Re: The Islamic States of America: A Comment

Submitted by Max B (Australia), Feb 7, 2007 at 23:03

Daniel says of the Muslim Brotherhood, that:

"Even if the Muslim Brotherhood is not specifically associated with violence in the United States (as it has been in other countries, including Egypt and Syria), it is deeply hostile to the United States and must be treated as one vital component of the enemy's assault force."

Is that fair? I don't agree with Sharia principles. I think they're anti-democratic. But if the MB, by its policies and peaceful strategies can become a political force within the US and cultivate a willing political base, isn't it Daniel's response to that perceived threat, rather than the perceived threat itself, that poses the greatest risk to democracy?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Daniel Pipes replies:

There is a good argument to be made that anti-democratic forces should not be allowed to participate in the democratic process. See Germany, 1933.