The Muslim Brotherhood and Voting

Douglas Farah

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1387347

If one wants to get a more realistic picture of how the Muslim Brotherhood and its international legacy organizations view voting and the democratic process than the usual platitudes of their public discourse, it is well worth reading the Guide to Voting in Islam, posted by the Muslim Association of Britain.

This document and commentary on its content was first posted on the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report, available for a free subscription.

Because in political Islam there is no difference between the state and religion, voting itself becomes, as one British Imam is quoted in the document as saying, a form of Jihad:

I consider Muslim political participation, especially in a non-Muslim country, as a form of jihad. This is our country and it would be foolish not to participate in the political processes which eventually shape our future and that of Islam. I support marching in the streets to raise awareness about certain issues. However, if we really want to change the status-quo then we have to influence those who walk the corridors of power. Muslims need not only to vote but put forward Muslim candidates in all the mainstream and serious independent parties. We need to be represented or be present at the tables around which policies are discussed, made and agreed.

The Guide to Voting offers grudging support for alliances with non-Muslims if the alliance is for the good of the Muslim population. Totally absent is the consideration of what is good for the country in which the Muslim individual is voting. This is made explicitly clear in a quote by Abdur Raheem Green, Dawah Administrator of the Central Mosque of London included in the Guide:

It has long been my position that any type of participation in democracy is a type of approval of that system. I have no doubt that democracy is antithetical to Islam. However, having read and listened to the sayings of many scholars on this issue, and being faced with the reality of a growing Muslim population here in the UK, who for all intents and purposes consider this their home, it has become clear to me that we must participate in every aspect of society as much as possible to ensure our rights and continued existence and well being in this society. This participation most certainly includes voting for whichever party or candidate best serves the needs and interests of the UK and indeed world wide Muslim population. This does not mean approval or acceptance of the ideal of secular democracy, but the intention is to use the means and avenues available to benefit Muslims and the communities we reside in.

That seems pretty straightforward to me. There is not a commitment to the fundamental concept of freedom and multi-party democracy. There is solely a commitment to establishing an Islamic state, and if that can be advanced through participating in elections, then so be it.

This ties in with the calls of the MB legacy groups in the United States to get Sen. John McCain to stop using the adjective Islamic to describe radical Islamist terrorists.

The charge is led by Muneer Fareed of ISNA, who says that “I think this is just criminality, fair and square. We should just call them criminals. You want to call them terrorist criminals, fine. But adding the word ‘Muslim’ or ‘Islamic’ certainly doesn’t help our cause as Americans.”

But therein lies the rub, because it is clear from the Guide, and many other writings, that the MB’s primary loyalty is not to whatever country they live in, but to the establishment of an Islamist state. And the terrorists define themselves as acting on behalf of Islam, and embrace the word.

So on whose behalf is Fareed and ISNA speaking? One must always ask that when dealing with the MB.