Assembléia Legislativa do Rio de Janeiro concede Medalha Tiradentes a Olavo de Carvalho. Aqui.

quarta-feira, 2 de fevereiro de 2011

Obama’s Brotherhood Moment

FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE

Posted by Robert Spencer on Feb 2nd, 2011 and filed under Daily MailerFrontPage. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.


Robert Spencer is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of ten books, eleven monographs, and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including the New York Times Bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran (Regnery), and he is coauthor (with Pamela Geller) of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America (Simon and Schuster).



Game over: Barack Obama has endorsed a role for the Muslim Brotherhood in a new, post-Mubarak government for Egypt.
This should come as no surprise. Obama has behaved consistently all along, from his refusal to back the protesters in Iran, who were demonstrating against an Islamic Republic, to his backing of these protesters in Egypt, to whom he has just given a green light to establish a government that, given numerous historical precedents, will likely be the precursor to an Islamic Republic.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Monday that a post-Mubarak Egyptian ruling group “has to include a whole host of important nonsecular actors that give Egypt a strong chance to continue to be [a] stable and reliable partner.”
Robert Malley, an Obama adviser and Mideast negotiator for Bill Clinton, explained that Obama’s expression of willingness to see the Brotherhood as part of a ruling coalition in Egypt was a “pretty clear sign that the U.S. isn’t going to advocate a narrow form of pluralism, but a broad one.”
In The Post-American Presidency, Pamela Geller and I profile Robert Malley, Samantha Power, and other fierce foes of Israel in the Obama Administration. In light of the information we reveal in the book, the Administration’s stance toward the Muslim Brotherhood comes as no surprise. But the ideology and goals of the Muslim Brotherhood will come as a surprise to most Americans, especially now that the mainstream media is retailing numerous soothing falsehoods about the group. Thus they warrant a closer look.
Contrary to claims that it is a moderate organization, the Muslim Brotherhood is actually the prototypical Islamic supremacist, pro-Sharia group of the modernage. Founded by Hasan al-Banna in Egypt in 1928, the Brotherhood emerged as a response to colonialism and Western influence in the Islamic world. Al-Banna wrote that “a wave of dissolution which undermined all firm beliefs was engulfing Egypt in the name of intellectual emancipation. This trend attacked the morals, deeds and virtues under the pretext of personal freedom. Nothing could stand against this powerful and tyrannical stream of disbelief and permissiveness that was sweeping our country.” His remedy? Restoration of Islamic law as the ruling principle of governance.
Al-Banna consequently decried Kemal Ataturk’s abolition of the Caliphate in secular Turkey, which he complained separated “the state from religion in a country which was until recently the site of the Commander of the Faithful.” Al-Banna characterized it as just part of a larger “Western invasion which was armed and equipped with all [the] destructive influences of money, wealth, prestige, ostentation, power and means of propaganda.”[1]
Al-Banna’s Brotherhood had a deeply spiritual character from its beginning, but it didn’t combat the “Western invasion” with just words and prayers. In a 1928 article al-Banna decried the complacency of the Egyptian elite: “What catastrophe has befallen the souls of the reformers and the spirit of the leaders?…What calamity has made them prefer this life to the thereafter [sic]? What has made them…consider the way of struggle [sabil al-jihad] too rough and difficult?”[2] When the Brotherhood was criticized for being a political group in the guise of a religious one, al-Banna met the challenge head-on:
We summon you to Islam, the teachings of Islam, the laws of Islam and the guidance of Islam, and if this smacks of “politics” in your eyes, then it is our policy. And if the one summoning you to these principles is a “politician,” then we are the most respectable of men, God be praised, in politics . . . Islam does have a policy embracing the happiness of this world. . . . We believe that Islam is an all-embracing concept which regulates every aspect of life, adjudicating on every one of its concerns and prescribing for it a solid and rigorous order.[3]
Al-Banna wrote in 1934 that “it is a duty incumbent on every Muslim to struggle towards the aim of making every people Muslim and the whole world Islamic, so that the banner of Islam can flutter over the earth and the call of the Muezzin can resound in all the corners of the world: God is greatest [Allahu akbar]! This is not parochialism, nor is it racial arrogance or usurpation of land.”[4]
In the same article al-Banna insisted that “every piece of land where the banner of Islam has been hoisted is the fatherland of the Muslims” — hence the impossibility of accommodation with Israel, against which the Brotherhood and its offshoots still struggle. But the problem was not just Israel, which after all did not yet exist when the Brotherhood was founded. According to Brynjar Lia, the historian of the Muslim Brotherhood movement: “Quoting the Qur’anic verse ‘And fight them till sedition is no more, and the faith is God’s’ [Sura 2:193], the Muslim Brothers urged their fellow Muslims to restore the bygone greatness of Islam and to re-establish an Islamic empire. Sometimes they even called for the restoration of ‘former Islamic colonies’ in Andalus (Spain), southern Italy, Sicily, the Balkans and the Mediterranean islands.”[5]
Such a call might seem laughable except that the Brotherhood also had weapons and a military wing. Scholar Martin Kramer notes that the Brotherhood had “a double identity. On one level, they operated openly, as a membership organization of social and political awakening. Banna preached moral revival, and the Muslim Brethren engaged in good works. On another level, however, the Muslim Brethren created a ‘secret apparatus’ that acquired weapons and trained adepts in their use. Some of its guns were deployed against the Zionists in Palestine in 1948, but the Muslim Brethren also resorted to violence in Egypt. They began to enforce their own moral teachings by intimidation, and they initiated attacks against Egypt’s Jews. They assassinated judges and struck down a prime minister in 1949. Banna himself was assassinated two months later, probably in revenge.”[6]
Continue reading page: 1 2

Nenhum comentário:

wibiya widget

A teoria marxista da “ideologia de classe” não tem pé nem cabeça. Ou a ideologia do sujeito traduz necessariamente os interesses da classe a que ele pertence, ou ele está livre para tornar-se advogado de alguma outra classe. Na primeira hipótese, jamais surgiria um comunista entre os burgueses e Karl Marx jamais teria sido Karl Marx. Na segunda, não há vínculo entre a ideologia e a condição social do indivíduo e não há portanto ideologia de classe: há apenas a ideologia pessoal que cada um atribui à classe com que simpatiza, construindo depois, por mera inversão dessa fantasia, a suposta ideologia da classe adversária. Uma teoria que pode ser demolida em sete linhas não vale cinco, mas com base nela já se matou tanta gente, já se destruiu tanto patrimônio da humanidade e sobretudo já se gastou tanto dinheiro em subsídios universitários, que é preciso continuar a fingir que se acredita nela, para não admitir o vexame. Olavo de Carvalho, íntegra aqui.
"Para conseguir sua maturidade o homem necessita de um certo equilíbrio entre estas três coisas: talento, educação e experiência." (De civ Dei 11,25)
Cuidado com seus pensamentos: eles se transformam em palavras. Cuidado com suas palavras: elas se transformam em ação. Cuidado com suas ações: elas se transformam em hábitos. Cuidado com seus atos: eles moldam seu caráter.
Cuidado com seu caráter: ele controla seu destino.
A perversão da retórica, que falseia a lógica e os fatos para vencer o adversário em luta desleal, denomina-se erística. Se a retórica apenas simplifica e embeleza os argumentos para torná-los atraentes, a erística vai além: embeleza com falsos atrativos a falta de argumentos.
‎"O que me leva ao conservadorismo é a pesquisa e a investigação da realidade. Como eu não gosto de futebol, não gosto de pagode, não gosto de axé music, não gosto de carnaval, não fumo maconha e considero o PT ilegal, posso dizer que não me considero brasileiro - ao contrário da maioria desses estúpidos que conheço, que afirma ter orgulho disso". (José Octavio Dettmann)
" Platão já observava que a degradação moral da sociedade não chega ao seu ponto mais abjeto quando as virtudes desapareceram do cenário público, mas quando a própria capacidade de concebê-las se extinguiu nas almas da geração mais nova. " Citação de Olavo de Carvalho em "Virtudes nacionais".