic leaders know that to succeed they must destroy America as a powerful presence on the world stage. They mean what they say in the 1991 document, namely, that all their  work in America is a grand jihad of destruction by boring from within  and  thus making  Islam “victorious over all religions.” 

The Muslim leadership in Europe and North America has been amazingly successful in using the freedom and openness of its host countries to freely practise their religion.  But their most effective means of outreach and spreading the faith is by means of numerous specialized organizations dealing with all the major issues of a modern society. The Explanatory Memorandum referred to above lists 29 Islamic organizations busy with furthering the spread of Islam in all the vital American institutions and organizations by stealth and obfuscation. 

 Subsequently, a number of other organizations were added, including the  Muslim Public Affairs Council and the ubiquitous  Council on American- Islamic Relations (CAIR). Erick Stakelbeck  summarizes:   

The Brothers’ stealth strategy includes gaining and exercising influence in the media, government, and educational circles; building mosques across a wide geographical area and establishing self-segregating Islamic enclaves; forging alliances with the political Left; and engaging in mass media blitz to reshape the national conversation (and public policy) when it comes to Islam, Israel, and the broader Middle East. This methodical strategy of infiltration, co-optation, and deception had already been articulated in The Project [the Exploratory Memorandum] and adopted by the international Muslim Brotherhood leadership in the early 1980s. (Stakelbeck, p. 46) 

The Fundamental Transformation of America

Since America is still  the most powerful nation in the world, it is a prime target for the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic goal to destroy the Western civilization from within. That’s the very reason  America is called the “Great Satan.”

The Brotherhood has a number of things in its favour, in addition to the flow of Muslim immigration into America where they are free to practise their religion, build their mosques and organize a large array of organizations to infiltrate the major institutions of influence, especially the media, the academy,  and  the agencies of  government. 

The most successful  campaign  to portray Islam as a positive and   much misunderstood religion is  occurring  in the lecture halls of all of the major American (and other Western) universities. Many millions of dollars have flowed from Saudi Arabia’s wealthy  donors to finance Islamic studies departments at American universities. Here as elsewhere, he who pays the piper calls  the tune. This is how the universities have become the preeminent champions  of an Islam-friendly worldview. There are many professors who are eager to assist in this process.  As well,  the Muslim Students Association, founded in 1963, is a major voice at the universities in the promotion of Islamic supremacy and the destruction of the state of Israel  

Typical is John Esposito, who is considered  America’s foremost authority on Islam; he is the author of more than 20 books on  Islam’s concept of politics and human rights. He served as the president of the Middle East Studies Association, and  now teaches at Georgetown University where he serves  as professor of religion  and international affairs, and professor of Islamic Studies. He also heads the Prince Alaweed  Bin Talal  Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding.

In addition, Esposito is a Muslim affairs  consultant  to the Department of State, as well as to corporations  and universities worldwide. He believes that the Muslim world is advancing toward an “Islamic democracy that might create an effective system of popular participation” and that the U.S, should not “in principle object to  implementation of Islamic law or involvement of Islamic  activists in government.” (David Horowitz, The Professors, pp. 148-151; See also Stephen  Schwartz,  “John L. Esposito: Apologist for Wahhabi Islam,” American Thinker, September 18, 2011)

The upshot of these developments in the universities has led to what in the words of historian Bernard Lewis amounts to an  “ideological straightjacket” that has locked  the Middle East Studies departments in universities all over the country into “a degree of thought control and limitations of freedom   of expression  without parallel in the Western world  since the 18th century…,[which] makes any kind of scholarly discussion of Islam, to say the least, dangerous. Islam and Islamic values now have a level of immunity from comment and criticism in the Western world that Christianity has lost and Judaism has never had.” (Robert Spencer, Stealth Jihad , p. 237)

 The White House Aids the Enemy

The second reason why the influence  of Islam  in America is growing is that it meshes very well with President Barack  Obama’s notion of fundamentally transforming America. Without doubt, the most surprising, indeed shocking reality is that  the spread of militant Islam in the U.S. is aided and abetted by none other than the current resident in the White House, President  Obama. No one could have foreseen such an outcome, because it makes no sense and can only be attributed to the truly chaotic state of American politics. The reasons for this disconcerting state of affairs are complex and confusing, but it can be understood by those who take the trouble to do some investigating.

 A good place to start is the June 4, 2009 speech of President Obama  at the Islamic oldest and most revered Al-Azhar University  in Cairo where he  distanced himself from President Bush’s policies. In fact, the speech became an apology for America’s role in the world while crediting Islam with carrying the  “light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for  Europe’s Renaissance  and Enlightenment.” Obama claimed  that with him a new day had arrived  in America’s relations with the Muslim world. Here is a key excerpt from that speech:

 I’ve come here in Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap and show common principles – principles of justice and progress; toleration and the dignity of all human beings…. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.

 The mind boggles in trying to grasp the meaning of these words. This must certainly be one the oddest speeches ever given by a president of the United States. The marvel is that it evoked little reaction in the mainstream press., despite the fact that it provides the key to Obama’s understanding of one of the most serious threats to America and the entire Western world. Let me try to summarize what I think is the meaning of this historic speech to the Muslim world. Here are five considerations that I think deserve our attention:

ONE.The first thing to note is that it is nothing short of grandiose in its temper and scale. Obama announced that he proposes to tackle the world-impacting challenge of the relationship between  Western civilization and Islam, something that after 1400 years has not been accomplished.

TWO. Obama’s “new  beginning” is a way to ignore and downgrade all previous attempts to deal with the American.-Islam relationship. (Remember that Obama was against America’s military action  in Afghanistan and Iraq.) He signals that he will be the anti-Bush in his dealings with the Muslim world.

 THREE. Obama’s language is  inclusive and pretentious. He refers to the U.S.’s dealing with the “Muslims around the world,” and fighting against “negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.” For one thing, there is no way he can do so; for another, it is not his duty as president of the U.S. to fight against  negative  stereotyping of Islam. In fact, it is his duty to  fight against  the widely believed and assiduously propagated stereotype  in the Muslim world, namely, that  America is a dictatorial  empire that deserves to be called  “the Great Satan.”  Instead of using this opportunity to defend America against such vicious falsehood, Obama  appointed himself as the  defender of the enemies of his own country.

 FOUR. In elaborating on his notion of seeking a new beginning of American-Muslim relations, Obama said that  mutual interest and respect are needed as well as the recognition  that  America and  Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Then he stated  that   the two  “overlap and  show common principles--principles of justice and progress; toleration and the dignity of all human beings.”

On this score, Obama  ignores the bitter reality that exclusion, hatred, injustice, and violence  is  built into the teachings of the Koran and the other sacred writings of Islam. This is the reason that radical Muslims are butchering the “wrong kind” of Muslims, that Christians and Jews are called infidels who are destined for hell, that right now the Middle East and  Africa is in great turmoil, that  thousands are killed and millions are threatened, that many of them are forced to flee for their lives, that Israel is again threatened with extinction, and that Christianity is being driven out  of the Middle East and some African countries. The terrorists who killed nearly 3000 people on 9/11 were motivated by the hatred that their imams had taught them from their scriptures. So was the Fort Hood killer of his fellow soldiers, and the Boston bombers who ended what was a pleasant social event in bloodshed and shrieks of  anguish and pain.  And so were the other thousands of suicide bombers who have killed and maimed their victims – all of this in the name of Allah.

 Does Obama not bother to read the Koran and the other Islamic scriptures? Does he not know that every Friday in thousands of mosques in the Islamic world and in some Western countries, too, the faithful are confirmed in their hatred toward the West? Has he never heard those hysterical crowds in Iran and other Muslim countries screaming “Death to America,” “Death to Israel”?

 Obama must know these irrefutable facts. They are there for all to see, unless one does not want to see them. This is called being in denial, which is a very serious malady for a leader of the once great America.

FIVE. There is one more of  Obama’s polices that deserves our attention since it directly affects the threat of radical  Islam  against America and the entire Western world. In response to complaints by Muslim spokespeople, Obama ordered a review of all training manuals for law enforcement and national security agencies with a view to purge all references that are offensive to Muslims.  

 Dwight C. Holton, speaking for Attorney General Eric Holder had this to say: “I want to be perfectly clear about this; training materials  that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that  this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice  stands for.  They will not be tolerated.”

And thus it was decreed  that all efforts to keep the country safe from future attacks  by the jihadists must not assume that there is any connection between Islam and terror. In other words, counter terrorism agents  are ordered to turn a blind eye to what drives a person to become  a terrorists. One would think that such information would be a key factor in the investigation and the prevention of terrorist attacks –but not in Obama Wonderland. 


The result:  the Justice Department cancelled the   scheduled training sessions  at national security agencies  by scholars who are critical of Islam teachings, such as Robert Spencer and Steven Emerson. U.S. Army Reserve Major Stephen Coughlin, an expert on Islamic law at the Pentagon, was fired because  he told the truth about Islam-inspired hatred and violence. The murder of  thirteen military  persons  by the fanatic Muslim  Nidal  Hasan at Fort Hood  was re-named as a case of “work place violence.” What is perhaps most incredulous is that the  new anti-terrorist (or work place violence ) training manuals were written with  the advice (and  consent?) of  Muslims.

If Obama would have been true to his oath of office, he could have used this speech to tell the truth about America and its role as a defender of Western civilization. He could have spoken up for the persecuted Christians and  Jews and the other non-Muslims in  Islam-ruled countries.  He could also have used this occasion to defend his own country against  the lies that now poison the relationship between it and the Muslim world. That would have been a difficult task, and might not have been accepted very well. But it would have been well worth the effort.

As it was, Obama told his audience what they wanted to hear, and in doing so, as David Warren writes, this speech did “not merely miss an opportunity to speak the truth plainly. It sabotaged every effort to speak the truth plainly, to the darkest tyrannical forces in the Islamic world. It sold out America, it sold out the West, and it sold out the Muslims, too.” (David Warren, Ottawa Citizen, June 6, 2009)

Harry Antonides