Hi Zim,
Oops, you're 100% correct, terrorism's in the toolkit of those seeking caliphate. And my post was light on explanation.
The thing I should have said is the MB has conned people into believing they are non-violent, when they are, in fact a terrorist group that does invoke terrorism when they feel it's appropriate.
I'd say it's likely the MB is pushing non-violence, using deceit, because Obama was putting them in power across the Middle East. That's out of the frying pan into the fire.
The MB also keeps a low profile on terrorism because their civilizational jihad requires that they infiltrate the US and be positioned for takeover. Their latest initiative is moving into positions of power in elected positions, from local through federal. I feel bad for Minnesota and Michigan, in particular.
So they play nice, put aside their extremism for the moment, until they get to the right point in their jihadist revolution. Then they'll use terrorism.
ISIS called on jihadists to attack the US on 1/1/2019. Al Qaeda has done that before, but often nothing happens. Hopefully that's the case this time around.
On Brennan, I said for the caliphate because he's part of the red/green axis, likely MB if he's Muslim, who are pushing Islam as the one-world religion. But because of the above-mentioned deception to enable their Trojan Horse strategy on the MB seeking non-violent takeover, he would be for the caliphate, but against terrorism, because that is the takeover strategy the MB, et. al., are pursuing.
But you are correct, terrorism's their tactic, as shown in Egypt, but it's non-violent here during this political jihad phase, for the moment. It wouldn't rule out their being involved in the terrorism and terrorism preparation that we've seen to date, that which continues on in spite of the MSM keeping a lid on it.
| 
