Sada ElBalad English (SEE) news website made an interview with Irina Tsukerman, American Lawyer and National Security Analyst. The interview came as follows:
What is your opinion about Muslim Brotherhood activities in the US, particularly in light of the recent events concerning “Lady Al Qaeda”?
Unfortunately, in the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood organized presence is strong and growing. MB in the US operates through front organizations such as CAIR National and its various chapters, ISNA, ICNA, Islamic Relief "charity" and many others.
They receive global funding but also fundraise domestically and all of that is channeled through various entities to the point that no one can keep track of their financing. The front organizations present themselves to the public as legitimate civil rights organizations for Muslims, but in reality, speak on behalf of very few people.
They don't actually represent most Muslims in the United States. All these organizations have the same small group of staff who migrate from one organization to the next, making it seem like they are very numerous. In reality, that's not the case at all. They also shut down voices of other Muslims who do not wish to be seen as affiliated with MB and who reject their victimhood narrative.
MB organizations also work closely with the Iran lobby in the US as well as various leftist organizations to promote the same domestic and foreign policy causes, including attacking Muslim majority countries that are fighting against MB and shutting down dissent in the United States. Although they do not have a wide representation among Muslim Americans, they work hard to recruit followers to the political process.
They are the only ones offering funding and training to Muslim American political candidates so even people who do not share their ideology end up following their rhetoric, talking points, and program in order to receive political support. They successfully backed the campaigns of people like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, but that's just a start.
They have training events for dozens of candidates and already had hundreds running in many local elections, trying to infiltrate US politics on all levels and to gain early control of the politicians they support to groom them for higher office. So their political influence is actually expanding and various Muslim communities in the US end up being represented by people who do not really share their views.
Although MB is closer to the Democrats than the Republicans, they've also managed to infiltrate the Republican party and many Republican officeholders are refusing to prioritize dealing with Islamist ideologies.
In light of the most recent Texas synagogue hostage-taking attack, when a British-born terrorist made demands to free “Lady Al Qaeda”, a convicted extremist who is serving 86 years for two attempted murders, among other crimes, the US should reexamine the role of these organizations. Some are unindicted co-conspirators in a series of trials involving terrorist charities, such as the Holy Land Foundation.
CAIR National spent years advocating for the release of “Lady Al Qaeda”, and has relaunched its efforts several months prior to the attack, with some of its leading voices even referencing “Zionist synagogues”. At the very least, such rhetoric and advocacy efforts inspire extremists worldwide. A more sinister interpretation is that CAIR may be coordinating its efforts with more violent counterparts abroad.
These events underscore the close relations between the Muslim Brotherhood, its front organization, and jihadist groups inspired by MB ideology, such as AQ and the Deobandi movements in Afghanistan and Pakistan, followed by the British terrorist involved in the Texas attack.
[caption id="attachment_307790" align="alignnone" width="949"]
SEE Editor-in-Chief Mohamed Wadie And Editor-in-Chief of The Washington Outsider and President of Scarb Rising. Inc. Irina Tsukerman[/caption]
In your opinion, why are the Brotherhood and other Islamist movements trying to penetrate European societies, specifically Germany, France and Austria?
Germany, France, and Austria are some of the leading and most economically developed states in the European Union. They also have significant political influence within EU Parliament and various international institutions. Penetrating these states means having a hand in generating policies friendly to the Muslim Brotherhood.
It is particularly important for the MB now when there's a popular backlash against Islamists in those countries due to security concerns after the Syrian refugee crisis and various terrorist attacks.
The political Islam ideology that these countries are seeing rise up in their institutions can be a conduit to more extremist activists, which threatens the very fabric of their societies, so Austria outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood activity, and France announced measures to "secularize" the Muslim population.
The Muslim Brotherhood is also undergoing internal friction and fears losing funding from state sponsors; for that reason, it is important for them to strengthen local roots in influential countries and to be able to benefit from states and private institutions.
Worth noting that Germany, Austria, and France also coordinate among themselves on the various security issues, and also, as members of the European Union, don’t have restrictive border policies which makes it very easy to travel from one country to the next.
It is no coincidence that the countries have suffered from various attempted terrorist attacks in recent years and that the extremists involved had communications with cells across the three countries. Indeed it is actually the popular backlash and the shared concern by the security agencies in these states that makes these countries particularly important to MB, even more so than in the past.
MB is also seeking to exploit the growing political pide between these three states and Eastern Europe in light of Russia & energy-related crises, funneling financing and political support to specific candidates, which would be much harder to do in Eastern Europe.
How do you see the recent measures by the Austrian and French governments to deter political Islam groups, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood?
While a positive ideological step in discrediting the Muslim Brotherhood, the Austrian government's efforts to limit or outlaw MB activity have thus far proven woefully ineffective. MB is adept in evading scrutiny and operates through institutions that don't call themselves the Muslim Brotherhood and shift names and identities as needed.
They are also flexible at forming partnerships with other groups, and for that reason are very hard to pin down. Currently, there are several Muslim Brotherhood organizations operating in Vienna alone with links to state-affiliated actors who claim to be human rights NGOs. If investigated, such groups resort to calling such scrutiny political bias or religious bigotry.
They are also banking on law enforcement's lack of intimate knowledge of their ideology and operational methods, and the fact that law enforcement agencies are ill-equipped for enforcing the existing laws or are infiltrated by MB agents. Even shutting down Islamists mosques is not working because the congregations then reassemble in private meeting rooms or rent new buildings.
The problem is all these measures are reactionary and ad hoc, whereas there needs to be a systematic approach devoted to uncovering the methods behind these associations and fighting them using the thinking of the Muslim Brotherhood and not that of Western politicians who are used to dealing with Western organized crime.
By the same token, France’s President Macron announced a series of measures to combat political Islam, such as the shutdown of private religious schools, and the clamping down on extremist religious institutions such as mosques & Islamic cultural centers.
Overall, however, these measures were not strictly enforced. Only a few institutions were shut down; and even those closures were deemed “temporary”. Congregations in such institutions are able to migrate to other buildings and rename themselves.
It’s like trying to play wack-a-mole. France remains dependent on Qatar for financial infusions, and Qatar remains a leading donor of these institutions. France had rebuffed efforts by moderate Muslim organizations to help with cleaning out Islamist imams and ideologies and has no religious legitimacy to do so independently.
Most recently, Macron had welcomed a number of Islamists, including Ramy Shaath who was serving a prison term in Egypt for providing material support to the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization outlawed n Egypt. Macron lobbied for Shaath’s release, and Shaath was deported to France.
In doing so, Macron contradicted his earlier messaging on combating political Islam, particularly since supporting Shaath put him in the same camp as Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and other US politicians who had likewise lobbied on Shaath’s behalf and are known to support the Brotherhood and to benefit in terms of donations and political support from MB front organizations such as CAIR. Shaath’s wife Celine Lebrun, is a French citizen and Hamas supporter. Hamas is another byproduct of Muslim Brotherhood ideology.
Are the leftist parties and the US in Europe natural partners for the Muslim Brotherhood?
Yes, that is the case in many European countries - the left parties are not only infiltrated but have been coopted or bought by the Muslim Brotherhood. Italy, France, UK, Germany and others come to mind.
In some European countries, there is not yet a significant Islamist presence or they are closer to pro-Iran state actors, but in reality, the left in Europe is inherently susceptible to recruitment by Islamists due to corruption, ideology sympathy with revolutionary causes, a highly ideological and perverse view of human rights, and lack of vetting mechanisms for partners.
Also, the alliances between Islamists and leftist groups in Middle Eastern states have never ended well for leftists, but their Western counterparts are unfamiliar with that history and process and tend to be unfamiliar with Islamist ideological precepts; they see them as temporary allis ad fellow travelers who are willing to support on them on some political causes - they don't tend to see the final objective that these groups pursue. We can see the results of these partnerships in London, which has become a center of Islamist activity welcoming extremist "asylum seekers" from all over the world.
Moreover, many European leftist parties receive direct political contributions from MB institutions and their state backers, as has been thoroughly documented in several recent exposes. There is also a lack of scruples in the European left; they just don't care who they partner with if it helps them win the elections. And some leftist figures such as Jeremy Corbyn are outright sympathetic even to terrorist groups, much less MB ideologues.
That is also the case in the US, where MB is much closer aligned with the Democratic Party, especially the “woke” left than with centrist moderates and Republicans. However, the MB has also approached the conservatives in the US and has managed to make the party largely ignore its threat, which means that everyone should be ideologically vigilant.
In the past, MB has tried to infiltrate the Republican party through political operatives like Grover Norquist and also through interfaith coalitions, or even by training Republican operatives
The Brotherhood plays victim and manipulates democratic and liberal values, while pushing its agendas clandestinely. What’s the best way to reveal the Brotherhood’s real goals?
First, the victimhood narratives towards society building is itself dangerous and open to exploitation and should be dismantled for everyone involved. The more people are seen as inpiduals rather than members of grievance groups the closer their actions and affiliations can be scrutinized. Another issue is the lack of trained and strict security mechanisms for vetting "refugees" and other political migrants, as well as various corrupt investor groups and others.
Many institutions in Europe benefit from real estate deals and other methods of investment exploited by the Muslim Brotherhood and turn a blind eye to tax evasion and other legal violations and unethical practices such as money laundering that would shed light on what is really behind these efforts.
From an ideological perspective, MB has the advantage of well-funded institutions and strong networks which anti-Islamist efforts do not have to the same extent. They have already gained control of "soft power" mechanisms in Europe which their opponents lack.
They also have successfully formed lobbies and political relationships, whereas anti-Islamist groups are generally disunited, don't work closely together, and lack access to political channels. In order to gauge popular and political interest in uncovering Muslim Brotherhood ideology, what's needed is consistent funding and political and social backing of these efforts, and coordination among various networks.
Without creating a system that is at least as powerful, influential, and well regarded in public view as what the Islamists are doing, inpidual publications in Arab press or private websites are not going to get very far.
Second, some of its activities are done openly – increasingly so as the front organizations feel more comfortable politically and as radical discourse and antisemitism, for instance, become more generally accepted, particularly by the left which is currently leading all of the US government branches.
For instance, CAIR leadership has focused increasingly not so much on advancing civil rights for Muslims overall but on pushing for special treatment for extremists and terrorists, and even warned of Islamophobia after the Texas synagogue attack, a typical maneuver to claim victimhood instead of acknowledging its own role in fueling pisions, extremism, and Jew hatred.
As these front organizations pursue increasingly narrow and pisive agendas that are of no benefit to the general American population and are in fact at odds with the US Constitution and values, the US political elites which have become seemingly immune to the threat of violence and discrimination that lies close to the surface of these agendas need to start questions about the loyalties of these organizations.
Follow the latest news on Google News
