Romulus Augustus Last Emperor of Western Roman Empire
John R. Houk
© May 12, 2013
Danny correctly observes the uncanny parallels between the Roman Empire and the United States of America. The only criticism I have and it is a bit silly is that the Roman Republic made Rome an empire. Rome’s decline began when the republican form of government was replaced by the rule of law of one man that utilized republic’s infrastructure to enforce the rule of one man. Rome exchanged the rule of law for the rule of man. When Octavius secured Roman government under his “enlightened” leaders he became Emperor. Octavius of the Republic was no more for he transformed into Augustus and essentially took his Uncle Julius’ family name as “Caesar” instead of the obvious “Emperor”.
Augustus’ Roman Empire was strong and succeeded hundreds of years after his death. Rome’s decline was the deficiency of one man rule of succeeding emperors that led quite immoral lives. Even though the Western half of the Roman Empire ended circa 475 AD according to famed historian Edward Gibbons, Western Roman already nearly non-existent by the time the last Emperor was defeated and deposed.
My point about the decline of Rome is if the USA has a parallel a one man rule will probably take place. Just as Augustus was perceived to be the savior from the chaos of Rome Republic rivals for power, then a similar parallel would occur in the USA.
Is America to the point that politically powerful people will divide the sympathies of Americans to the point that the U.S. Constitution is irrelevant? It could happen that factions tear Constitutional rule of law to pieces because of the feeling of desperation.
America’s only hope is for a consensus of voters become strong enough to elect Constitutional Originalists into Office and Constitutional Originalists are selected for the Federal Judiciary especially the Supreme Court.
Otherwise … Factions of the political spectrum will war for power with the winner taking all rendering the Constitution as a glorious document in the history of humankind.
Well those are my thoughts on Danny Jeffrey’s essay “The Decline and Fall of America”.
John R. Houk
© December 3, 2012
I believe there was a time that American voters had a concern about stealth Marxism/Communism transforming America into a Collective in which Liberty and Civil Rights were defined by the State rather than Constitutional Rule of Law. After Election 2012 I now believe Americans could care less about American Freedoms. People are simply willing to have their lives and culture defined by the State.
Feel me, hear me, see me and touch me and tell me what to believe for my own good. The toehold to despotism is the illusion of government dependent beneficence. If the government is the hand that feeds you and the creator of a temporal synthetic existence causing security euphoria, then actual Liberty won and instituted by law by the people and for the people will be lost to an oligarchic bureaucracy that in turn has government policy distributed by a ruling elite.
The polarization in America is between hardcore Leftists that have convinced (apparently most) Americans that a Secular Humanist, Multicultural Diverse and Judeo-Christian destroying society is the path to utopia AND those Americans that have an awareness of fiscal responsibility, Social Conservatism based on Judeo-Christianity as well as the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers revolutionizing the Rule of Law of a Representative Republic.
We Americans on the Right side of the polarized scale must step up our level to communicate to Americans the risks to American Liberty by unwittingly investing in the Socialist-Marxist-Communist journey to the illusion of a man-made utopia. Friends, there is no such thing as a utopia that realizes the greater good for the betterment of humankind when the architect is man.
Yes, I am a Christian. I am a Christian that believes a great debt is owed to Jews. Even though the Jews do not share the Christian sentiment of Salvation in Christ Jesus, the New Testament clearly proclaims that Salvation is of the Jews. Our Savior was born a Jew, raised a Jew and lived as a Jew in His earthly walk that led to the Crucifixion, Death and bodily Resurrection that Christians believe brings Deliverance from bondage of a Satan influenced age and a transference to the Kingdom of God.
The only utopia on planet Earth will be after the Creator forms the New Earth-New Jerusalem and the New Heaven in which the nations that have come to their senses believe in the Kingship of Jesus Christ. The Rule of Law will not be devised by humanity; rather humanity will have the Will of God imprinted in their new creation spirit knowing instantly the good rejecting any evil that separates from God Almighty.
Yes that is correct. I injected faith and politics as the God-Kind of life that government will be like without humanity calling the shots. The Founding Fathers realized that government should not have any business in religion yet that religion (specifically the Christian religion) must be the conscience of government. Robbing America of a Christian conscience has slowly changed our society in which greed, violence and distrust are embedded in our culture.
We Americans of the Right must find a way to reinstill the vision of the Founding Fathers complete with the conscience that keeps government in line and by extension our culture in a better moral state.
You may wonder what set off this line of thought. Well it was an article by Trevor Loudon that exposes the tentacles of the Left forming policy of the Democratic Party as administered by the Obama regime on the USA.
JRH 12/3/12 (Hat Tip: Danny Jeffrey)
Arabs that call themselves Palestinians and support Islamic terrorists like Hamas are evil.
Here is an interview of released Gilad Shalit after five years of captivity.
Gilad is home and free!! Hit Like to celebrate! Watch this
Posted by James W
Posted on 10/18/11 8:38 PM
After being held for more than 5 years by Hamas, Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was released in exchange for more than 1000 Palestinian prisoners. This is the actual interview with Gilad Shalit on Egyptian television on the day of the prisoner exchange deal.
John R. Houk
© July 2011
America: the land of the free and home of the brave, THAT IS AMERICA.
I am quite biased! I am a huge believer in American Exceptionalism. Why is America exceptional? Why do foreigners all over the world make the constant of their life to reside in America? Why do the same foreigners flocking to America to reside also rail against American culture?
I will tell you the reason.
The American experiment that began in 1776 resulted in a Constitution that has endured the test of political time. The Constitution, the Bill of Rights (first ten Amendments) and the following Amendments which goes on to the number 27 are the framework of the most viable political system the world has ever seen.
America’s Constitutional Representative Republic has produced such a culture of Liberty, that haters of America have used the Constitution to veil the intention of destroying American Liberty.
The Islam of Mohammed and Sharia Law demanding the right to practice the portions of their religion that are unconstitutional is a classic example of subversion in America. When Left Wing American multiculturalists stand with purist Islam against the Constitution in the name of cultural diversity, subversion to American Liberty becomes the danger.
This is the case of Tulsa Police Department Captain Paul Fields who was suspended and demoted because of his refusal to obey the order of Police Chief Charles Jordan to attend a Muslim service at the Islamic Society of Tulsa for a faux Law Enforcement Appreciation Day. Paul Fields refused to be a dhimmi. Charles Jordan embraced dhimmitude of multicultural political correctness.
ACT for America has taken up the Cross to bear for Paul Fields with reports and petitions. In a recent ACT for America email Guy Rodgers I learned that the Thomas More Law Center is involved in taking Fields’ case in a civil suit.
For those who cherish freedom
Why we need to stand with Captain Fields
By Guy Rodgers
Sent: Jul 8, 2011 at 2:12 PM
ACT for America
We need 4,000 signatures to reach our petition Goal
I have a message from my heart I want to send to every ACT! for America member today. It’s about something very, very precious to me: Freedom.
You see, my mother grew up in Germany during World War II. I remember as a child her telling me the story of a man in her apartment building, who in the late 1930’s would publicly criticize Hitler.
One night my eight-year-old mother awoke to hear men yelling and pounding on this man’s door. Amid the screams of his family, the Gestapo dragged him away and he was never seen again. The message sent was heard loud and clear. My mother lived in fear of her own government. She understood how precious freedom is.
I have never forgotten that story.
Because of my love of freedom, I have long been a student of our colonial and founding era. Words cannot describe how much I have learned studying the writings of the Founding Fathers.
Four days ago we celebrated the 235th birthday of our country, a country birthed out of passionate desire for liberty and self-governance.
Against that backdrop, police Captain Paul Fields was demoted and suspended because he refused to surrender his constitutional rights when ordered to attend an Islamic proselytizing event held at a Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Center.
Sadly, very little attention has been paid to this in the media, even in the more conservative talk radio media. So why have we at ACT! for America decided this is an issue we need to aggressively fight?
Here’s why, and it’s the same reason our friends at the Thomas More Law Center have filed a lawsuit on his behalf.
I have no quarrel with government officials choosing, voluntarily, to attend religious events of various faiths. But Captain Fields should never have been compelled to attend an Islamic service and observe classes on Islamic beliefs, simply because he was a police officer and was ordered by his superior to do so.
Would the ACLU sit by quietly if a Muslim officer were ordered to attend a Sunday morning Christian service, called “Law Enforcement Appreciation Day?” We all know the answer to that.
If the disciplinary action taken against Captain Fields is allowed to stand, without protest or outrage, the message sent to government officials, not only in Tulsa but across the country, is that they can compel subordinates to attend Islamic events, and no one will resist.
As much as Islamic terrorism concerns me, I am as concerned about the threat radical Islam—and the political correctness that enables it—poses to our freedoms.
That threat is incremental, where tyranny chips away at freedom little by little, until one day freedom is gone.
Just ask Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, our chapter leader in Austria who was recently convicted of “denigrating a religion,” about incremental loss of freedom.
Our Founding Fathers understood incremental loss of freedom. That’s why they protested even small taxes imposed on them unlawfully, not because the amounts were large, but because of the precedents they set.
We at ACT! for America do not have the human or financial resources to engage every issue or fight every fight. But the case of Captain Paul Fields is one we must rise up and fight.
Government officials in Tulsa need to know there are Americans who will resist politically-correct driven assaults on our freedom. The Islamic Center of Tulsa needs to know this. Groups like CAIR and ISNA need to know this. Government officials around the country need to know this.
If we, as an organization, make a strong enough and loud enough stand, they will know.
· This is why we launched our petition—and why we continue to appeal to patriotic Americans to sign it
· This is why we will go to Tulsa and hold a news conference and rally.
· This is why we will launch a call-in campaign to selected Tulsa government officials at the right time
Because if we don’t, what will be next—the Mayor of Tulsa ordering his staff to attend a Ramadan Iftar dinner?
If you cherish freedom as I do, and you haven’t already done so, please join us in adding your name to our petition calling for the reinstatement of Captain Fields. We’re only 4,000 signatures short of our goal.
Yours for a safe—and free—America,
Refuse Government Mandated Dhimmitude
John R. Houk
© July 8, 2011
For those who cherish freedom
ACT for America is an issues advocacy organization dedicated to effectively organizing and mobilizing the most powerful grassroots citizen action network in America, a grassroots network committed to informed and coordinated civic action that will lead to public policies that promote America’s national security and the defense of American democratic values against the assault of radical Islam. We are only as strong as our supporters, and your volunteer and financial support is essential to our success. Thank you for helping us make America safer and more secure.
John R. Houk
© May 21, 2011
Geert Wilders of Netherlands has been facing persecution in his native land for years. The focus of the persecution is the Wilders message that Islam is evil and inimical to the Judeo-Christian culture that has inspired Western concepts of Freedom. This Freedom has found its greatest heights in America which is codified in the U.S. Constitution and can only be changed by a Constitutional Amendment or a rebellion against the Constitution.
In the Europe that is coalesced around the concept of a European Union Freedom is defined by relativity. Relative Freedom is diluted Freedom. Relative Freedom is freedom only as it is interpreted by the Central Government. Thus when the few Biblical Christians that still exist in Europe denounce Islam as a false religion or publically stand to a morality that belittles the lifestyles of homosexuality, Relative Freedom will those people jailed or fined or both as an illegal disruption to multicultural diversity.
Geert Wilders’ global message is that people must wake up to the threatening despotism that Islam represents against Western Culture. Recently Wilders was part of an expose Islam conference at a Church in Nashville, TN. Andrew Bostom brings this speech to the American Thinker for all to read what was spoken in Tennessee.
The Wilders speech definitely was not politically correct. Since there was no politically correct restraint in the speech, the first impression of Americans that love the heritage of Freedom in America, will sense the passion that Adolf Hitler expressed against Jews in the rise to power of Nazi Germany. Frankly I can almost hear or read the venom of Leftists who love multiculturalism yet hold an underlying hatred to the heritage of Judeo-Christianity.
Here is a less volatile excerpt from the Wilders speech:
Islam is dangerous. Islam wants to establish a state on earth, ruled by islamic sharia law. Islam aims for the submission, whether by persuasion, intimidation or violence, of all non-Muslims, including Christians.
The results can be seen in Europe.
Islam is an ideology of conquest. It uses two methods to achieve this goal: the first method is the sword. Do you know what figures on the flag of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, a country where Christian churches are banned and Christians are not even allowed to wear a tiny crucifix? There is a huge sword on that flag, just below the Islamic creed. The message is clear. Without the sword islam would not have been able to spread its creed.
The second method is immigration. Islam’s founder Muhammad himself taught his followers how to conquer through immigration when they moved from Mecca to Medina. This phenomenon of conquest through immigration is called al-Hijra. My learned friend Sam Solomon has written a perfect book about it.
I am here to tell you that Geert Wilders is right on the money! The irony of our Western Culture is our tolerance for other cultures. Unfortunately tolerating Islam as it is espoused in its pure beginnings as preached by Mohammed is a cancer that will eat away the freedoms Western Culture has achieved over the decades from the days of one-man absolute monarchies through today’s rule of law that honors the rights of citizens rather than top to bottom despotism.
Leftist ideology regardless of all the rhetoric of power to the proletariat was a top to bottom central government rule that told citizens how to live and believe at the cost life or prison slavery. The same deception is inherent in Islamic ideology which has become theo-politicized via Sharia Law which also demands absolute adherence with punishment that results in second class citizenship (dhimmitude), prison for free speech assertions perceived as anti-Islamic, loss of limbs for theft or loss of life for insults to Islam, Mohammed or Allah.
When a Muslim attempts to tell you that enforcement of Sharia Law punishments longer occur in Islam, the only truth in that assertion is only valid in a Western nation that still requires the rule of law over Sharia Law. In Muslim nations Sharia Law punishments seemed to retreat in some nations that have attempted a modicum of secularism; however a resurgence of Sharia Law applications in all its harsh forms have made a strong comeback after the purist Islam influenced by what we in the West has called radical Islam. The fact is the very Muslims America and Europe have labeled as moderate are beginning to adopt Sharia Law according to the demands of reformist Muslims of Salafist, Wahhabi and Twelver Shi’ites.
A classic revival of Sharia Law in its pure form is exampled in Europe by Islamic enclaves that require all that enters the enclaves to respect the rules of Sharia Law or expect the potential an extra-legal enforcement beyond the touch of a European nation’s rule of law.
Dear God in Heaven people, please listen-up! Even if it goes against our nature of tolerance to foreign cultures we need to make laws that illegalize aspects of a religion or an ideology that has an agenda to overcome Constitutional Law, especially in the United States of America.
John R. Houk
© March 1, 2011
I always get in trouble for this thought: Islam is evil. This three word thought elicits vulgar comments from Muslims and outrage from Left Wing multiculturalists with the accusation of Islamophobe meant as an epithet and not a compliment. In honesty I have often given Muslims devoted to a theological principle of worship with the desire to better oneself via their monotheistic deity the benefit of the doubt. The benefit is a faith of inner peace. The doubt is Islam is just as much political as it is theological. This means there is a direct link between the governing authority and a focus on faith in the religion of Islam.
In my Christian faith, residing in America as well as being a Conservative, I am a huge believer of religion being an influence on governing the State, BUT NOT the State having any influence on any religion. The American Left has warped 20th century Constitutional thought into Judicial Activism believing in the propagandized myth of Separation of Church and State. This means that religion must not have any influence in the affairs of governing as well as the government not having any influence in religious practice. The problem for America with the Leftist vision of religion and State is that the moral foundations of our past are being eroded by the Leftist replacement with Secular Humanism which emphasizes Moral Relativity. Moral Relativity means the values of society are purely measurable by what humanity defines as moral. When humanity defines morality there is no constant standard. Biblical Morality is a constant standard based on the Word of God. The lack of a constant standard by its nature means there is little restraint on the proclivity of human nature to act selfishly. Selfishness in human nature left unchecked leads to an ever evolving descent toward wickedness.
Today in the name of First Amendment Free Speech there is a pervasiveness of pornography; family disunity via divorce; children are disrespectful of authority to the point of social dysfunction that leads to violence in schools, pervasive teen drug use, despicably abhorrent bullying that incites violent retribution or suicide; theft is so prevalent that one is thought a fool if they don’t loc their doors and more.
The absence of a distinctive difference between temporal governing and religious practice in Islam means that the governing authority must comply with Islamic Law and that the governing authority has the duty to enforce society to follow Islamic Law. This leads to a concept of Islamic Supremacism in which Muslim and non-Muslims have severely curtailed civil rights. For the devoted Muslim this may not be bad news; however for the more secular minded Muslim and the non-Muslim civil rights and civil liberty is extremely hampered which is REAL bad news for a person who violates the governing principles of Sharia Law.
It is the theopolitical nature of Islam that makes Islam evil. This is especially so in America in which our nation’s whole foundation is based on the Declaration of Independence which emphasizes the concepts of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. America’s Constitution insures explicitly various rights of Liberty and Freedom which are unalienable. From the Founding Father perspective these unalienable rights are created in humanity by God Almighty Himself. In America life is about choice that does not break the law. In Islam life is about submission to Allah and the deity’s prophet Mohammed.
American representative democracy and Islamic culture are as divergent as night and day. Islam can take no other view other than the American way of life is evil. The Liberty implicit in American culture has no choice but to view Islamic culture as evil. The unfortunate circumstance in America is that American Liberty allows Leftist doctrine and Islamic theopolitical thought to be freely expressed even if it eradicates American Liberty.
To switch gears a bit allow me to express some concerns that is going on in the Muslim Maghreb and Middle East.
The little Muslim nation of Tunisia exploded into a grassroots move to end the government of their dictator. This move in Tunisia spread through the Muslim world as a wild fire. The irony is the apparent Muslim populist movement is very reminiscent of the Bush Doctrine Neoconservative idea that democracy is an infectious way to live if given the opportunity to attach to any nation in the world. After Iraq and Afghanistan began to regard American invasions as an occupation rather than as a deliverance from despotism, the Bush Doctrine took a major dent. Even Neoconservatives began to be disillusioned with democratic nation building. We Neocons believed that the democratization of Germany and Japan after WWII could be a repeated experiment on any form of despotism. The thing is Germany is from the Western tradition. Although Japan has no roots in Western influence, if one examines Japanese history there are surprising similarities between Japan’s feudal past and Europe’s feudal past. It could be that the feudalism of Japan was a precursor making Japan pliable to adapt Western style democratic institutions.
Being Americans, Bush Agenda supporters did not take into consideration that theopolitical Islam would trump civil rights and liberty. Muslim lands have had the curse of a stagnant culture stuck in their successes of the Middle Ages. Also Muslim lands have had the blessing of intense indoctrination of theopolitical Islamic Sharia Law that has made Islam entrenched in the minds of its adherents. The cultural path of Islamic indoctrination enabled each generation of a conquered people to be more and more devoted to Islam. This mind entrenchment thwarts all non-Islamic political ideologies and thwarts the success of an alternative religion from effectively competing with Islam. Alternative political ideologies and alternative religions are not only dealt with harshly by Muslim clerics, but entrenched minds of the populace will take it upon themselves also to deal harshly with alternative concepts.
The indoctrinated entrenchment of the Muslim mind makes it a group of people that have a love affair with the concept of a global Caliphate. One might tell you that a Caliph would have the same significance as the Roman Catholic Pope. The Pope today is considered by Catholic adherents as the head of the Church on earth. Today that is translated as the spiritual head of the Church. An Islamic Caliph has more than spiritual attributes. In Islam the Caliph represents a successor to Mohammed. A Caliph must carry out the directives of the Quran, Hadith and Sira. These directives go beyond a concept of a spiritual leader keeping the Ummah (Global Community of Muslims) on the spiritual path of Allah as espoused by the prophet Mohammed.
Mohammed made it clear that it is the duty of Muslims to bring Islam to the whole earth. If Islam is rejected then it is the duty of the Muslim conquerors to create conditions that makes the choice of converting to Islam easier. Those conditions include brutal temporal conquest, rejecters of Islam monotheists may choose to retain their faith BUT ONLY if there is an agreement to follow Sharia Law, polytheistic rejecters of Islam do not receive a choice of a dehumanized Sharia life or if the combined rejection of Islam and Sharia is the choice then choice as far as the Quran, Hadith and Sira is concerned is to advocate death. Polytheistic rejecters of Islam were cut no slack by historical Caliphs of spiritual/temporal power. The polytheists’ choice was simpler: Convert to Islam or die.
Islam ran into a snag of convert or die in the conquest of India. The polytheistic Hindu population was so huge even in the 7th and 8th century AD that somebody realized that if all the Hindu rejecters of Islam were slaughtered then there would be nobody left to pay tribute called jizya. Still the slaughter and enslavement of the Indian Subcontinent was an immense genocide of the most heinous brutality of conquest to that date in history. After a jizya system was eventually set up for Hindus, Muslim rulers still felt obligated to please Allah every so often to terminate groups of Hindus’ lives by the will of Allah.
This picture of the past is important in this present day.
I foresee a great danger to Western Civilization with the grassroots Muslim uprisings across the Maghreb and the Middle East. Regardless of what you hear about a comparison of grassroots and democracy having a chance in these Muslim lands elucidating the hope that Western democracy will now finally have its opportunity, do not believe it. Islamic theopolitical doctrine and Western concepts of Freedom and Liberty simple are not compatible.
If these Muslim grassroots uprisings are successful I assure you their Islamic indoctrinated mind will eventually look to the Quran, Hadith and Sira for direction in a united Ummah. What do you think a united Ummah entails? A united Ummah would demand a Caliphate. What has been the objective the Muslim Brotherhood (and offshoots), Wahhabis, Salafists, Deobandis (SA Here) and the like including al Qaeda sympathizers? That objective is a reformist return to the purity of Mohammed and the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs which is the establishment of a Caliphate to once again move to force the issue of converting to Islam.
Check out these thoughts from Andrew C. McCarthy on the grassroots uprisings and the potential of a Caliphate:
The caliphate is an institution of imperial Islamic rule under sharia, Muslim law. Not content with empire, Islam anticipates global hegemony. Indeed, mainstream Islamic ideology declares that such hegemony is inevitable, holding to that belief every bit as sincerely as the End of History crowd holds to its conviction that its values are everyone’s values (and the Muslims are only slightly less willing to brook dissent). For Muslims, the failure of Allah’s creation to submit to the system He has prescribed is a blasphemy that cannot stand.
As I recounted in The Grand Jihad, Churchill’s views were not eccentric. A modern scholar of Islam, Andrew Bostom, recalls the insights of C. Snouck Hurgronje, among the world’s leading scholars of Islam during World War I. In 1916, even in the dark hours of Ottoman defeat, he marveled at the grip the concept of Islamic hegemony continued to hold on the Muslim masses:
It would be a gross mistake to imagine that the idea of universal conquest may be considered as obliterated. . . . The canonists and the vulgar still live in the illusion of the days of Islam’s greatness. The legists continue to ground their appreciation of every actual political condition on the law of the holy war, which war ought never be allowed to cease entirely until all mankind is reduced to the authority of Islam — the heathen by conversion, the adherents of acknowledged Scripture [i.e., Jews and Christians] by submission.
Muslims, of course, understood the implausibility of achieving such dominance in the near term. Still, Hurgronje elaborated, the faithful were “comforted and encouraged by the recollection of the lengthy period of humiliation that the Prophet himself had to suffer before Allah bestowed victory upon his arms.” So even as the caliphate lay in ruins, the conviction that it would rise again remained a “fascinating influence” and “a central point of union against the unfaithful.”
Today, the OIC is Islam’s central point of union against the unfaithful. Those who insist that the 1,400-year-old dividing line between Muslims and non-Muslims is ephemeral, that all we need is a little more understanding of how alike we all really are, would do well to consider the OIC’s Cairo Declaration of 1990. It is the ummah’s “Declaration of Human Rights in Islam,” proclaimed precisely because Islamic states reject the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights promulgated by the United Nations under the guidance of progressives in the United States and the West. That is, the leaders of the Muslim world are adamant that Western principles are not universal.
They are quite right about that. The Cairo Declaration boasts that Allah has made the Islamic ummah “the best community . . . which gave humanity a universal and well-balanced civilization.” It is the “historical role” of the ummah to “civilize” the rest of the world — not the other way around. (The OIC and the Caliphate; Andrew C. McCarthy; National Review; February 26, 2011 4:00 A.M.)
“OIC” is the abbreviation for Organization of the Islamic Conference. It is crystal clear that the OIC is the foundation for the dreams of a global Caliphate. There will be a galvanizing of Islamic instruments beginning to call for the return of Islamic purity. Those instruments can be seen in Hasan al-Banna’s founding of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in the 1920’s and a Muslim Sheik’s embracement of a little known group in the Arabian Peninsula named by the West after Muhammad bin Abd al Wahhab (1701 – 1791). Hence there is term Wahhabism. I understand Wahhabis do not necessarily appreciate the appellation and prefer the term Salafism. The MB and Wahhabism were both puritanical yet they were distinct. Nasser’s crackdown on the MB in the 1960s led much of their group to flee. The Saudi King offered refuge. At this point the MB and Wahhabism seemed to have a mutual infusion. This is important because the MB vision has been a Pan-Arab move toward a Caliphate. Wahhabism was pretty much confined to the Arabian Peninsula focusing on a return to the purist Islam of Mohammed’s days.
The MB-Wahhabi infusion brought a Pan-Arab Caliphate vision to nation that then began to finance the spread of Salafist theopolitical ideology in the Muslim World (dar al-Islam) and to the non-Muslim world (dar al-harb – significantly Western nations).
So let’s recap my thoughts a bit.
There is an inspired grassroots movement among Muslims in the Maghreb and the Middle East to change despotic governments. The West has viewed this grassroots movement as an opportunity for democratic institutions in the Muslim world. The reality is Islamic Culture and Western Cultural democratic institutions are totally incompatible and cannot coexist successfully. Salafi movements of which the Muslim Brotherhood is the best known in the West (there are others) have the objective of a return to purist Islam and a return of the theopolitical Caliphate. The OIC is plugged into the Muslim Brotherhood in a Pan-Muslim objective as well as extending Muslim influence toward non-Muslim lands. The OIC is as much theological as it is political.
All this points to the OIC as being the platform of establishing the Salafist dream of a Caliphate. Multicultural idiots of the West are big on telling their constituents that the West (especially America) is not at war with Islam. Yet Islam across the Sunni-Shia divide has called America the great Satan. This is an indication that Islam is at war with Western principles because America is the embodiment of Western Freedom and Liberty.
Please tell me, someone in the West or America is wise enough to prepare for the inevitable coming conflict between the Secular West (with a Judeo-Christian heritage) and the theopolitical agenda of Islam’s move to a Caliphate?
Links to compare about the course and affect of the OIC: