Sydney asked me to expand the discussion of 'non-violent' radical Islam, which I think is the true threat that the West faces.
'Non-violent' Islamist organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood are called that because they say they do not support terrorism. However, like terrorists, they want to establish a global Caliphate ruled by sharia law. What does that mean in practice? Replacing Western law, with its guaranteed rights and principle of equality before the law, with a legal system that discriminates between Muslims and non-Muslims; between men and women; and promotes holy war, or jihad, as a basic principle. Or, as an internal memo of the Muslim Brotherhood puts it:
"The [Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."
I think many 'non-violent' Islamists reject violence primarily because it's ineffective. After all, if you go around murdering people, someone's bound to notice. Coming in under the radar is much smarter. The goal, however, is the same.
These groups may say they oppose terrorism, but like 'moderate' Imam Rauf, the fellow promoting the mega-mosque project, they usually refuse to condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations. Like Rauf, they'll also tell you that we brought 9/11 on ourselves. So it's not too surprising when the FBI, as it did in the Holy Land Foundation trial, discovers secret links between 'non-violent' organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood and jihad. Or when you find out that Rauf is linked to one of the groups that organized the Turkish flotilla.
Nor does 'non-violent' really mean 'non-violent.' If you believe that, under sharia, the punishment for leaving Islam (apostasy) is death, that's a pretty violent way of dealing with people who want to leave the faith. Adding, as one imam did after he threatened to kill Ayaan Hirsi Ali, that 'of course, that doesn't apply here,' shouldn't fool anyone. Or look at the travails of Rifqa Bary, the young girl in Ohio who converted to Christianity.
Ditto with 'honor killings' or wife-beating, considered OK if they keep troublesome women in line. If any 'non-violent' Islamist group has denounced the 'moderate' Muslim leader in Buffalo who beheaded his uppity wife, I haven't heard of it.
If you want to learn more, there are many excellent websites (see links on the right). Jihad Watch and Pajamas Media are great for giving you an idea of what's going on; The Investigative Project follows, among other things, court cases brought against 'non-violent' Islamist as well as terrorist groups. The American Islamic Forum for Democracy blog shows what real 'moderate' Islam could look like.
If you want a Truly Brilliant Analysis of what's going on in Europe, where this process is more advanced, see my article of several months ago.