Skip to main content

By August 27, 2019June 30th, 2020Christians, Deception, Islamism, islamophobia, The Weekly

“…The interconnected nature of social categorizations such as race, class, and gender as they apply to a given individual or group, regarded as creating overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination or disadvantage.”

“The bullet that has hit us Muslims today left the gun centuries ago when we let the clergy decide that knowledge and education were not important.”  ― Nadeem Aslam, The Wasted Vigil

“…Differences between the world’s Muslim communities are less important than what they share-namely, Islamism, sharia, and the dream of caliphate.”  ― Hamed Abdel-Samad, Der islamische Faschismus: Eine Analyse.

I was intrigued by an article I read recently, “Palestinians stand with Standing Rock.” What does the “Palestinian Youth Movement” have to do with the Lakota, Dakota and Nakota native-Indian tribe pipeline issue in North Dakota? While studying about the solidarity that the Palestinian youth were demonstrating with their American Indian brothers and sisters it became vaguely clear that this form of intersectionality is increasingly becoming a working strategy for many who want to make their point and gain popular support for their issue. We’ve seen this same affect among the same-sex marriage advocates who have surreptitiously aligned  themselves with the civil-rights movement.

To be fair, I want to caveat my statement above with a disclaimer. I am not trying to imply that everybody who is victimized racially or according to gender, is indeed not a victim and that they are not entitled to obtain the exact same rights as everyone else. This position is called genuine intersectionality. It was first seriously studied and written about in 1993 by Kimberlé Crenshaw, a professor of law at UCLA and Columbia Law School. She is a leading authority in the areas of civil rights, black feminist legal theory, race, racism and the law. She posits the theory that there are multiple levels by which people are discriminated against, not just black and white or male and female. There are those who suffer at multiple levels for their uniqueness, for instance, black females. I commend Crenshaw for her work and agree that her theory is solid. I would like to demonstrate however, that there are others who take her theory and apply it inappropriately to their particular situations with terrible consequences. This seems less than genuine, to say the least.

There is a growing movement of Islamists in the USA who are using the theory of intersectionality to create great confusion about the true intentions of the Global Islamist Movement. They are aligning themselves with oppressed people movements hoping to become closely associated with the victimized, so when someone uses the word Islamaphobe, they automatically associate the word with the civil rights movement… no questions asked. This is happening on a much more frequent basis than one might care to believe.

One of the tragic results of the intersectionality strategy is that good, peaceful Muslims are caught in the web of this deceit. They find themselves on either one side or the other of the debacle. I would dare say that most Muslims in the USA enjoy good relationships with their non-Muslim neighbors and that there are only a small percentage who embrace this form of deceitful ideology. The problem is that as the deceptions multiply, many non-radicalized Muslims will become angry as they see themselves systematically impacted, even targeted by those who are pushing back against this deception. Eventually they may find themselves on the radicalized side of the fence, not knowing exactly how they got there. One thing is for certain, there is far more than meets the eye concerning this subject.

Just to be clear, I am associating the duplicity of North American Islamists and their manipulation of their well-meaning liberal left compadres, with the intersectionality being attempted on other much more legitimate planes.


Intersectionality is a theoretical framework that assumes that multiple social categories (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status) intersect at the micro level of individual experience to reflect multiple interlocking systems of privilege and oppression at the macro, social-structural level (e.g., racism, sexism, heterosexism). I wanted you to have a documented definition of intersectionality so that you didn’t think I was just making this up. It is an emerging theory that is enjoying an increasing amount of credence and support academically. From my stand point, It is a solid theory. It helps us to understand many forms of oppression, especially at the racism and gender-ism levels. But like many good concepts, humans have a way of taking them beyond their breaking point so that they no longer make good sense.

It seems strange that there is an intimate relationship between Islamism in the West and the “liberal political left.” Just take a look at democratic congress women: Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, both avowed Muslims. They are staunch supporters of groups in the USA such as The Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights and advocacy group. They are also advocates of groups such as the Islamic Society of North America. In 2017, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz submitted legislation to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Cruz (R-TX) earlier had a bill in the Senate which would not only ban the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. but also three of its front groups: Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) USA, Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). Muslim Brotherhood has already been labeled by a number of countries around the world; namely, Bahrain, Egypt, Russia, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Currently, President Trump’s administration is considering applying the title, “terrorist organization” to the Muslim Brotherhood. This will complicate the relationships of many liberal politicians who have cozied up with them and their sister organizations in the past. The reason this feels so odd is that these organizations are close affiliates of movements that regularly suppress women’s rights and the rights of homosexuals. They are against abortion and the right for Israel to exist. It is so odd that their human rights records never even come up in liberal circles. I am not sure what these Muslim groups are telling their liberal colleagues, but they are not discussing the palliative matters which seem very important to the average liberal voter.

Mohamed Badie, the supreme spiritual leader for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt was recently reported as explaining, “The West has allowed gay marriage under the pretext of democracy, which we will never allow in Egypt” (adding that the Brotherhood would also “not allow under the pretext of national unity that a Muslim woman would get married to a Christian man, which violates Islamic law.”) This is a pretty clear stance. Here we have not only the condemnation of homosexuals, but also women and Christians. This is the progenitor of Counsel on American Islamic Relations in the USA. For more on the teachings and endorsements of Muslim Brotherhood by CAIR click here.

It appears that the Islamist movement has done such a good job at identifying themselves with victimized America that nobody goes deeper to the other issues at hand. What they have done is intersectionalized themselves so much that when people hear the words Islamaphobic, they closely associate them with other marginalized and oppressed groups in the USA such as homosexuals, transgender, people of color, and the disabled, all of which are banned by these same Islamist ideologues.

The Islamist global movement and the liberal left make very strange bed-fellows. One of these days a reckoning will happen and the naiveté of the liberal left will find itself in a quandary asking, “What just happened?” They will think they are using a sound theory such as intersectionality, when in all actuality they are just being duped.


Truth is truth. Manipulating many people so that they will proclaim something as true will not make it any closer to the truth than it was when it started. This is how this perfectly viable theoretical approach is being used to deceive the masses. It is so important that we as general consumers of information learn how to ask the right questions when confronted with these kinds of conceptual manipulations.

In writing this edition I was confronted with some of my own preconceptions. I have had numerous discussions with my daughter concerning the matter of “white privilege.” I just couldn’t comprehend how I was a benefactor of white privilege. I grew up in a rather humble lower class family. I have worked hard for many years. I worked my way through college, in both undergraduate and graduate school. Nothing came easy for me. I have been finding it difficult to understand how I was privileged simply because I was white.

I have been deeply disturbed by racism in our country. I came across a study that really made sense to me, published by the Journal to Social Change on Ethnicity and Racism. The article is entitled, “White Immunity: Working Through Some of the Pedagogical Pitfalls of ‘Privilege.’” I had been resisting the label of “white privilege,” because it seemed as if that idea focused on what I had been given as opposed to what a person of color had been given. It didn’t feel like I was given much. The Author, Nolan L. Cabrera, took a little different tact. He looks at historic white supremacy and demonstrates that it was not necessarily what white people got that people of color did not get. It was more what people of color did not get that white people got. The difference seems subtle, but it really helped me to understand it better. He definitely does a more thorough job of explaining it. Click here for a link to the article. His point is  that oppression is based on taking from people something they are due, not just not giving them what they are due. I found myself doing what Cabrera said that white men do. “Instead of engaging issues of racism, White people frequently search in their personal histories for narratives of struggle and then use them to downplay the significance of White privilege.”

If you are interested in understanding this better I encourage you to dig deeper for yourself.  I know I have much more to learn. One thing is clear. To understand something entirely, brings with it a responsibility to change; also to be part of the solution rather than the problem, no matter how innocuous my part may have seemed in the past.


  1. Have realistic expectations. Remember Occam’s razor. “The simplest solution is most likely the right one.” (a simplistic explanation of Occam’s Razor) 
  2. Be a life-long learner. Never stop. 2 Timothy 3:13-14 says, “But evil people and impostors will go from bad to worse as they deceive others and are themselves deceived. But as for you, continue in what you have learned and found to be true, because you know from whom you learned it.” 
  3. Learn to speak up graciously when people are speaking less-than-truth.
  4. Learn how to say, “No.”  Warren Buffet used to say, “He who says no the most wins.” The older I get, the clearer that seems to me.

The follow-up.

Trump and Iran’s president talk of possible meeting to solve nuclear impasse…

I wrote on this young man last year. “Osama bin Laden’s son and heir, Hamza dead, say reports”… We grieve the loss of any life.

The feed-back.

For your comments or questions about any of our digests please feel free to write to me at:


Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity

Volume 3, Issue 1 | 2017

© 2019 • More Than Meets