Saturday, April 16, 2016

Breaking from the U.S., the U.K. Condemns the Muslim Brotherhood, Calling It a Terrorist Group

Kindly note: this item was published in the leading American publication National Review on December 22, 2015.

Breaking from the U.S., the U.K. Condemns the Muslim Brotherhood, Calling It a Terrorist Group

by STEVE EMERSON & PETE HOEKSTRA December 22, 2015 4:00 AM

— Steve Emerson is the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism. Pete Hoekstra is the Shillman Senior Fellow at the Investigative Project on Terrorism, and the author of Architects of Disaster: The Destruction of Libya.

To read this item in National Review (a magazine who under it`s founder, the influential intellectual William F. Buckley, was influential and important for American Conservatism), kindly click here:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428877/united-kingdom-muslim-brotheroood-terrorist-organization

From the article:

Following an intensive 18-month governmental study, the United Kingdom issued a startling indictment of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB). It described the organization as fiercely anti-democratic, openly supportive of terrorism, dedicated to establishing an Islamist government, and opposed to the rule of law, individual liberty, and equality. 

...

The new account, resulting from an exhaustive investigation by respected foreign-policy experts, presents a brutally honest and in-depth examination of the movement.

...

“Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities . . . run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs,” Prime Minister David Cameron said in a statement.

...

Moreover, the Obama administration brazenly ignored every word of the detailed findings by the British team. Within minutes of the release of the U.K. report, the Obama administration condemned it in an e-mail to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), citing the MB’s stated commitment to nonviolence and arguing that pushing back against the organization would lead to the radicalization of some of its followers. The “political repression of non-violent Islamist groups has historically contributed to the radicalization of the minority of their members who would consider violence,” the statement reads. “The de-legitimization of non-violent political groups does not promote stability, and instead advances the very outcomes that such measures are intended to prevent.”

...

Now read the words of the U.K.-government report, which manifestly demonstrates that the MB’s so-called non-violence was due not to its participation in an open society but rather to a calculated campaign based on “expediency” and using democracy as a means to take away freedoms and to institute “Islamisation.” On this complex subject, Sir John Jenkins, a co-author of the report, concluded that for the most part, the Muslim Brotherhood have preferred non-violent incremental change on the grounds of expediency, often on the basis that political opposition will disappear when the process of Islamisation is complete. But they are prepared to countenance violence — including, from time to time, terrorism — where gradualism is ineffective.