Quote:
Mohammed sculpture at top US Supreme Court draws mild rebuke from US Muslim leaders
Agence France Presse ^ | February 7, 2006

Friday night, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, and Malik Shabazz, leader of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam, were on FBN’s “Money Rocks” with Eric Bolling. Other panelists included lib talk-show host Mark Levine and attorney Joey Jackson. Usually the left & right on this panel are evently split, but even Levine & Jackson can’t stand the rhetoric from Shabazz.

I want to know what this fool from the New Black Panther Party is smoking. Among the idiotic crap he spouts, he claims the following:

• Blacks are not offended by the Ground Zero Mosque
• There is no proof Muslims were involved in 9/11
• Our Founding Fathers were Shriners, who studied the Koran in secret
• We need to learn more about Islam and its contributions to the world, and that’s what this Mosque will allow
• The U.S. Government was behind 9/11
• Usama bin Laden has never been charged with any crimes, so that makes him innocent (by Malik’s reasoning)
• If we would only open our minds and try to understand why Muslims hate America, we would see the error of our ways
  

To See Video http://www.msunderestimated.com/2010/09/new-black-panther-leader-malik-shabazz-vs-pamela-geller-on-money-rocks-the-ground-zero-mosque-video/

An Ecofascist Crescent Moon Near Ground Zero

By Mark Musser*

Ibrahim Abdul-Matin, a U.S. environmental policy consultant and one of Feisal Abdul Rauf’s spokesmen for the new mosque being contemplated near Ground Zero, surprisingly announced in August that it will be the first “green mosque” in the United States. Not only will this structure comply with very strict LEED green standards (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), but it will also become an interfaith cultural center that will emphasize “the intricate relationships between Islamic teachings and environmentalism.” As such, this new mosque will not only be built green, but it will also become an environmental Islamic community center. In fact, the project has been renamed “Park 51” to reflect this green emphasis.

In the Daily Beast, Ibrahim Abdul-Matin went on to say that “Islam calls upon people to be stewards of the earth and to treat all things in nature as sacred. The new name invokes images of trees, creeks, and children playing. Parks are for the public. Parks are fun. Parks are green. And parks are not controversial.”

Contrary to such an innocuous suggestion is that injecting environmentalism into Islam is hardly uncontroversial. In reality, it only multiplies the dangers by stuffing more flammable material into a rich concoction of explosive anti-western civilization sentiments, all in the name of green moderation. Both Islam and environmentalism loathe western financial institutions, all of which was best represented by the Twin Towers the bastion of international free trade before they came crashing down in flames on 9/11. Thus to suggest that a green mosque is uncontroversial is naïve at best, and in reality, completely disingenuous. New York’s Ground Zero area might be better served by a typical mosque with plenty of prayer rugs on hand for its worshipers. That environmental regulations have already played a large role in stalling the rebuilding of Ground Zero is not something should go unnoticed, especially now with a green mosque going up nearby.

Blending environmentalism with Islam can only serve to strengthen the totalitarian ideals of the green movement. With modern environmentalism’s fixation on ecological holism that strictly views people and their economic activities as expendable, unbalanced, unsustainable and cancerous this will only be greatly bolstered and strengthened by the totalitarian will of Allah. If modern western man is way out of line with regard to the environmental movement, just think what it will mean when Allah enters into the equation.

In fact, sounding very much like one of Prince Charles’ eco-fascist paupers, Ibrahim Abdul-Matin believes that the Earth is one giant mosque, and that everything in the universe is an interconnected balance of continuity, which of course, western materialism under American capitalism, has violated with their greedy, consumption habits. With such a passionate environmental stance, the Twin Towers can only be a symbol of American greed and arrogance over Allah’s natural mosque. Even more troublesome is that Ibrahim Abdul-Matin claims that he has three sides to him, “the social justice part of me, the environmental part of me, and then the Muslim part into one sort of tightly woven expression of what’s happening today.” Tight indeed. Could it be that the destruction of the Twin Towers was evidence of Allah’s environmental social justice upon the stronghold of international finance and trade, which was allegedly fueling the rape and pillage of the planet’s natural resources?

In an interview in February 2010, Ibrahim Abdul-Matin even went so far to say that “science and religion mix in Islam, so we’re not having a debate about whether climate change is real or not.” How convenient. With Allah and Al Gore running the science department together, inconvenient scientific facts can much more readily be stymied and denied by two jack boots rather than just one. Under Allah and Greenpeace, debates about what is truly scientific would become redundant and unnecessary. This, in turn, would save the climate research programs from embarrassing fiascos like Climate-gate.

In fact, Ibrahim Abdul-Matin views science and religion in a unified, faith-based, symbiotic relationship. He has also written a book, due to be released in October called, “Green Deen: What Islam Teaches About Protecting the Environment.” According to Ibrahim Abdul-Matin, “deen” means “creed.” On his webpage, which promotes his book, he believes that “living a green deen means treating the world with justice. The first step is to recognize that humans can have a negative impact on the Earth. The second step is to reduce and stop that negative impact.”

“Science,” environmentalism, earth first justice, and Allah are all wrapped up into one tight wholeness for the sustainable future of mankind right at the doorstep of Ground Zero.

Like a foreboding omen is that Ibrahim Abdul-Matin even touts Malcom X as an early environmentalist. He grew up listening to his tapes, and he strongly pointed out in a speech at the Schomburg Center in Harlem in February of 2010, that Macolm X lived an “off-grid lifestyle.” This, of course, is the environmental pipe dream for all a sustainable, future paradise, off the grid of modern energy, that the green economy is all poised to take advantage of. Malcom X is thus another good example for environmentalists to follow. He grew his own vegetables and was dead serious about blacks being healthy and nationalistically self-sufficient in their own tight bio region where the corruption of international Jewry and American capitalism is to be avoided. One of the professors who attended the event noted that “it was good to hear a variety of perspectives on Brother Malcolm’s life. Ibrahim Abdul-Matin’s connection between Malcolm’s activism and environmentally conscious upbringing was an interesting addition to Malcolm’s sphere of influence.”

While it is true that Malcolm X later softened his racism after he became a converted Sunni Muslim right before his previous pals from the Nation of Islam assassinated him, black nationalism was still a critical pillar of his beliefs. Furthermore, his softening on racism was largely due to the fact that he noticed that many Muslims and Africans were not black. In other words, he became color blind only as it related to Islam. Otherwise, much like Hitler’s white Aryan racism before him, which was rooted in Ernst Haeckel’s Social Darwinian ecology, Malcolm X never disavowed his belief that the blacks were the cradle of civilization and should also be segregated from the whites to keep the races pure. That the Nazis had also adopted a green camouflage for their own anti-Semitic and anti-American Capitalistic views has never received the scrutiny that it most assuredly deserves.

Last, but not least, is that Ibrahim Abdul-Matin also worked for the organization “Green for All,” and thus also has connections to Van Jones, not to mention Al Gore. “Green for All” is a national organization that promotes the so-called up and coming clean and green economy, which is allegedly designed to help people come out of poverty through assistance from other like minded groups, business leaders, and government subsidies. Here is seen the combination of environmental social justice with the redistribution of wealth where “Green for All” means that environmental greenbacks and green jobs will be available for all, i.e., the poor. Here, environmentalism is being harnessed to provide yet another excuse to redistribute wealth.

Perhaps worst of all is that it was Van Jones who infamously once said that “the white polluters and the white environmentalists are essentially steering poison into the people-of-color communities, because they don’t have a racial justice frame.” Here, Van Jones, a self-proclaimed communist and a fairly recent convert to the environmental cause, mixes his black nationalism/communism with ecological views that, shockingly enough, can be traced directly back to the socialistic labyrinth of Nazi Germany where race and nature, blood and soil, ethnicity and environmentalism was the rage of the 1930’s and 40’s.

While some environmental historians have recently been forced to write books on the connections between National Socialism and the early German greens to help prevent their pet movement from being smeared with Nazi blood, a green mosque being pondered at Ground Zero under the shining light of Allah’s Anti-Semitic and Anti-American crescent moon, only serves to demonstrate the clear and present danger of eco-fascism in power and the great threats that the United States is currently facing as the western sun sets on the horizon.

*Mark Musser is the author of “Nazi Oaks: The Green Sacrificial Offering of the Judeo-Christian Worldview in the Holocaust.”

Muslim Brotherhood Declares War on America; Will America Notice?

• Posted by Asst Natl Dir Mellie on October 12, 2010 at 9:28am in Faith in the Public Square
• Send Message View Discussions
Thursday, October 7, 2010


By Barry Rubin

This is one of those obscure Middle East events of the utmost
significance that is ignored by the Western mass media, especially because they happen in Arabic, not English; by Western governments, because they don't fit their policies; and by experts, because they don't mesh with their preconceptions.

This explicit formulation of a revolutionary program makes it a game-changer. It should be read by every Western decisionmaker and have a direct effect on policy because this development may affect people’s lives in every Western country.

OK, cnough of a build-up? Well, it isn’t exaggerated. So don’t think the next sentence is an anticlimax. Here we go: The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood has endorsed (Arabic) (English translation by MEMRI) anti-American Jihad and pretty much every element in the al-Qaida ideology book. Since the Brotherhood is the main opposition force in Egypt and Jordan as well as the most powerful group, both politically
and religiously, in the Muslim communities of Europe and North America this is pretty serious stuff.

By the way, no one can argue that he merely represents old, tired policies of the distant past because the supreme guide who said these things was elected just a few months ago. His position reflects current thinking.

Does that mean the Egyptian, Jordanian, and all the camouflaged Muslim Brotherhood fronts in Europe and North America are going to launch terrorism as one of their affiliates, Hamas, has long done? No.

But it does mean that something awaited for decades has happened: the Muslim Brotherhood is ready to move from the era of propaganda and base-building to one of revolutionary action. At least, its hundreds of thousands of followers are being given that signal.

Some of them will engage in terrorist violence as individuals or forming splinter groups; others will redouble their efforts to seize control of their countries and turn them into safe areas for terrorists and instruments for war on the West.

When the extreme and arguably marginal British Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary says that Islam will conquer the West and raise its flag over the White House, that can be treated as wild rhetoric. His remark is getting lots of attention because he said it in English in an interview
with CNN. Who cares what he says?

But when the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood says the same thing in Arabic, that's a program for action, a call to arms for hundreds of thousands of people, and a national security threat to every Western country.

The Brotherhood is the group that often dominates Muslim communities in the West and runs mosques. Its cadre control front groups that are often recognized by Western democratic governments and media as authoritative. Government officials in many countries meet with these groups, ask them to be advisers for counter-terrorist strategies and national policies, and even fund them.

President Barack Obama speaks about a conflict limited solely to al-Qaida. And if one is talking about the current military battle in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Yemen that point makes sense. Yet there is a far bigger and wider battle going on in which revolutionary Islamists seek to overthrow their own rulers and wage long-term, full-scale struggle
against the West. If it doesn't involve violence right now it will when they get strong enough or gain power.

More than three years ago, I warned about this development, in a detailed analysis explaining, “The banner of the Islamist revolution in the Middle East today has largely passed to groups sponsored by or derived from the Muslim
Brotherhood.” I pointed out the differences—especially of tactical importance—between the Brotherhood groups and al-Qaida or Hizballah, but also discussed the similarities. This exposure so upset the Brotherhood that it put a detailed response on its official website to deny my analysis.

Yet now here is the Brotherhood’s new supreme guide, Muhammad Badi giving a sermon entitled, “How Islam Confronts the Oppression and Tyranny,” translated by MEMRI.
Incidentally, everything Badi says is in tune with the stances and holy books of normative Islam. It is not the only possible interpretation but it is a completely legitimate interpretation. Every Muslim knows, even if he disagrees with the Brotherhood’s position, that this isn’t
heresy or hijacking or misunderstanding.

Finally, this is the group that many in the West, some in high
positions, are urging to be engaged as a negotiating partner because it is supposedly moderate.

What does he say?

--Arab and Muslim regimes are betraying their people by failing to confront the Muslim’s real enemies, not only Israel but also the United
States. Waging jihad against both of these infidels is a commandment of Allah that cannot be disregarded. Governments have no right to stop their people from fighting the United States. “They are disregarding Allah's commandment to wage jihad for His sake with [their] money and [their] lives, so that Allah's word will reign supreme” over all non-Muslims.

--All Muslims are required by their religion to fight: "They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life." Notice that jihad here is not interpreted as so often happens by liars, apologists, and the merely ignorant in the West as
spiritual striving.

The clear meaning is one of armed struggle.

--The United States is immoral, doomed to collapse, and "experiencing the beginning of its end and is heading towards its demise."

--Palestinians should back Hamas in overthrowing the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and unite in waging war on Israel.

Incidentally, what Melanie Philips has written on this issue fits perfectly here:

--Rational calculations of the kind applied by the West to its
adversaries, mirror-imaging, assuming that Muslims won't act in a revolutionary and even suicidal manner want a better future for their children, etc., do not apply to the Islamist movement:

"Allah said: 'The hosts will all be routed and will turn and flee [Koran 54:45].' This verse is a promise to the believers that they shall defeat their enemies, and [that the enemies] shall withdraw. The Companions of the Prophet received this Koranic promise in Mecca, when they were weak... and a little more than nine years [later], Allah fulfilled his promise in the Battle of Badr....Can we compare that to what happened in Gaza?....

Allah is the best of schemers, and that though
Him you shall triumph. Islam is capable of confronting oppression and tyranny, and that the outcome of the confrontation has been predetermined by Allah."

This says: It doesn’t matter how long the battle goes on, how many die, how much destruction is unleashed, how low your living standards fall, how unfavorable the odds appear to be, none of that is important or should deter you.

In the real world, of course, the Islamists are unlikely to win over the long run of, say, 50 or100 years. But those views do mean that these 50 or 100 years are going to be filled with instability and bloodshed.

Equally, Badi’s claims do not mean all Muslims must agree, much less actively take up arms. They can have a different interpretation, simply disregard the arguments, and be too intimidated or materialistic or opportunistic to agree or to act.

Yet hundreds of thousands will do so
and millions will cheer them on. And by the same token, neither the radical nor the passive will assist in moving toward more moderation or peace or compromise.

Well, will the problem go away if people in the West condemn
“Islamophobia” or make concessions or apologize or produce a just peace?
No.

His words provide some important points for people in the West to consider:

"Resistance is the only solution…. The United States cannot impose an agreement upon the Palestinians, despite all the means and power at its
disposal. [Today] it is withdrawing from Iraq, defeated and wounded, and it is also on the verge of withdrawing from Afghanistan. [All] its warplanes, missiles and modern military technology were defeated by the will of the peoples, as long as [these peoples] insisted on resistance –
and the wars of Lebanon and Gaza, which were not so long ago, [are proof of this].”

First, the more the likelihood that U.S. policy might obtains a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, the more anti-American violent activity will be sparked among the Islamists and their very large base of support, the more Iran and Syria will sponsor terrorism. Desirable as peace or even progress toward peace might be, the West should have no illusions about those things providing regional
stability, and they will produce more instability.

Second, U.S. actions of apology, concessions, and withdrawals—whether or not any of the specific steps are useful or desirable—they are interpreted by the Islamists and by many in the Middle East as signs of weakness which should spark further aggression and violence. There are hundreds of examples of this reaction every month. Here's a leading
moderate Saudi journalist explaining how many Iraqis and other Arabs are viewing the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq means
that it is turning the country over to Iran. Wrong but an accurate show of that very common Middle East way of thinking.

Indeed, this last factor explains the Brotherhood's timing. Note that he says nothing about fighting Egypt's government, which won't hesitate to throw the Brotherhood leaders into prison and even to torture them.

Still, the coming leadership transition in Egypt, with the death or retirement of President Husni Mubarak, seems to offer opportunities.

The new harder line coincides with the Brotherhood's announcement that it will run candidates in the November elections, another sign of its confidence and increased militancy. The Brotherhood is not a legal
group but the government lets members run in other parties. Its candidates won about 20 percent of the vote in the last elections, especially impressive given the regime's repressive measures. If the Brotherhood intends to defy Egyptian law now there will be confrontations, mass arrests, and perhaps violence.

Most important of all, however, Badi and many others sense weakness on the part of the West, especially the U.S. leaders, and victory for the Islamists.

Even former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is warning
about such things. Blair comes from the British Labour Party. Many conservatives understand these issues. But the West can never respond successfully without a broader consensus about the nature of the threat and the need for a strong response. Where are Blair's counterparts in the left-of-center forces in North America, the kind of people who played such a critical role in confronting and defeating the previous wave of anti-democratic extremism, Communism?

This new hardline signals

1. Increased internal conflict in Egypt, the start of a decade-long struggle for power in the Arabic-speaking world's most important country.

2. The likelihood that more Brotherhood supporters in the West will turn to violence and fund-raising for terrorism.

3. The true nature of the radical indoctrination--preparing people for future extremism and terrorism--in the mosques and groups they control.

4. A probable upturn in anti-American terrorist attacks in the Middle East and Europe.

In August 1996, al-Qaida declared war on America, the West, Christians and Jews. Nobody important paid much attention to this. Almost exactly five years later, September 11 forced them to notice. Let it be said that in September 2010 the Muslim Brotherhood, a group with one hundred
times more activists than al-Qaida, issued its declaration of war. What remains is the history of the future.

Update: A well-informed friend in Egypt just said that while he's been expecting this move by the Brotherhood for some time that I have been the only one who's noticed it outside the country. This is the kind ofservice I'm trying to give my readers.

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan).

The website of the GLORIA Center is at
http://www.gloria-center.org and of his blog, Rubin Reports,
http://www.rubinreports.blogspot.com.
ShareThis

Links to this post
RubinReports: Muslim Brotherhood Declares War on America; Will ...

RubinReports: Muslim Brotherhood Declares War on America; Will America Notice?
Posted by Tom Carew
at
October 8, 2010 9:04 PM

BARRY RUBIN: WHEN WILL THE US EVEN BEGIN TO NOTICE THAT THE MUSLIM ...



Think of the jihad in terms of the pirates that plied their murderous trade on the high seas during the 16 and 17th centuries. They all were pirates, loosely affiliated, with roughly the very same goals (self enrichment at others ...
Posted by KEGS59@gmail.com (KGS) at
October 8, 2010 8:29 PM

Video: Tony Blair, Washington Institute speech, on defeating the ...

Original Home Page – And another very early post from this blog; Current Latest Page; All Contents of Site – Index; Sign the Ban Blair-Baiting petition here. Comment at end. 8th October 2010. Click to Buy Tony
Blair's 'A Journey' ... Posted by keeptonyblairforpm
at
October 8, 2010 5:20 PM

The Muslim Brotherhood is ready; is the West?

Paul. In August 1996, al-Qaeda declared war on America, the West, Christians, and Jews. Almost nobody paid attention. Last month, says
Barry Rubin, the Muslim Brotherhood, a group with one hundred times more
activists than al-Qaeda, ...
Posted by Paul
at
October 8, 2010 6:15 AM


http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2010/10/muslim-brotherhood-declare...