Political Islam, i.e. radical Islam, is actually a cutout for continued communist aggession against the West. This is perhaps the most justifiable explanation for the resurgence of radical Islam in recent years, though it receives scant recognition.
We knew this to be true back in the 1970s and 1980s, when the communist-inspired PLO began its operations against Israel. We knew that Hezbollah and the other Muslim terrorist organizations got their training, weapons and support from Syria - a Ba'athist (Stalinist Arab Communist Party) country. We knew by extension that Syria, like all Soviet client states, was acting on behalf of the Soviet Union.
But after the Soviet Union "fell" in the 1990s, suddenly we were confronted with "Muslim" terrorism. Still the same actors, still the same support networks, still the same tactics, yet now it was supposedly a dire new threat. And if you think horrific public killings and suicide bombings – even using children – are an Islamic invention, ask anyone who served in Vietnam. Communist tactics, all. Even before the communists, Japanese frequently used this tactic in WW II. A very good article on Alternet.org, The Hard Truth About Suicide Bombers had this to say:
Martyr missions made their official twentieth-century debut in the Second World War with the Kamikazes; they showed up again in the 1960s, when Viet Cong sympathizers exploded themselves amidst U.S. troops. Their debut in the Islamic world was not until the 1980s, during the Iran-Iraq war.
If you listen to statements from jihadists like Osama Bin Laden, their justification for war against the West is based on the same tired slogans repeated by leftists since the 1930s, i.e. that America and its allies are "imperialist," "greedy capitalists" "exploiting" the rest of the world, yada yada, only now it is the Muslim world we are supposedly oppressing.
Meanwhile, strong evidence has surfaced that al Qaeda is stage-managed by the KGB. This was the assertion of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko – poisoned in 2006 with radioactive polonium-210 by Putin’s KGB assassins. Litvinenko asserted, among other things, that al Qaeda number two, Ayman Al-Zawahiri is in fact a KGB agent. And it is he, not Bin-Laden, who many believe calls the shots. Other Russian dissidents support this claim.
Some will argue that it was Hasan Al Banna who initiated the modern “Islamic resurgence” when he founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. And it is true that this group was the springboard for most of the modern jihadists groups known today. A later Brotherhood leader, Sayyid Qutb, was, if anything, an even greater Islamic purist than Al Banna. Yet the Soviets’ have historically demonstrated an uncanny ability to capture such movements for their own nefarious purposes.
The Islamic jihadists are no exception.
This assertion provides the most compelling internally consistent explanation for the left's enthusiastic embrace of Islam. Consider: the left is supposedly all about women's liberation, equality, saving the "oppressed of the earth" and is militantly opposed to religion and religious intolerance in all its forms. If this is true, then on ideological grounds the left should be at war with radical Islam, or at least see it as a dangerous competitor, because radical Islam is the most intolerant, misogynistic, oppressive, religiously fanatic bunch of lunatics in the world -- except perhaps the communists.
National Lawyers Guild (oldest US communist front) Lawyer Lynn Stewart, who was convicted of communicating messages to Islamic radicals for her client, the jailed blind sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, gave it away when she said:
They [radical Islamic movements] are basically forces of national liberation. And I think that we, as persons who are committed to the liberation of oppressed people, should fasten on the need for self-determination…My own sense is that, were the Islamists to be empowered, there would be movements within their own countries…to liberate.
There it is: "...were the Islamists to be empowered, there would be movements within their own countries… to liberate." You have to know leftist terminology. "Liberate" everywhere and always refers to imposing a communist regime, for that is always the leftists’ long run goal. So what she is saying is that these movements are actually communist movements in disguise. And indeed, the statements by radical Islamic leaders, though couched in Islamic phraseology, essentially advocate the same thing.
This does not mean that radical Islam is not a threat in-and-of-itself.
Just as most American liberals are unaware that their purpose is to give legitimacy – "mainstream" if you will – the radical left's communist agenda, most Muslim Jihadists are unaware that they fight on behalf of the same ideology. Many of them believe the exhortations of their Imams. Some Imams may even believe it. Many truly believe they are working on Allah's behalf to create a worldwide Muslim caliphate. Because of this, they have to be considered a stand-alone threat.
And herein lies the purpose of this post.
This 1/2 hour video is an abridged version of a 1.5 hour documentary, the Third Jihad, narrated by Dr. Zuhdi Jasser. An American and prominent Muslim himself, Jasser states that after 9/11 he dedicated his life to battling radical Islam. It came out last year. If you haven’t already seen it, watch it and forward it to everyone you know.
Further Reading:
Muslim Guerillas Training in USA
Al-Qaeda/KGB Connection Confirmed
Anti-Semitism or Anti-Americanism?
The Meat: Jeremiah Wright Publishes CAIR Founder's Manifesto
Comments
This sounds like what was once called a "double whammy"...there
are still some folks out there better wake up and see this.
Jim, thanks for pointing out a critical element in this bad scene.
Dude, this article is just tinfoil-hat SILLY.
There wasn't "suddenly" Islamic terror in the 1980s. Ever heard of Iran? Khomeini made VERY sure to kill all the Communists he could find.
For "Syria" in the 1980s, read Hafez Assad the Alawite; he played all the sides against one another so he could keep his minority faction from getting slaughtered.
Just because someone says "liberate", even if they say it cynically and on behalf of a totalitarianism, does not mean that someone is a Communist. Non-Communists are fully capable of totalitarianism. Look at Iran again. Islam has an ideological basis a good deal more serious than the pretended Marxism of an Obama or the environmentalism of a Gore.
Zimriel:
Before you call it "tin-foil hat silly" do a little bit of research. Save the ad hominem attacks for someone who deserves them. Basing your conclusions on what Iran did in 1980 while ignoring their very close relationship with Russia, ignoring Assad's relationship to the Soviets and your very incorrect analysis of his purposes in "playing all sides against one another" which, in Lebanon at least, gave him pretext for invasion, and forgetting little details like about how he dealt with opponents like in Hama, for instance, demonstrates to me that you either really don't know much or are deliberately playing ignorant so you can draw such conclusions. Since when does the testimony of Soviet defectors, including ones who gave their lives because of the information they revealed, deserve such conceited, contemptuous dismissal? Before you take such an arrogant, knee-jerk attitude next time, take a little time to actually learn something of which you speak! Where do you get off?
Radical Islam, (Rick Warren and Radical Christianity - Uganda), every major Monotheistic religion can be radical. I will agree that Islam is the fastest growing monotheistic religion and it will eventually lead to another dark age...to bad people cannot understand that "religion" tends to do that over its life span.
Maybe we need more freethinking individuals everywhere to help people understand we dont need "religion" keep your God, gods, Gods, god etc. but dump the religion part!
Jesse, put a link to your article in your comment. (And, of course, invite James to do the same on your article)
:-)
What a bunch of crap. All based on a false flag operation. The Arab world suffered much more from Islamic terrorists financed by people in the west , Jordan and suadi Arabia. Why Assad attacked Hama? Do research. As long as Syria doesn't kneel to Israel and the central bank of Syria not owned by the Rothschild it will be considered terrorist country. Ironic we don't give people the right to defend their homes while we travel thousands miles to fight helpless people who did nothing for us.
Mark neil:
You are the one who needs to do research. Assad didn't like the Sunni Muslims protesting his secular rule, so he wiped out the whole town with his airforce. That okay with you? Justifiable? Get a life.
If Islam is the sheep's clothing for communism... communism must be unbelievably evil.
So Obama is basically a commie.
The ideology of Islam has great similarities to the ideology of Communism. Both are violently agressive, imperialistic and totalitarian. However, Islam is anti-Communist. It is a mistake to link radical Islam to Communism and the Soviet Union. We are the ones who gave Al Qaeda its start when we armed them against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Radical Islam does not need Communism. It is a radical ideology in its own right. The communist left supports radical Islam because both of them want to bring down capitalist, mostly Christian America.
It's remarkable how this article fails in any way to actually build it's case.
What similarities are there between Communism and Sharia Islam? They both hate America? So what? You know who else allied with the USSR against a common enemy? America and Britain.
Communism is strongly anti-traditional, anti-religion, and gender-wise egalitarian. It's very much the opposite of radical Islam.
I'm ignoring your attempts to describe the left in America as Communist or somehow sympathizing with radical Islam, as this is just obviously incorrect.
All you have to do is examine Obama's record to know:
1. Obama is a Radical Marxist Communist: www.commieblaster.com/obama/index.html
and
2. His Foreign Policy is “One World Communism” and “Support for Terror”: www.commieblaster.com/world_obama/index.html
See for Yourself at www.commieblaster.com
Jack:
It is remarkable how you build your argument that this article fails to make the case. To make the case in a way that would convince you would require a book, and my guess is you would remain unconvinced. Oh, but wait, there is a book, cited in this article, in fact. It is called Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left. READ IT! Then read all the other citations in this article, one of which is from a former KGB agent who gave his life to bring us this information. This is the trouble with so many liberals: they think that they are thinking when in fact they are finding excuses to avoid thinking. You don't know what you don't know. If I can't teach you adequately here, and you are unwilling to check my impeccable sources, you're basically a lost cause.
WE MUST WAKE UP SOON! THANKS JIM FOR YOUR GREAT ARTICLES!
Evidense that this article is wrong :
1)Muslims (Osama ?) fought Reds in Afghanistan
2)Moscow is being attacted RIGHT NOW By terrorists
Evidense that this article is wrong :
1)Muslims (Osama ?) fought Reds in Afghanistan
2)Moscow is being attacted RIGHT NOW By terrorists
There is a difference between the way communists view property and the way socialists view property. The words are not interchangeable.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!