Islam and the Four Horses of the Apocalypse
This is the favorite horse of the Muslim Brotherhood. By using guile, deceit (taqiyya), and cunning, the M.B. has infiltrated its operatives into positions of influence in government agencies to “destroy Western Civilization from within.”
The careful insinuation of Muslim Brothers into positions from which they can exercise influence on U.S. policy began long before the attacks of 9/11, although their success has accelerated dramatically under the administration of President Barack Obama. The massive Muslim Brotherhood organizational network in the U.S., so patiently built up over the decades since that first Oval Office meeting in 1953, eventually gave it a prominence and (false) reputation of credibility that was unmatched by any other Islamic groups, moderate or otherwise. Using a combination of taqiyya (deceit, dissimulation) and intimidation, the Muslim Brotherhood succeeded not only in making itself the "go-to" authority on all things related to Islam, but in suppressing those who would speak truth about Islam – again, often by persuading the U.S.'s own senior officials to do the job for them: "by their hands".
This picture of Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s Svengali, whispering in her ear says it all.
This is the favorite horse of the Saudi royalty. They use petrodollars to set up Islamic enclaves of power within universities, for hiring P.R. firms, buying politicians, and setting up radical mosques and their madrassas, resulting in isolated communities practicing sharia and advancing Wahhabism:
House of Saud is simply a more established and diplomatic version of ISIS. It shares the extremist Wahhabi theo-fascism, the lack of human rights, intolerance, violent beheadings etc. – but with nicer buildings and roads.
This is the favorite horse of Iranian ayatollahs. Sensing the desperate need of the Obama administration to create the appearance of success of smart diplomacy, the Iranians are leveraging economic and military expansion by threatening chaos (close the Straits of Hormuz, trigger oil price war, wipe Israel off the map...) – the classic example being the phony long drawn out treaty negotiations to upset the balance of power, especially, as mentioned, by threatening to undermine the perception of success in stabilizing the Middle East that the Obama administration desperately wishes to project.
This, of course, is the horse of al-Qaeda, ISIS, and its unseen backers. The threat of radical Islam and its terrorist acts from 9/11 on provide the clout behind the charge of Islamophobia long used by Hillary Clinton in claiming that anti-Muslim rhetoric is dangerously promoting violent jihad. General David Petraeus just got into the act warning of the same consequences in an op-ed in WaPo entitled “Anti-Muslim bigotry aids Islamist terrorists.” Petraeus claims that criticizing Islam just plays into the hands of ISIS and that we mustn’t enrage Muslims, or they might become radicalized. Here is Robert Spencer commenting on the Petraeus op-ed:
So the upshot of Petraeus’ argument is that we must not say things to which Muslims might object, because this will just make more of them become jihadis. His prescription for minimizing the jihad against the West is for the West to practice self-censorship in order to avoid offending Muslims.
In other words, mustn’t offend the bully, or he might hurt you. As Christine Brim in The Federalist points out, this theme is rampant in the MSM:
For example, The Mirror: “ISIS wouldn’t be here if there wasn’t Islamophobia”; The Nation: “ISIS Wants You to Hate Muslims”; The Guardian: “Islamophobia plays right into the hands of Isis”; Salon: “After Brussels, far-right Islamophobes are doing exactly what ISIS wants them to do.”
All four battle horses are ridden with great cunning by both Sunni and Shias, herding the West into the sunset. Meanwhile, U.S. politicians concern themselves with bathroom etiquette.