April 5, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - A group calling itself the Muslim Public Service Network [the website - http://www.muslimpublicservice.org/ - is registered to Shahed Amanullah in Oakland, CA. Amanullah is also the registrant behind altmuslim.org and HalalFire.com] is part of an effort by Muslims to influence the policies of government via selective placement of agendized personnel in positions of power.
Though on its face this effort might seem as American as apple pie, closer scrutiny indicates otherwise.
Since we have written extensively about the phenomenon variously described as lawful Islamism or stealth jihad [for example [UK Defeated By Muslim Stealth Jihad, Capitulates To Shari'a] we find no need to recapitulate the theme here again in extended form.
In outline however, the stealth jihad has a number of aspects, but one key fundamental.
The strategy stems from a realization by the Islamists [which include, in addition to the violent jihadis, Muslims who advocate for incremental Islamization of their societies, and incorporation of Shari'a derived components within them, through the exercise of political power] that direct confrontation can only succeed in a time and place where there is at least rough parity between Muslims and non-Muslims. From this logic stems a counter strategy in which instead of adopting a policy of head-on confrontation, those who seek to at some point in the future bring about a Caliphate, opt for gradual change as a precursor of that future utopian Islamic state.
A seminal document - a concrete embodiment of this idea - was discovered during a Virginia terror raid made 15 years ago - written by the Muslim Brotherhood [and approved by the Shura Council] the Egyptian terrorist organization which serves as the intellectual ancestor for all modern day Islamic terrorism, including Hamas and al-Qaeda.
This rare find outlined an audacious plan Islamize America. Being of such importance, it was tagged government document number GX3-85 and submitted into the court record in the largest successful Hamas terror funding prosecution U.S. history - U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation, et. al.
It reads in part:
"The process of settlement is a "Civilizational Jihadist Process," with all that the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house from within..." [The General Strategic Plan for the Group in North America, pg. 21, item 4]
So this Muslim Brotherhood plan assumes a two pronged attack, one violent when conditions permit, the other nominally legal, working within institutions to modify the culture into greater recognition of Shari'a towards its [assumed] eventual acceptance of full compliance.
Since Mr. Amanullah is a key player in the Muslim Public Service Network effort let's examine an essay he wrote in 2004 and published in one of his web presences, altmuslim.org.
The piece [see, Why are Muslims so shocked & awed by Yassin's assassination? - The killing of Hamas' founder marks a turning point for Palestinians and an opportunity to re-evaluate their support for the group's military activities] strikes at the heart of the assertion that the intent of this Muslim public service movement is greater dialogue, instead suggesting it's a one way street, a ploy really in which influence can be peddled within the halls of power.
A quick read of this piece seems to show Amanullah decrying Hamas' terrorism but upon closer inspection really expresses the sentiment present in the Muslim Brotherhood's plan for stealth jihad.
"...What surprises me most is that so many Muslims have backed Hamas' military strategy for securing Palestinian rights, even though the heavy weaponry is on the wrong side..."
The above writing is clearly then a tactical judgment, not a blanket moral condemnation of Hamas. Mr. Amanullah is recognizing the imbalance of power between Israel and jihadi Palestinians, observing that the Israelis have all the advantages and power, not to mention all the guns.
Reading through the piece reveals that Amanullah has, in part, kind words for Hamas, "Hamas had the potential to be so much more. It's social institutions have been lifesavers for Palestinians hardest hit by the occupation..."
Of course Mussolini made the trains run on time, a trait shared by totalitarians throughout history.
The reasoning behind the author's words seem to justify the stealth tactic - taking into account the relative imbalance between forces which necessitates adopting a non-confrontational approach, working through the institutions, marching through them and changing them - in the words of Antonio Gramsci, the Italian communist theorist who in the 1920s established the intellectual model for this avenue of transformational cultural attack.
Amanullah understands that the West holds all the cards in military confrontations, hence he counsels the path of least resistance.
Again, the ability to see that you are on the losing side militarily is neither moral leadership nor is it lofty wisdom.
Adding to this assessment we look briefly at the uproar which surrounded the censoring of Sherry Jones short lived novel, The Jewel of Medina, thought critical of Mohammed, in which Mr. Amanullah played an interesting role.
The intended publisher of the work, Random House, quickly buckled under severe criticism which by some accounts seems to have been fanned by Mr. Amanullah.
Asra Nomani's article in the Wall Street Journal on the controversy [see, http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB121797979078815073.html] reads in part:
After he got the call from Ms. Spellberg, Mr. Amanullah dashed off an email to a listserv of Middle East and Islamic studies graduate students, acknowledging he didn't "know anything about it [the book]," but telling them, "Just got a frantic call from a professor who got an advance copy of the forthcoming novel, 'Jewel of Medina' -- she said she found it incredibly offensive." He added a write-up about the book from the Publishers Marketplace, an industry publication."
In an article written by Carlin Romano, orignially published by the Chronicle of Higher Education and reprinted by Campus Watch [see, http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/5657] Amanullah's role seemed critical in fanning the fire of censorship, though he has gone to great lengths since then to claim otherwise.
"Spellberg" [who received a galley copy for review] "who subsequently called the book a "very ugly, stupid piece of work" in an interview with Nomani, phoned Shahed Amanullah, editor of a Muslim Web site and a guest lecturer in her classes, to alert him to its existence. Amanullah told Nomani that Spellberg was "upset" and felt the book "made fun of Muslims and their history." Amanullah then e-mailed a Listserv of graduate students in Middle Eastern and Islamic studies. That provoked a wave of blogging, including descriptions of the novel as "a new attempt to slander the Prophet of Islam" and strategies to ensure that "the writer withdraws this book from the stores."
So what we are left with here is another case of a supposed moderate Muslim being in reality not quite so supportive of the liberalism upon which the West is based.
Turing to practical matters, if one examines the Western country in which acceptance of the Muslim multicultural offensive has gained most acceptance - Britain - the downside of this movement - to inject an intolerance rooted in an interpretation of Islam into the public square - is immediately apparent.
Instead of resisting, the UK has instead actually partnered with the advocates of this continent-wide and ferocious Islamist cultural assault, to the extent that now Downing St. has established a dual system of jurisprudence, civil courts based upon the tenets laid out in English Common law for most, but for the nation's Muslims, a growing system of Shari'a courts which the central government has empowered to make legal renderings applying only to members of the Islamic faith.
Allow us to be perfectly clear in this matter, public institutions can always benefit from the input of new blood. It follows then that individuals of all religious persuasions, Catholics, Jews, Hindus, Muslims etc., who are supportive of the basic cultural norms upon which our society is based have a legitimate place at the common table.
Additionally, let us stipulate that we are by no means suggesting that Mr. Amanullah intends to pursue this methodology in anything but an entirely legal manner.
That said however, when these programs are carried out by individuals who at their core are illiberal, the end result eventually diminishes and tears apart the social contract which binds us all in a sometimes uneasy but historically viable voluntary alliance.
This is the great danger posed by those who pursue stealth jihad. They attack this society at its most vulnerable point, making their efforts difficult to check since that with which they are engaged is legal in a statutory sense - despite the long-term harm such practices engender.
Failing to take heed of these lessons and actively work to combat movements which engage in injecting people with an Islam-centric world view into positions of influence or power will lead the United States down a similar path. This is more than sufficient justification to resist the Muslim Public Service initiative - it's a Trojan Horse gambit designed to bring out by stealth what can't - for the time being at least - be secured by more traditional, less civil means.
2010 PipeLineNews.org LLC. All rights reserved.