“But let me be clear.  As a citizen and as a president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country.  And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan in accordance with local laws and ordinances.” [Emphasis mine.]

A day later…

“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making a decision to put a mosque there.” [Emphasis mine.]

Remember how GW was great for comedians because he butchered the english language on a daily basis?  Likewise Obama is great for bloggers because he butchers the presidency and the Constitution on a daily basis.  I mean, I have a full-time job that has nothing to do with blogging or writing about…well, anything; if I were to write every time someone in government did or said something stupid, I’d have to quit my job.

This whole controversy about the mosque – I mean Islamic Center – is absolutely ridiculous.  The people that are falling all over themselves to support the religious freedom and get this – property rights(!) – of the Imam and his supporters are naive.

First off:  BREAKING NEWS…BREAKING NEWS…BREAKING NEWS:  We Are At WAR…shhh…don’t pass it on.

Nine years ago, a couple of yahoos didn’t kinda sorta make a wrong turn and crash into the World Trade Center or the Pentagon; it wasn’t a horrible accident that Flight 93 crashed in a Pennsylvania field.  We were attacked.  It was an act of war.  We were attacked by terrorists acting in accordance with their beliefs and by the ideology of Militant Islam or Totalitarian Islam.  In fact, it was just the boldest act of war perpetrated by Totalitarian Islamists.  They declared war on the West in general and the United States in particular in 1979 with the storming of the U.S. embassy in Iran and the taking of hostages.

I know what you’re thinking:  But I thought we were at war against extremists.  Bush called this the “war on terror.”  That was mistake number one; terrorism is a tactic.  You can’t fight a war against a tactic; you fight an enemy – the enemy that employs the tactic.  That enemy is Totalitarian Islamists.  Period.  Do you want to know why we’re still at this nine years later?  That is reason number one.  How can you defeat an enemy that you can’t even mention aloud without being called insensitive or racist? (Islam isn’t a race, by the way).

Instead, President Bush on numerous occasions bent over backward appeasing our enemy saying, “Islam is peace” and that we are not at war with Islam; we are at war against terrorists.  We are not at war against Islam; but we are at war against a certain percentage of people using Islam as their philosophical base.  Now we have President (America is so sorry for existing) Obama going around appeasing…everyone.  No wonder all the wackos of the world are collectively sticking up their middle finger to us – from Chavez to Kim Jong-il to Ahmadinijad – all of them are saying “What are you going to do about it?  Nothing.”

But I digress…

Anyone who thinks that this “interfaith” community center (which is not a mosque and is for all faiths dammit!) – I mean why would you think that a project headed by an Imam (who is fundraising in the Middle East for said project), labeled an Islamic Center and called the Cordoba Initiative is centered around a mosque or Islam?  Anyone who thinks that this is benign is a Fool.

If it’s benign, why a couple blocks from the site of an attack by members of the Islamic faith who used said faith as motivation and justification for their actions?  If it’s benign, why did the organizers turn down NY Governor Paterson’s proposal to provide a place to build the mosque – I mean Islamic Center – I mean interfaith community pool and rec area elsewhere?  Oh, and why call it (until recently) the Cordoba House or your organization the Cordoba Initiative?

Using the name Cordoba shows an arrogance and a sense of smugness that can only be equalled by the intellectuals on the Left that support the project siting religious freedom and (get this), property rights!  I love how the Left goes out of its way to attack the property rights of businessmen but is touting property rights as one of their arguments for the Islamic center.  Classic.  Just as ridiculous is the Right, who is jumping up and down stating that the Islamic center (or “Park 51″) shouldn’t be built so close to Ground Zero when – at the time of the attack and the weeks and months that followed – they didn’t have the backbone to either identify the enemy or declare war; remember who had control of both the executive and legislative branch at the time.  So republicans – spare me.  You’re as much a loser as the democrats.

So, back to the name behind the curtain…The Cordoba Initiative’s mission statement is interesting as it capitalizes on the West’s naiveté:

“The Cordoba Initiative aims to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade, bringing back the atmosphere of interfaith tolerance and respect that we have longed for since Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in harmony and prosperity eight hundred years ago.”

Cordoba was captured by the Muslims from the Visigoths in 711AD as part of their conquest of the Iberian Peninsula (what is now Spain, Portugal and Gibraltar).  Visigoth rule over the territory was weak and it is believed that some factions welcomed the Muslim army, not putting up much of a fight.  What’s clear is that there were years of bloodshed, internal conflicts and civil war.  The golden age of Islam in Cordoba, where this fairy tale of a “tolerant” society flourished, began with the rule of Abd-al-Rahman III, who came to power in 912AD, proclaiming himself Caliph (“Commander of the Faithful” or leader of the Muslims).  During his tenure, Cordoba flourished, as Abd-alRahman III expanded the reach of Islam, bringing Christian kingdoms to the north (through conquest and diplomacy)  under his control.  Non-Muslims were given the status ahl-al-dhimma: non-Muslim subject of a Sharia Law state.  Here’s where the “tolerance” and everyone living together in “harmony” came in  -under Sharia Law, dhimmis were given three choices:

1. Pay a jizya (tax) and remain second-class citizens under Muslim rule, perhaps being allowed to practice your own religion.  (There are conflicting views on this point.  My guess is that they were allowed if they agreed to pay the tax and live under Muslim rule.)

2. Convert to Islam.

3. Die.

This golden age of “tolerance” was indeed a time of prosperity and the mosque that was built there on the site of the Church of St. Vincent was a symbol of Muslim and Islamic supremacy of the region and was considered the focal point of the capital of the Islamic state of Al-Andalus.  It doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots here.

Now we come to the man of the hour – Imam Rauf.  A quick search on Google will let you find quotes of Imam Rauf stating that “the issue of terrorism is a complex question” or ” The Islamic method of waging war is not to kill civilians.  But it was Christians in World War II who bombed civilians in Dresden and Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets.”  But here’s what I’ll focus on, tying it to Cordoba:

Let’s look at a 24 March interview (translated from Arabic) – “Religious dialogue as customarily understood is a set of events with discussions in large hotels that result in nothing. Religions do not dialogue and dialogue is not present in the attitudes of the followers, regardless of being Muslim or Christian.”

Hmmm…

In a 26 May interview by Sa’da Abdul Maksoud on the website Hadiyul-Islam, Abdul Rauf was asked his views on Sharia Law and the Islamic state.

He responded that, “Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more than just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Sharia that are required to govern.”  He continued to say that “Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.”

Isn’t that fascinating.  Let me spell it out for you:  Sharia can be established in countries that are democratic so long as the government is Sharia compliant and that Man’s laws are not above Sharia Law.

Okay, time to tie it all together.  Imam Rauf – the moderate that has worked on behalf of the State Department, has preached religious tolerance in English and something different in his native tongue – wrote the book What’s Right With Islam is What’s Right With America.

In it, he talks about how Islam and America can coexist.  Isn’t that nice.  What a great sentiment (no sarcasm; I wish it were true).

One problem:  Before it was published in English it went by another name.  In non-English speaking countries it was published under the title, A Call to Prayer Under the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11.

Now, you may be thinking to yourself, “what does dawa mean?”  In Islam, da’wa literally means “call” or “invitation.”  It can be equated to “mission” work.  The purpose of da’wa is the implementation and spread of Sharia; it has been called by some has “stealth jihad” because it has the same purpose as jihad but accomplishes it through non-violent means (or subterfuge).  In fact, Yusuf Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood  has said that Islam will “conquer America” and “conquer Europe” through da’wa.

Qaradawi has urged Muslims to “fight the American military if we can, and if we cannot, we should fight the U.S. economically and politically.”  In 2004 he issued a fatwa calling for Muslims to kill Americans in Iraq.  He is for the destruction of Israel:  ”Oh Allah, take your enemies, the enemies of Islam. Oh Allah, take the Jews, the treacherous aggressors.”  How about this gem:  ”Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.”

So what does this have to do with the good and noble Imam Rauf?  First, in 2001 he referred to Qaradawi as “probably the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today.”  Second, remember that Qaradawi is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and a spiritual leader of the movement.

In a 1991 memorandum to the Muslim Brotherhood leadership in Egypt, Mohamed Akram (a leader in the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood) stated 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.”

Included in this memorandum was a list of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends,” which included the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT).

A funny thing happened on the way to the Islamic Center:  A “special non-commerical edition” of the book written by Imam Rauf was produced in cooperation with Rauf by – guess who?  ISNA and IIIT.

Yeah, I’m sure it doesn’t mean anything…Cordoba being the capital of the Moorish culture and the epicenter of Islam during its time; Imam Rauf’s curious positions on Sharia and da’wa; the connections between Rauf, Qaradawi and the Muslim Brotherhood…I’m sure it’s nothing.

The best part of all this is that they want this thing built in time to open on the 10th anniversary of their greatest victory – I mean the terrorist attacks of September 11th.  No, no symbolism there…Imagine a mosque or Islamic center being opened on the 10th anniversary of September 11th a couple blocks from Ground Zero while the site of the attack still looks like this:

Yeah, no symbolism there…

There are more than 100 mosques in NYC.  If they truly just want to build it for the reasons they say, do it somewhere else; somehow, I don’t think they will want to…

I could write about the absolute ridiculousness of the health care reform bill but I don’t really know where to begin.  I could (and probably will at some point) write about the economic sh*t that’s been going on but really – what else can I say about it that I haven’t already?  Or I could write about the infringement on free speech that is being mounted by Congress and the President in the name of the “public good.”

But I’ve decided to start back up on one of my favorite topics: the environmentalist movement.  This is of course gaining steam (to include the President’s coming attempt at another cap and trade scheme) because of the horrible BP oil fiasco/disaster.

The environmentalists continue with the same old scare tactics they’ve been spouting for generations and I am so sick of it.

If you don’t stop living like a human being from this side of 1900, the world will end in a fiery hell…in a deep freeze…we’ll run out of fuel…we’ll all starve to death…the oceans will rise up and flood our cities…the rain will turn to acid…dogs and cats will start living together…

Do you think I’m making this up?

No.  I’m not unfortunately.

Now, I’ve written about the movement before and what they’re after, particularly here and here; but I’d like to focus on their tactics and just how silly most of their claims are and their, how can I put this nicely…insanity.  Yes, that’s the right term.  Insanity.

Before I shoot down the “movement,” let me say that there is an increasing number of people who have good intentions and who are reasonable people trying to live “green” to conserve energy, waste, etc.  They recycle when they can so as to not unduly add to landfills; when possible, they buy organic foods that perhaps don’t have traces of hormones in them; they furnish their new kitchen with recycled materials that look just as nice but were made from pre-used products; they are perhaps vegetarians because they feel that if they don’t have to kill an animal to eat well and be healthy, they would rather not; they may use compact fluorescent lightbulbs because it saves money, conserves energy and no longer contains mercury; or they use cloth diapers or tankless water heaters to conserve water.  But in the end, they still think being human isn’t a crime against “mother nature.”  I know because I do or have done many of those things.

I’m not talking about reasonable people here; I’m talking about the base (to use a political term).  Unfortunately, just like with political parties, the base is where the philosophy and ideas live and because of the (false) guilt the base puts on those that just want to do the right thing (the moderates), the lunatic fringe of the environmentalist movement keeps getting a pass from the moderates.  Environmentalism is so much like a religion it’s scary.

No matter how wrong they’ve been with their claims over the years, environmentalists continue to get a pass because of the “higher than thou” attitude they have and the guilt they put on those that are vulnerable to their arguments.

In one form or another, they’ve been going at this for a long time:

“Geologists Think the Earth May Be Frozen Up Again” – New York Times, 1895

“Disappearing Glaciers…deteriorating slowly, with a persistency that means their final annihilation.” – Los Angeles Times, 1902

“Professor Schmidt Warns Us of an Impending Ice Age” – New York Times, 1912

“Most geologists think that the Earth is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer.” – Los Angeles Times, 1929

“If these things be true, it is evident, therefore that we must be just teetering on an ice age.” – The Atlantic Magazine, 1932

“…winters are getting milder, summers drier.  Glaciers are receding, deserts growing.” – U.S. News and World Report, 1954

“If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000″ – Paul Ehrlich, author of the book The Population Bomb where he states that hundreds of millions would die each year in the 1970′s due to starvation from overpopulation.  He stated that the only way to divert the mass deaths would be population control “by compulsion if voluntary methods fail.” - 1969 [Emphasis Mine]

“Global cooling for the last forty years” – Time Magazine, 1974

“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue.  Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing – in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” – Former Sen. Timothy Wirth, 1990 [No Emphasis Needed]

“Gilles Langis, senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service, reported in the spring of 2008 that arctic ice is in places 10 to 20 cm [4 to 8 inches] thicker than the previous year.” – National Post, 2008

Let us not forget the 1962 book Silent Spring by Rachel Carson that ushered in the modern era of environmentalism.  The book’s main target was the insecticide DDT, which was used beginning in WWII primarily due to its effectiveness at killing mosquitos and other insects in order to control the spread of typhus and malaria.  During the time of the book’s writing, it was common practice (from what I’ve read) to douse ecosystems with the insecticide, which could also kill some fish if used in large quantities and was linked (but never proven) to the thinning of some avian egg shells.

Instead of raising the issue and stating that we should look at the dosage or do more testing on how it effects ecosystems when used in large quantities, Carson paints an apocalyptic picture where people get cancer from the chemical (which has never been proven) and there are no birds left to sing (hence the title).  She states that controlling disease-carrying mosquitos was an arrogant act of “tampering” with nature.

DDT is not Kool-Aid; but used in moderate, appropriate doses, it could be a life-saving, welcome sight in places like Africa and South America.  Before the needless and irresponsible scare tactics by Carson and the “movement,” DDT eradicated malaria in the U.S. and sharply dropped cases in tropical countries such as Venezuela, which had 8 million cases of malaria in 1943 and 800 in 1958.  According to the World Health Organization, DDT prevented the death of 50 to 100 million lives.  Yet, ten years after the book’s publishing, the EPA was formed and the first chemical it banned was DDT.  Most other countries (to include many of the Third World countries that needed it most) sadly followed the U.S.’s lead.  The World Health Organization now estimates that there are 300 to 500 million cases of malaria each year…and 1 million (needless) deaths each year.  Sickening.

I’ve stated before that what the base of environmentalism is after is not necessarily clean water or clean air but the dismantling of our technological and industrial civilization.  Watch the video again of the tree (nature) worshipers who revere the tree like a religious icon and scoff at technology and industrial progress because it infringes on “mother nature” in her natural, pristine state.

It’s a very simple connection to make; there’s no conspiracy theory here.  Environmentalists want us to stop using oil, coal and hydro-electric (from dams) power because of their supposed harm to the environment and our dependency (in terms of oil) on other countries, particularly those in the Middle East.  It’s easy to look at the oil spill and say we shouldn’t be drilling for oil; it’s stupid but it’s easy.  Of course it’s a disaster and of course BP should be vilified but the story doesn’t end there.  With the amount of oil available within U.S. control, we should never have to rely on other countries…in a free market, innovation would take off and if the market warranted a change, the innovative and entrepreneurial spirit would prevail; but you cannot force innovation and that is what President Obama (for the sake of his totem) is doing.

The government has been funding research into renewable (non-fossil) fuels since the ’70s and yet only about two (2) percent of the world’s fuel comes from solar and wind sources; you know, the sources that are going to power our “green” economy.  Ever ask why BP would be drilling so far offshore in mile deep water where it is much more difficult to work?  No?  Because the government prohibited drilling any closer.  Didn’t hear about that, did you?

When the government kills our ability to have industrial scale energy, hampering our ability to deal with much of anything; when they tax carbon emissions (read: industry and production) out of existence before viable alternatives have been developed through the only viable way possible – the free market where innovation is rewarded – will they still find a way to blame capitalism for all the world’s ills?  How do they think the life expectancy has risen so dramatically over the last 150 years?  Magic?  Why is it higher in industrial nations?  Coincidence?  Luck?  You see, a carbon cap should be called what it really is: an energy cap.

So when they achieve their goal and cut the amount of industrial scale energy we can produce, who will be allowed to drive?  Only people going to work?  Will there be a national moratorium on joy-riding?  Will there only be enough energy for hospitals in cities of 500,000 people or more?  Will there be rules governing when air-conitioning or heat may be used?

Some of these yahoos even oppose the use of solar and wind power because of the “footprints” they would require on nature to produce any kind of energy.  Can you say tree worship?  It would seem that the best result for these people would be a new garden of eden (except without even the two occupants in the story); just the garden…