Two more Muslims have publicly come out against the project. I wish to hat tip Michael Medved on this find. Remember there was an interview done with another Muslim reformist, whom are under-supported by the Left.
….New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.
The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” — i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna”
So what gives Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the “Cordoba Initiative” and his cohorts the misplaced idea that they will increase tolerance for Muslims by brazenly displaying their own intolerance in this case?
Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?
There are many questions that we would like to ask. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.
[….]
As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.
[….]
The Koran implores Muslims to speak the truth, even if it hurts the one who utters the truth. Today we speak the truth, knowing very well Muslims have forgotten this crucial injunction from Allah.
If this mosque does get built, it will forever be a lightning rod for those who have little room for Muslims or Islam in the U.S. We simply cannot understand why on Earth the traditional leadership of America’s Muslims would not realize their folly and back out in an act of goodwill….
In this article Charles Krauthammer tackles this idea and shows throughout ours and others cultural histories this is a well known “law.” Charles:
A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).
To say this is about religious freedom and Muslim’s have just as much right as anyone else to practice their religion are non-sequiturs.
When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there — and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.
That’s why Disney’s 1993 proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition that feared vulgarization of the Civil War (and that was wiser than me; at the time I obtusely saw little harm in the venture). It’s why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It’s why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.
And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place; it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign…
[….]
…Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history — perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.
Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims. Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi — yet despite contemporary Germany’s innocence, no German of goodwill would even think of proposing a German cultural center at, say, Treblinka.
Which makes you wonder about the goodwill behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy “an accessory to the crime” of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, “I’m not a politician. . . . The issue of terrorism is a very complex question.”
America is a free country where you can build whatever you want — but not anywhere. That’s why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn’t meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.
These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz — and no mosque at Ground Zero….
This post should be understood in the context as well that “part of the landing gear from the first plane to hit the Twin Towers rammed through the roof of the Burlington Coat factory, which is now going to be the ground-zero mosque.” Parts of people were found on the roof of the building as well.
Part of the landing gear from the first plane to hit the Twin Towers rammed through the roof of the Burlington Coat factory, which is now going to be the ground-zero mosque.Parts of people were found on the roof of the building as well.
I think we conservatives should all be happy that the Obama administration is in complete and irreparable meltdown. We can add to Hugh Hewitt’s great rant the one judge in California overturning 7,000,000 voters, to Maxine “Marxist” Waters and Charlie “in a pinch” Rangels ethics charges, to the Commander in Chief supporting a Mosque and Imam who has terrorist ties and dirty money to build his project with. This is all coming up to bite the Dems in the ass in November. I already posted this, but look at all this with the eyes that the Dems are sealing their defeat.
President Barack Obama’s endorsement of the Ground Zero mosque has transformed an emotion-laden local dispute in New York into a nationwide debate overnight, setting nervous Democrats on edge and creating potentially dramatic political implications in the upcoming midterm elections.
Key Republicans think the president bought himself some political trouble by using his White House bully pulpit to announce his support for a controversial plan to build an Islamic center just blocks from nearly 3,000 people died in Manhattan at the hands of Islamic extremists on 9/11.
[….]
Obama has put Democrats from coast to coast in the tough position of having to weigh in on an issue they’d rather duck. Prior to his speech, a few candidates tried with limited success to make the proposed mosque an issue outside of the tri-state area around New York City. Now any Democrat facing an election – less than three months away – can be put in the uncomfortable position of being asked to reject the president’s stand or side with him.
Several New York Democrats either involved with members of Congress or strategists said privately that they are not happy about the speech because it puts them in a bind. A recent CNN polls found two-thirds of Americans oppose building the mosque in the neighborhood around Ground Zero.
They’re afraid to be up front in the same way as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who got national press for supporting the mosque but who is not facing a reelection campaign.
It’s going to be one of the most memorable – and debated statements – of the president’s first two years in office….
Besides all the presidents tying together bad lines of non-related thinking. He also said something about U.S. History at this speech that was just flat wrong! A twisting of the truth.
This great article comes from LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICAN and should be read by all, in it entirety. I am discussion this very same topic over at THE WORLD ACCORDING TO KIMBA, a misguided friend. He feels that to try and stop this Mosque is an affront to our history, not wanting to make subject/object distinctions, but instead tear at false arguments and ideas behind the opposition. Between this and the linked post of a friends site, one can piece together a pretty tight argument as to why this Mosques shouldn’t be built. Article will follow video. (Take note that Pamela had rushed from the top video to the Hannity show here — that’s why she is in the same suit.)
As one of America’s leading Libertarian thinkers, perhaps I’m always expected to give the “Libertarian answer” to every issue. But sometimes one has to speak not as a Libertarian, Republican or Democrat, but rather as an American- preferably a common sense American. The issue of allowing a mosque to be built in the shadow of the 9/11 terrorist tragedy is one of those times.
The answer is simple for a common sense American- I support religious freedom, as all Americans should. But this is not a case of religious freedom. Yes, Muslims can build their mosque virtually anywhere in America- despite 9/11…despite the Times Square bomber…despite plots by Islamic extremists to blow up the New York subway system…despite everything happening in Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. That’s what makes our country great. We do in fact support religious freedom. You can build a mosque virtually anywhere in America.
However, there are also the rights and sensibilities of others to consider in a free society.
Does “religious freedom” mean hate groups should build statues to Hitler in front of Jewish temples in America? Should Americans raise money to build Jewish temples and Christian churches at Mecca? Should Japan build a statue to the bravery of their pilots at Pearl Harbor? Should the U.S. build a statue to the bravery of our pilots at the site of Hiroshima? Aren’t those examples all about “freedom of expression,” “religious freedom” and property rights? Perhaps, but is it too much to ask for a little consideration and respect toward others?
[….]
Privately funded or backed by Foreign Governments?
[….]
Yes, private individuals and organizations have the right to build houses of worship with their own funds. But one has to wonder where the money is coming from to build a 15-story building on some of the most expensive real estate in the country. We Americans believe in the separation of Church and State. If it turns out that this project is sponsored by a foreign government — either directly or through a state-sponsored organization that engages in terrorism — than the idea of this being an issue of religious freedom is a sham and an argument can be made that our Constitution would actually prohibit this mosque from being built.
However, if this is privately funded by parties with no ties to a foreign government, I have to believe that we have enough people in this country who are offended by the prospect of a mosque at Ground Zero, that the money can be raised to buy this land at a fair price from the owners. I know I’d be the first to contribute to a foundation to keep this sacred land from ever being desecrated by a symbol of the very groups that attacked America on 9/11.
We can also put public pressure on the property owners to sell to this new patriotic foundation funded by Americans. We can organize massive protests, filling the streets surrounding this property with patriotic Americans concerned that the hallowed ground of 9/11 never be used as a political tool to taunt or embarrass the United States, or as a place to preach intolerance towards Americans. I, for one, am ready to fly 3000 miles to New York to join the protest.
These are the only rational answers for common sense patriotic Americans who still believe in a free society. In situations like this, none of us can afford to be Libertarians, Republicans, Democrats, or politicians of any stripe. We are all proud Americans.
Editor’s Note – Wayne Root was the 2008 Libertarian Vice-Presidential candidate. He is currently an At-Large Member of the Libertarian National Committee, and Chair of the Libertarian Committee for Congressional candidates.