The “ground zero mosque,” as you may well know by now, is not at ground zero. It’s not a mosque but an Islamic cultural center containing a prayer room. It’s not going to determine President Obama’s political future or the elections of 2010 or 2012. Still, the battle that has broken out over this project in Lower Manhattan — on the “hallowed ground” of a shuttered Burlington Coat Factory store one block from the New York Dolls Gentlemen’s Club — will prove eventful all the same. And the consequences will be far more profound than any midterm election results or any of the grand debates now raging 24/7 over the parameters of tolerance, religious freedom, and the real estate gospel of location, location, location.
Here’s what’s been lost in all the screaming. The prime movers in the campaign against the “ground zero mosque” just happen to be among the last cheerleaders for America’s nine-year war in Afghanistan. The wrecking ball they’re wielding is not merely pounding Park51, as the project is known, but is demolishing America’s already frail support for that war, which is dedicated to nation-building in a nation whose most conspicuous asset besides opium is actual mosques.
So virulent is the Islamophobic hysteria of the neocon and Fox News right — abetted by the useful idiocy of the Anti-Defamation League, Harry Reid and other cowed Democrats — that it has also rendered Gen. David Petraeus’s last-ditch counterinsurgency strategy for fighting the war inoperative. How do you win Muslim hearts and minds in Kandahar when you are calling Muslims every filthy name in the book in New York?
You’d think that American hawks invested in the Afghanistan “surge” would not act against their own professed interests. But they couldn’t stop themselves from placing cynical domestic politics over country. The ginned-up rage over the “ground zero mosque” was not motivated by a serious desire to protect America from the real threat of terrorists lurking at home and abroad — a threat this furor has in all likelihood exacerbated — but by the potential short-term rewards of winning votes by pandering to fear during an election season.
Are any of you in New York planning to go to the rallies to be a part of the manipulated, “look over there” crowd?
Maybe if you look a little deeper you might understand how you are playing the “useful idiot” with your insightful analysis .
Mr.John Batchlor has his eye on the ball.
Imam Feisal Rauf is a double-talking sharpie who has been practicing his malarkey for a decade on various political actors in both parties (Democrats are no more sucker for it than the credulous GOP) – all in preparation for the big stage of the mosque at Ground Zero and checks with many zeros. It’s about the money; it was always about the money. Rauf and his spouse, the obtuse Kashmiri Daisy Khan, are playing to the TV cameras now (on a State Department junket to the Gulf), knowing that the hot ticket is to be on FNC and MSNBC and NBC for the sheiks back in the Gulf and the sultan crowd in Malaysia and Indonesia. The mosque tale is now toxic for POTUS, and the White House wishes it will disappear behind the peace process palaver with regard the ragtag Palestinians. Notice how the mosque at Ground Zero makes the Israeli maneuver with the PA crowd look like weak tea. The Obama administration is in despair for the fact that no one is fooled by the Palestinian “direct talks” announcement. The assertion from administration sources that Iran is a year from the nuke fuel for weapons is another flabby try by the White House to divert attention from Feisal Rauf and Daisy Khan and their carney skills. I recall a cartoon early in the war. Two guys wrapped in dynamite talking about a third guy in the distance, who wears only one dynamite stick on his belt. The joke is, “He’s a moderate.” The fact is that jihad is absolute intransigence and First Cause bloodymindedness. Rauf knows this. That he remains alive and nimble is a measure that the jihad knows he is useful. Rauf chats in American about peace and moderation. In his natural Arabic (he is Kuwaiti), he chats anything at all with the sheiks and the princes. The White House is in knots. And the mosque? Talk, talk, talk all night in Arabic while the zeros grow and grow. It’s about the money; it was always about the money. Speaking Sunday 22 with Claudia Rosett, FDD, and Andrew Bostom, author, re the latest on the the money at Ground Zero.
Here’s what’s been lost in all the screaming. The prime movers in the campaign against the “ground zero mosque” just happen to be among the last cheerleaders for America’s nine-year war in Afghanistan.
Just another example of letting Uncle Dave come up with one of his nuanced, stretched to the point of absurdity point-of-view.
Religion, all about the money? Tell me it ain’t so.
Well, speaking of money, I heard a tv show say that the owner of the site bought the property for 5 Mill and that some entity has offered to buy the property for 20 Mill allowing the “mosque” to be built elsewhere but the owner has rejected that offer. Wanting more, or wanting a triumphal mosque–who knows?
I am “against” mosques anywhere in the USA because I “understand” the Muslim religion to be a COMBINATION of religion and politics meaning that when it is in a position to do so, it requires everyone within its control to become Muslim and to observe all the rules.
How can we confirm/deny this?
It does no good to say that the majority of Muslims just want to lead a peaceful life. HOW DO WE MEASURE THE “INTENT” OF THE MUSLIM RELIGION??????
Seems to me its enough that countries with a majority Muslim population do impose their brand of Islam===or am I wrong? The country with the most muslims is Indonesia and it is oft stated that they live in harmony with the other religions. Yet recently I have heard reports that Indonesia is experience “Muslim Extremists” who want Sharia law imposed. In USA and/or Britain, we read stories of Islam taxi drivers refusing to drive single women or people carrying alcohol to their destinations. Is that “enough?”
If it is true that Muslims in general whether they know it or not SEEK the imposition of their religion on others is that sufficient to deny them access to our culture OR is our First Amendment to be considered important enough/powerful enough to withstand any such intent by foreign interests?
Is it reasonable to simply assume that the First Amendment is more important to honor than a religion that would do away with it if they were able to?
How should we measure this issue if we choose to?
There is a “special” on tv sometime this week about “surprising” results of a survey of Muslim people. Did not note the channel or time but I assume it is going to report that the majority of “peaceful” Muslims agree that the USA “deserves” to be attacked for its presence in the Middle East. How much more specific such a report might get, I don’t know. What difference would it make???
Surely, we (USA) will leave its mark on the USA if HISTORY notes that we gave up our freedom in the name of freedom to a religion who did not recognize the distinction between religion and government/freedom?
How do we guage/assess/evaluate this threat or should we as I have observed so far that no such threat exists?
I read about the dangers of ‘Muslims’ and ‘Sharia law’ and I automatically replace that with ‘Christians’ and ‘Fundamentalism’ – and the things that are written can then be applied to the true state of affairs in America.
Exactly, Yevgyeni, exactly!
#4 Bobbo: “Seems to me its enough that countries with a majority Muslim population do impose their brand of Islam===or am I wrong? The country with the most muslims is Indonesia and it is oft stated that they live in harmony with the other religions. Yet recently I have heard reports that Indonesia is experience “Muslim Extremists” who want Sharia law imposed. In USA and/or Britain, we read stories of Islam taxi drivers refusing to drive single women or people carrying alcohol to their destinations. Is that “enough?””
The problem with this kind of measure is that it only counts exposure. Speaking from the outside perspective, I wouldn’t have a hard time putting on the same kind of goggles and look at the US as a prime example of why the same is “true” for christianity. What we’re really measuring, I’m afraid, is the media impact of extremists… It’s the hot new ticket, and they’re savvy enough to make use of this fact, no matter what kind they are.
I wonder why we haven’t heard many (if any) of the people so worked up against this complaining about the person or company that sold the land to them evil muslims? You would think that they would want to know why someone would sell the land to them. But of course that would be an affront to their sacred cow of “free market.”
This is just as manufactured as the “controversy” over voter intimidation.
Who is Uncle Dave, and why is he taking credit for an article written by Frank Rich in the NY Times?
a) It is and will be a mosque. Local NYC news (if no liking FOX try CBS,NBC, ABC,…) have shown that the building is currently regularly used as a Mosque (not prayer room). They’ll just have other content as many mega-Churches and mega-Mosques have everywhere.
b) Not “Islamophobia” as shown by another clearly liberal news source: TIME Magazine. Their pool showed that vast majority of people opposing GZM welcome Mosque in their own neighbourhood (including invitation to GZM Mosque builders to relocate just next to them).
#8–Tippis==you say: “Speaking from the outside perspective, I wouldn’t have a hard time putting on the same kind of goggles and look at the US as a prime example of why the same is “true” for christianity.” /// As an antitheist I hold all religions as basic insanity, so I am basically willing to think “the worst” of any relgion. “But” I don’t see the catholics, prots, and jews as horrific as I do the Muslims. Christianity does not “today” desire to force all non christians into their fold. Neither do Prots or Jews. Maybe indeed they would “like to” in their heart of hearts but its pretty objectively the case that they are willing to keep to themseleves and only mindf*ck those that have drunk their flavor of koolaid. Not so the Muslims.
From your statement, I take it you agree the Muslims do this as well but think it is balanced in some way by the other Christians doing it as well. But I disagree: the other Christians are not doing it as well==but the Muslims are.
Is this a fact determined question or one of dogman/absolutes?
Why can’t you just face it? Most Americans don’t like Muslims, and they don’t like them taking over cities. Perhaps 9/11 is the prime reason, but those asshole terrorists have been tarnishing that religion for decades, and generating hatred for the rest of the Muslims. You know, the “peace-loving” ones, who NEVER condemn terrorism.
I can imagine Bobbo being a Tory during the colonial American period tapping his walking stick and loudly calling for us to do something about those Frenchies.
All the while there is a redcoat on every corner and lodging in our homes.
Over here! Police tazering and beating people. Christians legislating morality.
Plutocracy removing The Republic.
Nah that don’t matter, those damn muzzies matter. They would change the current oppression I have gotten used to now. And at least we speak a proper language. Hear Hear, Hurrumph! Good show eh wot?
He’s the same type that also pulled the savage injun card, the can’t trust a coloured card, watch out for anarchists card and damn pinko commie scum card.
But where’s the Bobbo the atheist for political office to clean up the system card? Oh no won’t be played because he wants someone ELSE to do it. If he had to he’d have to take time away from DU postings.
Cursor_
#15–Stillborn==I for one don’t like any religious people but I recognize that FREEDOM means other people doing and thinking things I don’t like. “But” there is a distinction with Islam that by its stated tenets and ACTUAL PRACTICE IN THIS WORLD NOW AND THROUGH OUT HISTORY, forces its one religion/one government dogma on people under its control.
Bill of Rights FREEDOMS should be given maximum effect “until” they start to conflict with one another. Freedom of religion is fine but a religion that also requires all others to submit to their religion is NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FIRST AMENDMENT.
Freedom of Religion does not include the requirement to submit to religions that take control of your government. And short of a take over, who wants the hassle? USA is a 20th Century society in the 21st Century World. We don’t need to go back even farther to the 1200’s to pretend that Islam is anything other than a tyrannical vision that needs to be stamped out/modified to be humane.
Isn’t President Obama one of the “last cheerleaders for America’s nine-year war in Afghanistan” ?
After all, he spent much of his campaign telling us that Iraq was the bad war, and Afghanistan was the “good” war.
As commander-in-chief, he approved the “surge” in Afghanistan.
#2 & 10: What exactly makes you think I’m taking credit for writing this? The link to the article is plainly in the first line.
Who’s afraid of the big bad Muslim?
Big bad Muslim?
Big bad Muslim?
Who’s afraid of the big bad Muslim?
Cringing Western European Descendants!
I dated Sharia Law. She was one hot African-American babe! All right! Giggity!
Cursor_
# 4 bobbo said, “I am “against” mosques anywhere in the USA because I “understand” the Muslim religion to be a COMBINATION of religion and politics…”
Exactly my feelings about Catholicism. Except, of course, the Roman Catholics actually ARE a political entity stemming out of the Vatican. I maintain all Catholic priests should have to register as agents of a foreign government.
As to the problem in NYC – the site was damaged on 9-11 so even if it is a couple of blocks away, it counts as ground zero.
Secondly, if Rauf had a politically benign past and would be more open about his funding, this might blow over. Too late and not gonna happen.
Third: It is unbelievably bad judgment for the State Department to use this guy as a representative of the US while this mess is in progress.
Fourth: I read that the Gov of NY is offering to GIVE them a piece of land to build their facility on. Will we start to offer free land to every other religious group that desires to build a place of worship in NYC?
So being in a building damaged on 9/11, and having company CEO saying it is at ground zero isn’t enough to call it being at Ground Zero?
The apologies from the Left for America’s enemies are silly..
re: #4, Bobbo… hits nail on head.
Alfred: Surprise! I couldn’t care less if they build there or not. Just like with any business, it should be up to the local zoning board to decide, based on community standards and LOCAL input, what goes where be it for religion, strip club or whatever. If the LOCAL population doesn’t want it, then they are the only ones who should have a say.
I do, however, feel this whole thing is a diversion from discussing real issues.
Islam? Is it really a religion or is it some thing else? I get the sensation that its like some kid of political tribe that isn’t very tolerant of anyone else.
It’s interesting that Iran’s’ new pilotless drone looks just like a NAZI V1.
and,
“President Ahmadinejad called the Karrar a symbol of death to Iran’s enemies.
But he also argued the drone serves as “a messenger of salvation and dignity for humanity”.
Do you want these ‘dudes’ in your neighborhood?
American based Islamic folks need to distance themselves from their more aggressive brothers fast if they want to join our tribe
The Republican Party sells fear. To the extent they get the people worked up (even over false issues like this), they win. But the bigger party is the media. They throw this sh*t in front of all our faces constantly instead of filtering out the false issues. If we have dolts in office, thank Fox (this is their whole reason for existing), but also thank CBS, NBC, ABC, the New York Times, Washington Post et al…
Available Sept 20th: 900 rounds 7.62 x 39 AK ammo only $154 not incl shipping
they want to build it a fahcking QUARTER MILE AWAY.
who gives a rat’s ass…
I quote Steve Guttenburg, from “Police Academy”: ‘Two a**holes, no waiting.’
Whichever spokesman for Massengill who wrote this bullsh*t above would be one of them.
OMG.
Got all the buzzwords down pat: “neocon”, “Fox News Right”, blah blah blah.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Mr. Douche, if you poll the victims’ families from the 9/11/2001 sneak attacks, they would overwhelmingly say stick the mosque idea near Ground Zero up where it don’t shine.
And they get the last word on that.
Where’s the consideration for their viewpoint in all of this? It should be dominant. This is the graveyard for their loved ones who had no idea that fanatics inspired by “the religion of peace” would fly planes into the WTC towers to pull off a “spectacular attack”.
Bloomberg also works for Massengill as a spokesman, so you two should get on famously.
“Not anywhere near Ground Zero. No effing way.”
Have a nice day.
Imagine that. Republicans and Al Quaeda on the same side of an issue!
Talk about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Anyone protesting this Islamic community center is guilty of treason.
Let some foreigners worry about it, if they want. They run the country.
So we spent a TRILLION dollars and 4000+ dead American lives to “free” the people of Iraq…to practice Islam…and now we’re paranoid about a cooking school and basketball court in lower mid-town? The people against this are idiots. We’ve spent our nation into the toilet to protect the freedom of Islamic people in Iraq and Afghanistan (they are Muslims after all) and but you’re worried about this one building? Idiots. Typical Republicans. No rational thought, no reason, no logic, just “emotion” and superstition. Pathetic.
I’m not surprised at this article. The typical modern liberal progressive response to anyone thinking anything they disagree with is to scream, “Idiot raciest bigot!”
After that they make up a lot of stuff and throw mud.
The location almost guaranteed a negative response. Do they have the legal right in the US to built it? Yes.
You aren’t going to be building any churches in the Arabian peninsula and are risking your life if you try to share any other faith than Islam there but that is another story.