The war waged in the West by Islamic extremists is won in the institutions before it’s won on the battlefield. Their method has a modern name: entryism. It involves embedding an ideology in campuses, charities and political parties so the battle is already half over before most people notice.
In the West, they keep choosing the same target: Jews.
Canada is a prime example of how this method plays out. A 2026 Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) analysis explored how Muslim Brotherhood-aligned networks are embedded in Canadian society. Even seemingly benign organizations like charities appear, in certain cases, to be a Trojan horse for Islamism. For example, the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC) has come under scrutiny after a Canada Revenue Agency audit indicated MAC had links to the Muslim Brotherhood.
On the electoral side, the Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council (CMPAC) and allied groups ran a 2025 “Vote Palestine” campaign that secured endorsements from hundreds of candidates across four parties. On campus, the ISGAP report notes, Qatar-linked funding of Canadian universities has surged.
The battlefield dynamics are not only about charities, grants and foreign influence. It’s about a civic climate in which Jewish presence is treated as a primary problem.
These Brotherhood-aligned groups are increasingly difficult to scrutinize because any inquiry is quickly branded Islamophobia. Those rules do not protect moderate Muslims. In reality, they protect their political rivals—the Islamist networks that claim to speak in their name. Canadians who name the networks are called “bigots.” Jewish safety becomes a footnote to someone else’s “Islamophobia.”
That is how entryism works. Criticism of the network is rewritten as bigotry.
Joe Adam George, the Middle East Forum’s Canada researcher on Islamist threats, interviewed for this article, elaborated on the ISGAP file’s findings: “Islamist groups in Canada have repeatedly been caught exploiting their charitable status to covertly pursue activities beyond their mandate. Yet they often evade accountability by accusing investigators and security agencies of anti-Muslim bias, and, worse, continue to receive government patronage despite past misconduct.”
This “nonprofit” cover, George said, is key to the broader Islamist political strategy: Governments fund them to deliver “Islamophobia” and “anti-Palestinian racism” training in schools; in return, politicians aligned with their agenda are assured of the influential Muslim vote to “help them win or stay in power.”
That is the preview. George warns, “The United States must be concerned about Canada’s blind backing of these Islamist groups.”
The United States already has similar Islamist architecture under different names: the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) in civic life; the Muslim Students Association (MSA) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) on university campuses; and a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) movement that treats “Palestine” as the moral test and Israel as the problem.
Islamism’s method has a modern name: entryism
The script for this network is a leaked 1991 Muslim Brotherhood strategic memo. It is a plan to capture American institutions and use coalitions to reshape public opinion in the spirit of Antonio Gramsci, the 20th-century Italian communist. His “war of position” concept aimed to embed a worldview in the schools, media and political parties that manufacture everyday assumptions without firing a shot on a battlefield.
The West observed his strategy in real time following Oct. 7, 2023, when floods of protests treated Jews and Jewish sites as targets. The effect was to strip Jews of their safety and free speech. “Entryism” is the campaign’s name, “Palestine” is its banner, and “institutional capture” is its strategy.
The Canadian strategy has found its way onto the American election ballot. Recent Democratic Party primaries and the last New York City mayoral election show how far an Islamist-progressive package can travel under social democratic branding.
For example, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has floated using his position to illegally arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he sets foot in Manhattan to attend the annual U.N. General Assembly. On his first day in office, Mamdani focused on redefining antisemitism to limit its definition’s scope and lifted restrictions on boycotting Israel. Even before taking office, he refused to sign a measure condemning the Holocaust. Two years after his father spoke at the first SJP conference, Mamdani founded an SJP chapter at Bowdoin College in Maine to further marginalize Jews.
These are not isolated campaign quirks. They are the Canadian pattern arriving in American politics. In accordance with the plan, Islamist networks treat Jewish safety as something to rewrite.
Michigan senatorial nominee Dr. Abdul El-Sayed ran on cutting military aid to Israel. After a truck-ramming attack at Temple Israel in Michigan, El-Sayed condemned the violence, then added that “hurt people hurt people,” a justification that turns Jewish victims into an afterthought. Reporting has tied his campaign to CAIR.
If this Islamist strategy can win primaries and Gracie Mansion, then American values are no longer winning. If entryism continues to choose Jews as its ultimate target, the test for the United States is whether this discrimination is named early enough to be stopped.
Fighting political entryism is only half the battle. The other half is what can and cannot be said. A leaked Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) memo told staff, “Do not refer to the Sept. 11 attacks as terrorist attacks.” A 2023 guidance likewise told journalists not to call Hamas terrorists “terrorists.” Following a backlash, the CBC adjusted the 9/11 rule. The lesson, however, was clear: Entryism wins when institutions police vocabulary. The test for the United States is whether Jewish Americans remain speakers in the public realm or are ostracized by the new vocabulary.
Melanie Bennet, a Juno News investigative reporter, told the authors of this article that Islamist groups are among the “sacred cows in the culture of Canada’s political correctness.” In May 2026, she was in the hall at the MAC convention in Toronto, where a youth session produced a “Jew-free” word cloud, and speakers talked of political infiltration. Her reporting was attacked as a smear, but she has kept publishing.
“Islamophobia,” Bennet said, “is blasphemy through the back door.” Any criticism of Islamic groups, however radical their ties, is now, in her account, impossible in Canada without being “branded as an Islamophobe.”
She added, “In Canada, we do not have that free-speech culture like the United States does.”
Muslim Brotherhood entryism risks gradually pushing America over the deep end, where it may begin sinking to the depths of Brotherhood-infiltrated Canadian society. To swim, not sink, America needs to begin rooting out Brotherhood influence from its institutions.
