The term “red-green” or “Islamo-leftism” refers to the forms of cooperation between the radical Western left and the organizations of the Islamic movement in the West, organizations which in turn control the mosques and the Islamic mainstream in Western countries. In practice, then, it is an alliance between the Western left and fundamentalist Islam, which presents itself as the representative of Islam without any objection from the Muslim majority.
The term seems to have appeared in numerous writings at the beginning of the twenty-first century, first in France, perhaps, then in Britain, but it has recently stirred controversy in America after the victory of Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York, followed by the victory of Abdul El-Sayed as the Democratic Party’s nominee for the United States Senate from Michigan.
But the mutual admiration and leftist support for the Islamic movement is older than that. Some date it to the beginning of Khomeini’s Islamic revolution in Iran in 1979, when the Western left, especially the French left, hailed the Islamic revolution as a triumph over imperialism and modernity. Leading figures of the French left such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Michel Foucault praised Khomeini’s revolution; Foucault described it as “a new political spirituality, an alternative to Western modernity.” Khomeini, for his part, used leftist terminology about justice and historical grievances in his Islamic sermons.¹
In 1994 the British writer Chris Harman published a study titled “The Prophet and the Proletariat: Islamic Fundamentalism, Class and Revolution,”² later published as a book in 1999, in which he laid the foundations for cooperation between the Islamic movement and the left in the West against a common enemy, imperialism and the state, without either side adopting the other’s ideology: “Where the Islamists are in opposition, our rule should be ‘with the Islamists sometimes, with the state never.’”
In 2002 the French sociologist Pierre-André Taguieff coined the term Islamo-gauchisme in his book The New Judeophobia to describe a current within the far left that opposes Israeli policy toward the Palestinians and enters into alliances with Islamic currents. The term was used widely in 2003 by supporters of the law banning religious symbols in French schools; the right-wing leader Marine Le Pen then employed it in 2012 to describe what she considered a suspect alliance between the Islamic movement and the French left; and it acquired broader official governmental use between 2020 and 2021 amid the controversy over “Islamic separatism.”
In an interview with the British Times, former Prime Minister Tony Blair said that “antisemitism is not new, but it has undergone a recent and malignant development after the Gaza war within progressive left circles, because of the alliance with the Islamic movement,” and he called for this evil alliance to be brought to an end.³
The Islamic movement in the West understands that its relationship with the left is a utilitarian one, tied to achieving shared objectives against a shared enemy. It is an alliance against everything Western, Christian, Jewish, white, or capitalist. It is an alliance of demolition, not construction: the two sides have no shared conception of the society they want to build together, but they agree on the enemy that must be united against, defeated, and broken.
One might put it this way. Just as Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security adviser under Carter, saw in Islam and the Islamic movements a force of violence, hatred, resentment, and rebellion, an organized and funded force, and used them against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan to defeat it there and hasten its collapse, so the Western left likewise saw in Islam and its movements a force of violence, resentment, hatred, and funded organization that could bring down the West from within. And the Islamic movement, in turn, found in the Western left a lever that would carry it into Western societies from the inside more quickly, and a partner in demolishing the West and replacing it with Islam.
Indeed, the scholar Daniel Pipes argues in his essay “The Western Mind of Radical Islam”⁴ that the Islamic movement is characterized by a duality: outward hostility to the West combined with deep influence by Western concepts in practice, and the adoption of revolutionary organizational methods resembling those of modern totalitarian movements such as the left and fascism, rather than the mechanisms of historical Islamic rule. This is true, though the practice of fascism and religious totalitarianism is itself a feature of Islamic rule throughout history. The Islamic movement’s imitation of the left and of the fascists certainly exists, but its imitation of Western Jewish organizations in organization, fundraising, and lobbying has become strikingly evident among Islamic organizations in the West. Even the term “Islamophobia” itself was coined in imitation of “antisemitism,” despite the vast difference between the two. And let us not forget that Islam itself stole a great deal of Jewish teaching and narrative without ever acknowledging it.
In France they did not stop at describing an alliance between the left and Islam. They found that many in the Islamic movement had adopted a shared Islamic-leftist agenda, and that many leftists had adopted Islamic discourse, meaning not merely a red-green alliance but a green-red interpenetration. This is why the French sociologist Pierre-André Taguieff in 2002 called them “the Islamic left in the West.” The Islamic left in the West is a merging of leftist Muslims and Islamized leftists, as if they had become a single new evil bloc challenging the West.
President Emmanuel Macron described the Islamic left as one that “minimizes Islamic violence and focuses on Islamophobia.” The former French interior minister Gérald Darmanin said that “the Islamic left is complicit in terrorist acts in France.” The former minister of higher education Frédérique Vidal said that “the Islamic left is gnawing at the whole of French society.” And the former education minister Jean-Michel Blanquer described the Islamic left as leading to catastrophes.
Shared Features
Both the left and the Islamic movement are totalitarian, exclusionary, supremacist ideologies.
Both believe in violence to achieve their goals, and both have practiced it.
Both possess the capacity for organization, mobilization, and mass assembly.
Both work to demonize their opponents.
Both fail at governing and at the agenda of progress, and succeed far better in the role of opposition and in cultivating popular resentment under the pretext of resisting injustice and calling for justice.
Both live inside a victim mentality, complaining of grievances and the absence of justice.
This is why so many radical leftist Muslims converted to the Islamic movement when it rose. The most prominent in Egypt was perhaps Sayyid Qutb, the theorist of Islamic terrorism in his famous book Milestones, who before that was a radical leftist and wrote two books of Islamic leftism, The Battle Between Islam and Capitalism and Social Justice in Islam, before turning fully to Islamic discourse. Ali Shariati in Iran likewise moved from leftist to Islamic theorist. In Egypt, too, Muhammad Imara and Mustafa Mahmoud were both Marxists who became Islamic thinkers; and Abdel Wahab El-Messiri moved from the left to Islam, specialized in anti-Zionism, and wrote a complete eight-volume encyclopedia on Zionism. The list of leftists who converted to the Islamic movement inside the Islamic countries themselves goes on.
Shared Goals and Interests
First: the shared anti-state agenda. Reducing the power of the police and the army, to the point of demanding the abolition of the police; defending illegal immigration; cutting prison funding; opposing imperialism and what they call Western settler-colonialism; working to demolish the capitalist system; demonizing the wealthy, “eat the rich”, which leads in the end to a policy of impoverishing everyone; noise and mass assembly; attempting to destroy the founding principles of the United States; demonizing the Founding Fathers; and ultimately working to demolish Western civilization from within.
Second: achieving the Islamic movement’s goals through this alliance, such as: criminalizing “Islamophobia” and treating any criticism of Islam as a crime; supporting Palestine; delegitimizing Israel; justifying violence as a response to grievances; working to turn Islam into a race; conflating Islam and Muslims and treating them as one thing; helping secure recognition of Muslims’ cultural and legal particularity, including sharia courts, sharia police, Islamic education, and sharia towns, despite their contradiction with Western constitutions and civilizational values; normalizing acceptance of the intifada and the slogan “Palestine from the river to the sea,” despite its representing an existential threat to Israel; participating in demonstrations for Islam and for Palestine; boycotting and isolating Israel internationally; spreading Judeophobia and conspiracy theories about Jews; and opposing Zionism.
It is important to understand that this alliance has a specific plan regarding Israel on which it works step by step: changing the political discourse about Israel in America and the West, then changing actual behavior toward Israel, including cutting aid, halting arms supplies, and economic boycott, then raising the level of hatred toward Israel and toward Jews, culminating in transforming Israel into an enemy rather than a strategic ally.
This cooperation appeared clearly during the Gaza war. According to the Crowd Counting Consortium at Harvard’s Kennedy School, 12,400 pro-Gaza protests were recorded across the United States from October 2023 to June 2024, and the same institute documented 3,700 protest-days at more than 500 American academic institutions.⁵
In Europe, Middle East Monitor reported more than 42,000 pro-Gaza demonstrations across the continent during the war.⁶
The Islamic movement’s closeness in the West to the left and to the woke movement protects it from criticism as inciters of terrorism. Indeed, it lends legitimacy to Islamic jihad inside Western countries, to the point of normalization, the acceptance of jihad as something ordinary.
The French newspaper Le Figaro published an extended report on the unholy alliance between wokeism and the Islamic movement, noting that working with the progressive left and the woke is the Islamic movement’s most promising tactic, while it retains its old plan of using every tool available to Islamize the West.⁷
How Does the Islamic Movement Justify This Alliance?
How does a Muslim support homosexual rights, when in his sharia it is a crime punishable by death and by being thrown from mountaintops and high buildings? How does he ally with communists, atheists, and the irreligious, who are infidels in his creed? How does he approve of gender transition for children and minors, despite Islam’s criminalization of it?
Islamic jurisprudence, the Islamic heritage, and the teachings of Islam are full of solutions that proceed from lying and evasion.
There is the jurisprudence of priorities, which proceeds from the tactic of postponing disputes in order to achieve the more important goals. In application, they see ideological and religious disagreements as to be deferred until tamkin,empowerment, is achieved, followed by domination and complete Islamization.
There is pragmatism, which they believe the Prophet of Islam practiced when he was weak: he made peace with his enemies and then pounced on them. He wrote tolerant portions of the Quran while in Mecca, then abrogated them, annulled their validity, once he possessed military power in Medina, where he wrote the Quranic verses that call for hatred, excommunication, violence, and jihad.
There is taqiyya, lawful deception: concealing what you believe and displaying its opposite in order to deceive others. Taqiyya is a Quranic injunction.
There is lawful lying in support of Islam, according to the hadiths of Muhammad.
There is the juristic maxim that necessity permits the forbidden, far more dangerous than Machiavelli’s dictum that the end justifies the means.
And there is the saying of Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad’s cousin and the founder of the Shia school, that the Quran “bears many faces”, meaning that one may choose from it according to the situation. The late Egyptian academic Hassan Hanafi explained this by saying that the Quran is like a supermarket in which you find everything: you find milk and you find rat poison. When you are weak, offer people the milk; when you are strong, offer them the poison, that is, hatred, violence, killing, and jihad.
The Islamic movement in the West knows all this well and uses every one of these tricks. But in the end they hate the West and Western civilization; they hate Judaism and Christianity; and they believe in Muhammad’s promise to them of the conquest of Rome, that is, the fall of Western civilization and its replacement by Islam.
The Rise and Election of Zohran Mamdani
Perhaps the most prominent example of this alliance’s sabotage of the West is the rise of Zohran Mamdani, a dangerous turning point in the history of New York. A communist governing the capital of world capitalism; a Muslim who relied financially and organizationally in his campaign on Islamic organizations, governing the city that Islamic terrorism struck roughly a quarter century ago. Mamdani combines the agenda of the radical left with the Islamic view of the West. He is the first mayor in New York’s history to announce his religion after his victory, that he is a Muslim, declaring, “I am proud of my faith, and I will serve by what Islam taught me!!!” On the day of his victory he went to celebrate with his followers at a mosque in Astoria, New York, telling them: “I am from you and for you.” This is why many considered the day of his victory a black day in the city’s history. The Big Apple has fallen into the hands of a green-red alliance.
The Islamic activist Linda Sarsour said at a CAIR conference on September 20, 2025, that Islamic money and Islamic Super PACs played a pivotal role in funding Mamdani and his political rise. The press recently reported her appointment as an adviser to Mamdani, and Al Jazeera interviewed her days ago, presenting her as his adviser. It should be noted that Sarsour has demanded that Mamdani dismantle the NYPD unit responsible for monitoring terrorist threats.
CAIR was named in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing investigations as an unindicted co-conspirator. The CAIR organizations, registered as 501(c)(3)s, established CAIR Action as a 501(c)(4) in order to have the right to electoral funding through affiliated Super PACs such as the Unity and Justice Fund, founder of a Political Action Committee. This fund supported Mamdani with $120,000, and by their own account, more than 80% of its funding came from Muslims. There is another CAIR-linked fund, Unity Lab PAC, which also funded Mamdani’s campaign.
The Rise of Abdul El-Sayed
The victory of Abdul El-Sayed (Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed) as the Democratic nominee for the Senate from Michigan was another shock, greater than Mamdani’s in New York, because El-Sayed comes from the very heart of the Islamic movement in America. He and his wife, while students at the University of Michigan, were prominent leading members of the Muslim Students Association (MSA), an organization founded by the Muslim Brotherhood in America as one of several major Islamic organizations, and they met each other through their involvement in it. El-Sayed’s father-in-law, Jukaku Tayeb, is one of the founders of ISNA, another of the large organizations founded by the Muslim Brotherhood, and was also president of the Michigan chapter of CAIR.
It is not only El-Sayed, his father-in-law, and his wife who are classified as activists in Islamic organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, but his sister and mother as well. His biological mother, Faten Fathi al-Koumi, worked for the Islamic American Relief Agency (IARA), an organization accused of financial cooperation with Osama bin Laden, Hamas, and the Taliban, and designated a terrorist organization by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2004.
His sister, Eman Abdelhadi, posted on X: “I hope the whole world rises up against the American empire.” She described Independence Day as a celebration of stolen land and Thanksgiving as a celebration of genocide and propaganda for American settler-colonialism, and she endorsed the October 7 attack on Israel. His close friend, who runs media promotion for his campaign, the Islamic extremist Hasan Piker, said that America deserved what happened to it on September 11.
I can say that the anti-American, anti-Western, and anti-Israel statements that have come out of El-Sayed and the members of his family are only a small fraction of what they believe. What they conceal is far more dangerous.
Strangely, El-Sayed criticizes political money in elections yet relies on Islamic political money: his father-in-law donated more than $200,000 to his campaign, and members of the Islamic organization CAIR donated $115,000.
Zohran Mamdani, Abdul El-Sayed, and other Muslim candidates rely in their campaigns on Islamic funding, Muslim volunteers, and decisive Muslim votes. They want to implement a leftist-Islamic agenda, and they accuse anyone who criticizes this of “Islamophobia”, El-Sayed even called President Trump’s criticism of him Islamophobia. More dangerously, he called criticism of sharia the product of white-supremacist racism, and his mendacity reached the point of comparing brutal Islamic sharia to Catholic canon law.
Arabic-language platforms have been filled with defenses of Mamdani and El-Sayed, one Arabic podcast in America even asked, “What’s wrong with El-Sayed if he really is a Brotherhood member?”, despite the Muslim Brotherhood’s designation as a terrorist group by the White House. And a Muslim American university professor of Egyptian origin argued that “we do not want to apply our Islam in America to Americans, but to ourselves, we Muslims”, meaning he wants an Islamic ghetto applying sharia and Islamic values that contradict the American Constitution and laws and the values of Western societies, and that stand against the very concept of citizenship in the modern state!!!
El-Sayed’s position on Israel does not differ from Mamdani’s: he describes Israel as an evil state that has committed genocide and practices apartheid; he rejects Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state; he wants to cut American aid to it and end all American military support; he wants Netanyahu tried as a war criminal; and he was a prominent member of the anti-Israel “Uncommitted” movement.
In short, anyone who analyzes the whole of his discourse concludes clearly that he is an antisemite and a hater of Jews, a fundamental feature of the Islamic movement’s discourse, beliefs, and behavior.
Add to this, of course, his radical leftist agenda: a return to the chaos of illegal immigration through abolishing ICE; nationalizing the ownership of artificial-intelligence companies; government rent control; free universal health insurance extended even to illegal immigrants; canceling medical debt; paying reparations for what he calls historical injustices; imposing a new 7% wealth tax; and, of course, portraying Muslims as victims of Islamophobia.
It is worth mentioning that El-Sayed said he stayed silent on condemning Khamenei’s killing of thousands of peaceful Iranians so as not to lose the Muslims of Michigan!!
But the question remains: does Abdul El-Sayed belong to the Muslim Brotherhood?
From my study of the history of the Brotherhood and of Islamic movements throughout Islamic history, and from my experience over decades of televised debates with senior leaders of the Brotherhood and the various Islamic groups, including Mohamed Morsi, whom I debated on Al Jazeera in November 2001 about the September attacks on America, and who later became president of Egypt, I can say with confidence that Abdul El-Sayed is a fundamentalist who belongs to the Brotherhood’s school of thought, carries its agenda and its goals of Islamization, and practices its methods of deception and misdirection. Beyond that, El-Sayed was an organizational member of a body the Muslim Brotherhood helped found, the Muslim Students Association (MSA); he cooperated with CAIR and spoke at its conferences; he received $115,000 for his campaign from 41 individuals, most of whom held or hold positions at CAIR; and, of course, his father-in-law’s relationship with CAIR and ISNA is documented, organizations founded by the Muslim Brotherhood or by elements supportive of Hamas.
Anyone who has studied the history of Islamic movements knows well that most Islamic organizations around the world, if not all of them, were founded by Muslim Brothers, Saudi Wahhabis, or Muslim fundamentalists; put more plainly, all of these organizations were founded by the organized Islamic movement. Most Islamic organizations in America and the West, and most mosques as well, particularly in the period 1960–2000, were founded through cooperation between the Brotherhood’s organization and Saudi Wahhabi money.¹⁰
As the proverb goes: if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. Everything that has come from Abdul El-Sayed and his family confirms that they belong to the extremist organizations of the Islamic movement and have close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood through the organizations the Brotherhood helped found in America.
It Began with Obama
We can date the rise of the red-green alliance in America to the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency, which combined leftism with support for Islamic presence and Islamic ascent. Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy, wrote an article and a book on the Muslim Brotherhood in the Obama administration,¹¹ naming many of the Islamic figures promoted during Obama’s tenure, such as Mohamed Magid, who had been president of ISNA and to whom Obama gave an important post in the Department of Homeland Security, along with others: Dalia Mogahed, Rashad Hussain, Huma Abedin, Farah Pandith, Kareem Shora, Mohamed Elibiary, Louay Safi, Kifah Mustapha, Azizah al-Hibri, Salam al-Marayati, Mazen Asbahi, Nawar Shora, Arif Alikhan, Eboo Patel...
Abdul El-Sayed plans to follow in Obama’s footsteps: from senator from Michigan to president of the United States.¹² The rise of Mamdani and Abdul, a quarter century after September 11, is far more dangerous to America than September 11 itself.¹³
Convergence of Goals with Certain Wings of the Right
A new term has recently emerged: “red-green-brown.” It means that certain Islamic organizations’ goals have converged with those of certain wings of the American right (convergence, not alliance). Tucker Carlson, for example, leads a fraudulent discourse in defense of Islam, Muslims, and the Islamic movements; he repeats the falsified Islamic historical narrative about Palestine and is hostile to Israel. The substance of Carlson’s discourse is an attempt to create a Christian right-wing current in the United States hostile to Israel in service of the Islamic narrative, and to produce a rupture between Christianity and Judaism in service of Islamic goals. This is why one of the Islamic movement’s leaders in New Jersey, Osama Abuirshaid, executive director of American Muslims for Palestine, admitted at a public event on January 16, 2026, that they had succeeded in splitting the MAGA movement from within; I believe he was referring to what Tucker Carlson and his current are doing. There are persistent reports about Carlson’s relationship with Qatar, matters that require security investigation more than they constitute research material.
It should be noted that the red-green alliance in America selects specific cities in which to extend its influence through candidacies for political office: Diverse cities with a mixed immigrant population, cities with a low proportion of whites and of Christian conservatives, cities with a high proportion of Muslims, cities controlled by the Democratic Party, cities with economic and social problems, cities that have become repellent to the middle class and to business people, cities with a notable presence of the radical left.
The Hijacking of the Democratic Party
For decades, the radical left or radical liberal current has controlled the schools, the universities, most of the American media, Hollywood, and then Silicon Valley, to the point that social media platforms, during the Biden years, practiced strict censorship of the American right and Christian conservatives’ access to their platforms, while opening the field to the woke agenda and the red-green alliance.
The problem is the acceleration of the so-called progressive current within the Democratic Party, which seeks to hijack the party entirely. This current calls itself the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), but in reality it differs from the social democrats or social democracy that existed in Europe and America. This current within the Democratic Party is in fact democratic communism: they want to use the mechanisms of elections and democracy to spread a communist agenda, and let us not forget that Hitler saw himself as a socialist.
What has helped this current rise in America, as Fareed Zakaria says, is the Democratic Party’s accelerating shift leftward over the past three decades: Obama was further left than Clinton, and Biden implemented a bigger leftist agenda than Obama. Zakaria observes that those who support the leftist agenda within the Democratic Party are not the poor and the workers but university graduates, which is exactly what happened with El-Sayed in Michigan. More dangerous, as Zakaria says, is the Democratic Party’s adoption of the woke agenda and its predicament regarding crime, immigration, and the border.¹⁴
The Islamic movement in America sees in the rise of this radical left within the Democratic Party its own opportunity for political ascent, which is why it has allied with it. The Islamic activist Linda Sarsour was a principal volunteer in Senator Bernie Sanders’s campaign, and the victories of Mamdani and El-Sayed are the fruit of this alliance.
Essential Observations on the Green-Red Alliance
This alliance holds that achieving justice requires bringing down the system, then bringing down the entire colonial West. From its perspective, the collapse of Israel is the prelude to the collapse of Israel’s makers and backers in America and the West, which is why the current is so intensely hostile to Israel.
This alliance takes no interest in criticizing tyranny, the degraded status of women, the absence of human rights, or the persecution of homosexuals in Islamic countries; it focuses exclusively on the West.
The persecution of Christians in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia receives no attention whatsoever from this alliance. Although the left is fierce in its criticism of Christianity in the West, it never comes near criticizing Islam, even though Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world today, and Islam is the foremost persecutor of Christians worldwide.
The Islamic side has imposed on this alliance the conflation of Islam and Muslims. However hard Western thought and Western courts try to separate the two, the Muslim party insists on conflating them; the Islamic organizations insist that any criticism of Islam is an assault on Muslims, and insist that they represent Islam and Muslims together, despite being unelected.
The left tries to adapt any philosophical position to find a justification for allying with the Islamic movement, from the Iranian revolution to Islamophobia to anti-Zionism. The left has also used intersectionality theory to place all forms of grievance in a single category, and used this intersectionality to classify Muslims not merely as a religion but as a racial and ethnic minority.
Red-green discourse is pale and evasive toward Iran, while it is hostile to the moderate Islamic states allied with America.
This alliance works, in cooperation with Islamic states that sponsor terrorism, to control the institutions of the United Nations and harness them to condemn Israel exclusively.
The Islamic movement also learned from September 11 that undermining America and the West will not succeed through violence so much as through infiltrating institutions and sabotaging them from within, via a policy of alliances, immigration, and procreation.
The radical Western left treats the Islamic movement as a persecuted minority and overlooks its violent ideology, hostile to every value of the West’s liberal democracies.
Islamic funding of many American universities has entrenched the alliance between the left and the Islamic movement on campus, with Islamic control of Middle East departments and the imposition of their academic vision upon them.
The green-red alliance also blends hostility to America and the West with hatred of Judaism and Christianity and with the theory of anti-white-man animus. It is, in short, a poisonous hatred of everything Western, Christian, Jewish, white, or capitalist.
The Western left has also helped the Islamic movement to organize, to reach the masses, and to change its hardline political language into an evasive, deceptive one, accelerating its entry into the political mainstream of the West.
Some have warned of the danger that this current has hijacked the causes of Black Americans and folded them into its agenda under its theory of intersectionality.
The red-green current converges with Iran in portraying America as the leader of imperialism and therefore, for both, “the Great Satan,” as Khomeini called it.
Most Muslims who emigrated from Islamic countries to the West carried the creed of antisemitism with them, and through their alliance with the Western left they raised the level of antisemitism on the left and thence throughout the West, but this time under the heading of the Palestinian cause. The word “Palestine” has become the key to antisemitism in the West today, and a source for inflaming that hatred.
The crime of the Western left is what it leaves unsaid about Islam and Muslims regarding violence, Islamization, sharia, the condition of women, apostasy laws, and Islamic terrorism, to the point that a German leftist activist said, after a vehicle-ramming attack on citizens in Germany, “I wish the perpetrator had been white and not a Muslim!!”
The left also overlooks the cities that have become semi-closed to all but Muslims. In Europe there are the so-called no-go zones; in France, 751 areas have been counted as “sensitive urban zones,” the product of an alliance between the Islamic movement, the left, and criminal gangs. In America, Dearborn, Michigan is more an extension of southern Lebanon than an American city, and when you walk through Paterson, New Jersey you feel you are in Ramallah rather than America.
The Future of the Alliance and the Future of the West
There are different theories about the future of this alliance.
The pessimistic view holds that this alliance will lead to the sabotage of the West from within, followed by its fall. Hans-Georg Maaßen, former president of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency (the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution), said in a television interview on November 24, 2023: “In the end the Europeans will surrender to Islam, because Europeans are not prepared to confront the Islamization that is gradually destroying their culture.”
In his last interview, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said: “Europe made a grave mistake in that it created within itself peoples who reject its standards, its values, and the foundations of its constitutions, through mass immigration.” Kissinger deplored that in Berlin, eighty years after the Holocaust, people chant “death to the Jews” in the streets without being held accountable.
The optimistic view holds that the West will wake up; that the right will govern and bring under control all these negative phenomena hostile to the Western spirit and its values; that they will work to limit Islamic immigration and weaken this leftist-Islamic alliance.
The dangerous view holds that the alliance of the left, the Islamic movement, and the anarchists will seize power in America and most European countries, especially through the ballot box, as happened with Hitler; that the reaction will be a hardline right seeking to save the West; and that this will lead to political conflicts, then mutual violence, then civil wars, and perhaps divisions and collapses.
I hope a reformist awakening occurs in America within the Democratic Party before this dangerous scenario unfolds.
Notes and References
The Iranian left’s enthusiasm for the alliance with the Islamic movement in 1979, which led to the fall of the Shah, ended with Khomeini’s persecution of the leftists: he killed many of them and imprisoned most. Likewise the Egyptian left’s alliance with the Islamic movement in the so-called Arab Spring — but after Mubarak’s fall, the Brotherhood monopolized power and excluded the left. In the end, the Islamic movement regards these alliances as temporary and self-interested, solely for achieving its larger goals.
https://www.aljazeera.net/politics/2026/3/29/ (Tony Blair: “We must end the sinful alliance”)
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/publications/protests-united-states-palestine-and-israel-2023-2024
I believe CAIR should have been shut down after the Holy Land Foundation case in 2008, and I have no doubt that CAIR is a terrorist organization. I was not surprised by the announcement of CAIR’s executive director, Nihad Awad, of his elation at what happened on October 7 — that is only natural. I personally debated him on the Saudi channel Al Arabiya in 2007, during the imprisonment of Sami Al-Arian, accused of terrorism in America and later deported; in that encounter Nihad Awad defended Sami Al-Arian vigorously. Anyone who listens to Sami Al-Arian since he left America does not doubt for a moment that he advocates terrorism; he called October 7 a great deed.
The Islamic movement everywhere shares Hasan Piker’s view that America deserved what happened to it on September 11 — indeed, they wish for America’s ruin. I debated an American Islamic figure named Mohammad al-Asi in the first Arabic-language debate on the subject, two hours long, titled “Does America Deserve What Happened to It?” on Al Jazeera on September 18, 2001. For two hours Mohammad al-Asi insisted that America deserved what befell it, despite being an American living in it. After the debate, I believe the Islamic organizations advised him to keep silent, for I have heard nothing of him since.
On May 18, 1962, the Saudi King Faisal founded the Muslim World League, gathering on its board Said Ramadan, the son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna; Abul A’la Maududi, founder of Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan; and Amin al-Husseini, principal founder of the Islamic movement in Palestine and friend of Hassan al-Banna. Al-Banna and al-Husseini had agreed that there was no solution to the Palestinian question except through Islam, and Hamas was later the natural outgrowth of their cooperation. The Muslim World League was the beginning of the Islamic movement’s global founding, uniting Saudi Wahhabism with Egyptian Brotherhood thought, Deobandism from the Indian subcontinent, and the Palestinian Islamic movement. Most organizations in America and the West between 1962 and 2000 were the product of this alliance: the Brotherhood took on the organizational and activist work, and Saudi Wahhabism took on the funding. The most important American organizations founded by the Brotherhood after this alliance are MSA, ICNA, ISNA, and later CAIR. On Saudi Arabia’s role in supporting global terrorism, see Dore Gold’s 2003 study Hatred’s Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism.
https://www.amazon.com/Muslim-Brotherhood-Obama-Administration-ebook/dp/B009HIP79K
CAIR announced decades ago that its goal is a Muslim in the White House as president of America. CAIR does not merely aim for an American president to come from a minority of no more than 1.5% of the population; it plans for a member of the Islamic movement to reach that office — and support for Abdul El-Sayed may well serve that dream.
New York City did not face the savagery of Islamic terrorism only on September 11; the Islamic strikes on the city continued. Immediately after September 11, Muslims attempted to build a mosque near the site of the fallen towers, dubbed the Ground Zero Mosque — an Islamic message saying: we brought down the symbols of New York’s and America’s economic power and raised a mosque in their place. Were it not for the efforts of the activist Pamela Geller, that mosque would have been built. Then, after the Islamic movement failed to bomb Times Square, its plan became to gather for prayer in that famous square, as part of a plan to Islamize the great squares of the West by praying in them, so that in their belief they become Islamic land and Islamic waqf. Then the Islamic efforts were crowned by Mamdani’s victory as mayor of the city. And most recently, an American convert to Islam named Jessica Bowie attempted to bomb the New York State Capitol and was arrested on August 20, 2026.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1571754584354482
Every one of these leftist morons needs to be taught the history of Iran, Indonesia, Sudan, Yemen, and soon the UK. All examples of the Red-Green alliance overthrowing a country and then the Greens killing all the Reds.
This is a very important piece of writing. It’s a wake up call that needs to find a wider American audience. Where is the national news source/platform that’s so desperately needed? Oprah should be talking about this.