Barack Obama’s support for building a mosque at Ground Zero has set Democrats in a sheer panic. The NY Times reported that Obama “strongly” supports the mosque and his remarks set off a wildfire of response. While Obama is “strongly” in favor of the mosque at Ground Zero, Americans are “strongly” opposed to it. And that is spilling over into the election cycle.
And Democrats — at least those who were willing to comment — could barely contain their frustration over Obama’s remarks, saying he had potentially placed every one of their candidates in the middle of the debate by giving GOP candidates a chance to ask them point-blank: Do you agree with Obama on the mosque?
This is going to be a powerful campaign issue, and liberals who recognize that this is a major loser are rapidly getting all wee-weed up. If you happened to be in DC or New York City over the last two nights and you happened to cast your glance skyward you would have seen the Journolist signal:
And they sprang to work to rescue the One.
Republicans jumped Sunday on President Barack Obama’s defense of a proposed mosque near where the World Trade Center stood before the Sept. 11 attacks, seeking to make his comments a campaign issue for Democrats come November.
GOP takes harsher stance toward Islam
The harsh Republican response to President Barack Obama’s defense of a mosque near ground zero marks a dramatic shift in the party’s posture toward Islam — from a once active courtship of Muslim voters to a very public tolerance after Sept. 11 to an openly aired sense of mistrust.
Republicans attack Obama over Muslim center comments
Republicans attacked President Barack Obama on Sunday for his comments on a controversial plan to build a Muslim cultural center in New York, saying he was “disconnected” from the nation in an election year.
Newt Gingrich compares mosque to Nazis
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Monday compared the mosque planned to go up blocks away from ground zero in New York to Nazis protesting next to the Holocaust museum.
White House tries to move on from debate over controversial N.Y. mosque
White House officials are ready to move past President Obama’s controversial decision to weigh in on the so-called Ground Zero Mosque.
Obama’s comments seemingly endorsing the building of a mosque several blocks from the site of the 2001 terrorist attacks sparked a firestorm over the weekend. Many Republicans appear intent on making the comments a midterm election issue.
But now that the president has had his say, the White House communications shop is looking to move on, according to spokesman Bill Burton.
Not so fast, cupcake.
Greg Sargent unleashed a torrent of self-righteous posts insulting those who oppose the Ground Zero mosque and imploring “commentators” to condemn GOP criticism of Obama’s support.
The singular most pathetic offering came from David Halperin. Halperin recognizes that Obama has lit a match in the dry forest and a conflagration is coming. Obama and has stepped in it and Halperin wants us all to ignore the stench and overlook the footprints on the floor.
The political potency of the issue is obvious. Polls overwhelmingly show the President has put himself on the wrong side of public opinion. Opposition to the new facility arouses acute emotion and creates near total unity among relatives of 9/11 victims, first responders, Republican officeholders, potential 2012 presidential candidates, Tea Party members, the Fox News–talk radio–Drudge Report echo machine and many of the highly coveted swing and occasional voters whom you will need at the polls to win in November.
So what should Republicans who hold the most potent campaign issue since “Read my lips” do?
Why, they should be good sports and not use it!
Yes, Republicans, you can take advantage of this heated circumstance, backed by the families of the 9/11 victims, in their most emotional return to the public stage since 2001.
But please don’t do it.
Halperin’s liberals called Tea Partiers “teabaggers.” They called Tea Partiers bigots. They called them no end of names. They falsely accused them of using racial pejoratives. Anyone critical of Barack Obama is called a racist.
As I said, Republicans, this is your moment. As a famous New Yorker once urged in a very different context: Do the right thing.
You had your chance to do the right thing and you didn’t do it, Halperin. Now your advice is for Republicans to stick their own heads up their rear ends?
Go f*** yourself.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
It isn’t a question of anti muslim feeling. It IS a question of basic, decent humanity in light of the 3000 people who were murdered.
What do we know?
It was Muslim extremists who murdered 3000 people on 9/11. THAT is a fact.
We KNOW that there are many many muslim sleeper cells. We KNOW that Muslim extremists hide behind the burqas of their women and the freedoms given by this country to grow their onw terrorists. We KNOW that they are lying in wait to attack again- geez, they have TOLD us this.
So why give them the key to do that on burial ground of those they already killed? Your point would be better taken if we were discussing a different venue.
It’s a simple equation. And Yes, a true moderate will say, balacing the equities, that compared to the 3000 people who died in a an extremist Muslim attack, it would be wise and forebearant to move the 13 story citadel to Islam away from the burial ground of those who were killed by Muslims. And BTW- those who blended in with society in the US-USING OUR VERY FREEDOMS AGAINST US- WERE THE ONES WHO KILLED 3000 PEOPLE.
@DKK:
All I can do is own up to my rudeness and apologize. If you don’t accept, then that’s your prerogative.
Wasn’t sure whether you were new or not; but I’m letting you know now, that if you click on the category link and look at the amount of comments in most of the post threads….start reading and sifting through them….and you might understand why I might have been a bit harsh to you, a new guest in the saloon.
And it’s not like you arrived through the doors, the model of civil discourse yourself.
Okaaaay….. 😐
Nope.
And btw, we’ve been through this one as well. So not to be rude, but you’re not saying anything that isn’t yesterweek’s news, here.
So what’s Rauf’s definition/belief on sharia? Is it the same as….oh, say the Taliban’s version of Sharia?
Who says I’m not sympathetic and sensitive to the pain of 9/11 victims and family members? Like you said: You’re new around here. It’s not just the host of the saloon that should be respectful to the guest. Respect works both ways.
Hey, I’m sorry for your own loss. Now get off your high horse and quit denigrating the opinion of others if you actually are sincere in wanting to engage in “intellectual discourse”. You can only speak for yourself. You have no right to speak on behalf of all those who lost friends and family members on 9/11.
@DKK #51:
extremists, sure. So then let’s oppose Muslim “extremists” from building there.
And it helps to encourage Muslims who are not jihadis, terrorist sympathizers, apologists, and radicals to tip off the FBI and Homeland Security should they be suspicious of anyone within the Muslim community who bears watching.
The symbolism only works if it’s the global jihad movement behind the funding; in which case, the FBI would put a stop to it. If it turns out that those behind Cordoba House are indeed moderates, then it stands to reason that they are regarded as Muslim apostates to the puritanical beliefs of Islamist radicals, and this would be a thumb in the eye to those who did attack us on 9/11.
You and I believe it was a bad decision on their part. But if you read their statements, you might understand where they might be coming from. They can be wrong; but it doesn’t mean they are insidious and purposefully trying to cause further pain and suffering.
Uh, yeah, and some of the other terror plots have been broken up by Muslims who alerted the FBI (including the Christmas bomber’s own Muslim father, fer crissakes).
Sharia is sharia. Last I saw, there was only one shariah law. For that, they have no “interpretation” of the kind that we discuss on these boards. so, kind of doesn’t really matter whether Sauf the fake presents quite as less extreme, the ultimate outcome is the same.
So what, let me get this straight, I am supposed to know everything that is posted in this board for the past what, 6 months? 3 months? what is the line of demaraction? Seriously, I don;t get that.
I don;t recall being anything but courteous to you and everyone else here. Do correct me if I am wrong.
And please let me understand. We don;t get to voice opinions here that may have been voiced in connection with other posts???
Muslim extremists atttacked the US on 9/11 and murdered 3000 innocnet souls. Next question.
End question- Are you the host of the saloon? Sorry, no one posted any rules that I need tiptoe around the host of this saloon. i would rather have free spirited intellectual discourse with someone who had less of a need to control. If you ARE the host, I am spending way too much time with a socialist. I gave my my right to be controlled when I moved out of my parent’s house.
And Yes, I have EVERY right to speak on behalf of myself and any of those those agree with we. You call it a high horse to further denigrate the loss of others, and me. So be it. But I am simply pointing out to you that there are FAR more of us who disagree with this plan than there are those who agree.
It’s simple math. More oppose, fewer agree, Find a compromise, if in fact they are truly “moderate” and looking for “multicultural understanding
extremists, sure. So then let’s oppose Muslim “extremists” from building there. And sadly, potential extremists BECAUSE it is hallowed burial ground.
Do you for one second believe that they will tell you that they are extremists?
Great, Word. You and I both know they exist. YOU decide who isn’t the sleeper cell. Otherwise, take the high road and don;t let them build over a burial ground.
ok and you get this from where? :
The symbolism only works if it’s the global jihad movement behind the funding; in which case, the FBI would put a stop to it. (Hmm. ya think with THIS administration?? I sooo doubt it.) If it turns out that those behind Cordoba House are indeed moderates, then it stands to reason that they are regarded as Muslim apostates to the puritanical beliefs of Islamist radicals, and this would be a thumb in the eye to those who did attack us on 9/11.
Yes, but how to tell the difference? Why not take that chance somewhere else-to further whatever legal or political agenda you espouse, instead of putting the 14 sotry citadel to vicotry over the infidels on burial ground of 3000 innocent people?
Welcome to the show DKK. I see that you have met some of our “sponsors.” Also I see you got the typical put down by MataHarley (I call her Hog Heaven) as a newcomer. She will do that to anyone new with whom she disagrees. She tried it with me but it did not work because i have been here for at least five and maybe even six years. She sounds exactly like that lady on the Morning Joe show who thinks that if you say – they have the right to build the mosque then you are not allowed to say “but” afterward. Either they have a right or they do not and if you say they have a right then YOU, my new found friend, do not have the right to protest. Of course, that is only a liberal interpretation of our Constitution and does not hold water.
Another interesting feature of these “sponsors” is the use of the classical logic fallacy we all have come to love so much from our lefty friends. If one of these crowned jewels disagrees with you but cannot make a credible argument they will accuse you of be biased, a bigot no less. Specifically the fallacy applies:
Also, calling the person who makes an argument biased is almost always an ad hominem fallacy. It is specifically referred to as an ad hominem circumstantial argument. Pointing out that someone has a reason to want a conclusion to be true is not a valid rebuttal to their argument. (http://www.articledashboard.com/Article/Philosophy-of-Logic—Illogical-Insults/334149)
Ask Mr. Aye – he is the professional at ad hominem attacks and especially loves that ad hominem circumstantial argument. I have to admit that he suckered me into his little den of stupidity but it was not all my fault. Having been coming to this site since around 2005 (don’t remember the exact time) i never saw these sponsors use such typically leftist attacks. When it happened to me I could not believe it. Mr. Aye refused to refute a single word of my opinions by showing me the error of my ways but openly criticized and made snide, insulting remarks, finally coming out and calling be a bigot. It took me a while to realize what he had done. The give away was when I asked him a very specific question:
Now let me ask you a question – Does the Quran and other Islamic writings give instructions on how to deal with dhimmis and infidels?
This does not imply that all Muslims follow the Quran and Islamic writings totally.
Do you think he answered that simple question? You are right – not even close. He dismissed it with something like – good question but the better question would be how many Muslims . . .
Lefty change the subject because the question would make me admit the opponent might be right response.
He will refuse to address issues on which he is proven to be wrong. Like most of us, if I am wrong and you provide me with strong enough evidence, I will change my mind. Of course, Mr. Aye would never do that because if he did he would lose again – providing information that would change my mind and thus negate his little personal insult of me being a bigot. Bigots, as we all know, will not change their mind even with facts given to them.
Rudeness!! Ha, some of these “sponsors” have become so enamored with their brilliance that you can almost feel the self righteous, moralistic condescending attitude in each stroke they make with their computers. Hog Heaven still interjects now and again how they NEVER steep to ad hominem attacks or snide remarks EVEN if one dares questions her brilliant prose (hey, it really is not bad). I await apologies from Mr. Aye but will not hold my breathe. Better yet, maybe I will go line by line through the offending post I made that, according to him, proved me to be a bigot.
Here’s the interesting kicker on such an adventure: I had my last eye operation on August 10 and am restricted to inside my house for another couple of weeks. I have lots and lots of time to get my ducks in order and prove to anyone willing to take the time to go through such a well researched diatribe as to why I believe the way I believe. It ain’t just book learning either.
You willing to take me on there Mr. Aye over the following bigoted posting:
“Islam is not now nor has ever been the Religion of Peace except when everyone on the planet is Muslim. Is this BS? Is this a lie? Or is it truth? Does making this truthful statement make me a bigot? Bigotry is an action carried out based on beliefs. Muslims living in a country who do not put into action their beliefs are the same as anyone who may disagree with a viewpoint but only verbalize disagreement. Does that make them bigots?
I have never even thought about mistreating Muslims, Christians, Jews or Buddhist because of their religion. I appreciate each human as an individual and interact with him or her accordingly. That does not change the truth of what I write.”
Line by line Mr. Aye. Want to have a go at refuting the truth in the above post? You also stated that I fit the definition of a bigot. Of course, like most lefties, you failed to follow up and provide me evidence for this opinion. It was just another one of your ad hominem circumstantial arguments.
Better think twice because in such a discussion, you cannot win and I cannot lose. You would be facing three possible outcomes, running away to avoid your demise, trying and failing to refute my statements or coming up with a counter argument that shows through internal readings of the said documents, historical events or current events that Islam is the Religion of Peace and all that this implies. You would lose in all three results. If you can successfully accomplish the latter, I will be the first to admit my errors and then immediately change my opinion. This, of course, would mean you lose again because bigots do not change their minds so easily.
Did you get my list of names that you could call me to change the subject again? Just wondering.
DKK, hang in there! I am here to learn something and so far you have done a good job at providing me that objective.
Chill. thanks for the vote of intellecutal honesty. I can deal with attacks, although not sure why they are necessary. (sorry for the misspellings, I am way above 40 years old and in training for a half marathon so am tired tonight!! 😛 )
Are they always like this?:
As you said- (see, I am electronically challenged)
Better think twice because in such a discussion, you cannot win and I cannot lose. You would be facing three possible outcomes, running away to avoid your demise, trying and failing to refute my statements or coming up with a counter argument that shows through internal readings of the said documents, historical events or current events that Islam is the Religion of Peace and all that this implies. You would lose in all three results. If you can successfully accomplish the latter, I will be the first to admit my errors and then immediately change my opinion. This, of course, would mean you lose again because bigots do not change their minds so easily.
Did you get my list of names that you could call me to change the subject again? Just wondering.
Thanks Chill. I have a moderat point to make, but find myself at the target of immoderate positions.
I’m sorry… but did you say *we’re* bigots? LOL Well, that moves the conversation forward well. And with that leap off the deep end of all logic, I can say my interface here is done. No more links, since you aren’t intellectually curious. No more comebacks or observations since you’re way too hypersensitive, and you’ll forever feel insulted (tho I see you don’t mind insulting others…. )
Ya know, DKK, my first comment to you had no attitude (INRE Former Muslims United) and was trying to fill you in beyond the hyped headlines. My second comment to you was after you came back with such a reaction to a study that Wordsmith had passed on, and yet you didn’t bother to even scan it.
Listen, I’ll make this real easy for you to have some echo chamber dialogue…. apparently all you are capable of absorbing. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say, but I sure don’t want to get in the way of you saying it. Because I’ve already read enough from you to know it’s probably not a point of substance I’d be interested in anyway.
DKK: No. This used to be a fairly decent place to see what is happening and get some good ideas to run with. Most, if not all, of the “sponsors” are good, wonderful conservatives, but just recently with this mosque thing, they have gone a little weird. The problem seems to be their inability to see, let alone accept, an alternate position than theirs. The alternate position just does not cut it in their minds. My guess is that the two or three who continue to “immoderate” you are probably conflicted over this issue. You know how great we Americans are (especially whities like me) at self loathing and guilt for being honest with our opinions and accomplishments.
Just had a thought concerning their arguments that being hostile or against the mosque will turn more Moslims into terrorists or turn more Moslims against us. You’ve read this all over the liberal press I am sure.
Now, how about the reverse of this argument. To allow the mosque to be built as a victory monument over America as was apparently done at the 93 site, will insure more Moslims will turn to terrorism to reap the obvious fruits of the coming destruction of American at these Moslims hands. It is a little more compelling to envision thousands joining in the victory celebration than even a dozen being “insulted” by not getting the Mosque. Both arguments, I believe are specious at best and dishonest at worst. The issue is not about what any other group of people overseas thinks or believes. This is an American issue only, IMHO.
Ya know, Cecil… I was wondering when you’d figure out that Wordsmith, Aye and myself are conservatives. Frankly, I’ll put my 434 authored posts up against your “lefty” charge any day of the week. It just so happens a lot of we authors happen to disagree with you on whether Cordoba Initiative are terrorists, or if we are at war with Islam. So far we’ve brought up legalities, statistics on American Muslims, said we’d wait for proof of Feisal Rauf, the Sufi, really being a closet Wahhabi as you all suggest, and pointed out that none of those involved with Cordoba House are associated with the 911 attackers.
On the flip side, all we’ve gotten from your side is emotions… it’s “offensive”… yup, we agree. But changing laws to prevent an “offensive” building by Muslims from being built is even more offensive to us. And we’ve consistently pointed out that the best way would be to lobby that Cordoba Initiative stops this on their own in good faith. But hang…. since Geller and Spencer blew this up and incorporated it into their battle against islam in American, and mosques being built no where near Ground Zero… the rhetoric coming from the conservative ranks is hardly an opening for any kind of entreaty. After all, most of you have decided they are bent on seizing the US, and making it into Iran or Afghanistan. right….
Or we’ve gotten all sorts of vague three times removed associations for Rauf as proof of “guilt”. The same guy that Bush has sent out on similar outreach missions twice, and the same guy with a mosque in NYC for over a couple of decades… all sans any problems.
Now all of the sudden the Sufi is a terrorist.
Emotions… pure emotions. And the bad thing is the more Geller, Spencer and Newt hypes this, the more fodder for the lib/progs for midterms. The jihadis? They don’t care. They’re just happy as a clam that conservatives are proving their rhetoric that Americans really are waging a war against Islam. They can prove it by picking any conservative blog between Geller/Spencer’s hype beginning in May 2010 until now.
Meanwhile – as you all predict national armaggedon because a building may, or may not go up, that doesn’t even have funding yet since the non profit hasn’t even been filed – the lib/progs are dancing around their economic record, and using putting the fear of a GOP Congress (filled with bigots) as their main talking points.
This has been a campaign that… were I of a conspiratorial mind… was designed by a lib/prog to take the wind out of the conservative and tea party sails for November. It couldn’t be performing more perfect for vacuuming the air on the issues.
It isn’t a question of changing laws. It is a question of sensitivity, neutrality, honor for those who have a dog in this hunt,
The law allows for equities to be considered. The fact that Mayor Bloomberg has come out in favor of the mosque is in part Jewish guilt, but mostly based on his affiliation with Arab companies.
FYI I always believed that he was the man for the job of Mayor because he couldn’t be bought. Now we know that his business affiliations will
supersede his mayoralty and yes, he can and will be boght.. Sad, And what a shame;
l
Great Mata.
We understand each other perfectlyl You think that BS propaganda which works on 85% of sheeple should work on us, but sorry I don’t buy it.
The classic lib response is to walk away, when you have no substance with which to counteract the opposition. Your claims, as they are, are based on opinion, conjecture, and supposition. Your articles are based on left winger ranting. Trust me, if it weren;t 2:30 am in my time zone I would be parsing out why they are all either BS. or ok as far as they go ( which is not far enough)
I don’t have a problem with Islam in general. I DO have problem with peole, who admittdly live with us, assimilate into our society anonymously, and act on their desire to kill us infidels.
Or haven’t you actually READ the Quran?
what do YOU propose to keep my kids and my family safe from this?????????????
Oh, Mata, and your nasty comments are really funny. 😛
Try using intellect instead of attacks. Really you should not take this personally.
Hog Heaven: Please back off the condescending pedal a bit. It is not pretty on you or anybody else.
Please check your records to make sure I am not lying about my time here at your website. May even go back as far as 2004 but it is probably 2005. Would I waste my time coming here that long not knowing it was a conservative site? Again condescending attitude is not pleasant to have to deal with.
Lefty charge!! Go verify what I just wrote about your friend Mr. Aye and then tell me it is nothing more than an allegation. Right out of the lefty play book. And all this time you trying to convince your readers that you guys do not do name calling.
As I mentioned to DKK, you guys seem to be a bunch good guys doing great work and it is this issue which has brought out stuff in you guys that I had not seen before.
Also you need to know that I am not a farmer and I do not harvest straw. Almost everything you stated about the opposition here is made up of nothing but strawmen. Do I need to step you back to each position you seem to have given us without or approval. Here is a list:
Cordoba People are terrorists
Codoba People are associate with 911 terrorists
we are at war with Islam
the Cordoba People are all bent on destroying the US and transforming it in a caliphate (my word not yours)
a national armaggedon is coming if the mosque is built
Rauf is a known terrorist
opponents hate Muslims
All strawmen to make your arguments appear to be more reasonable and civil. In your mind, I am sure they are but . . . well there are those who disagree. I understand and appreciate both sides, do you or are we just a bunch imbecile GOPer playing into the libs hands? If so, then the problem is you and those who agree with you for having no appreciation for those who would disagree except your own person strawment.
Your argument for not opposing the building based on the right to build is specious. If the people in the area decide that such a building is inappropriate at that location, they can and should be listened to. And, IMHO, there should be nothing offensive about a community choosing what can and cannot be built in the confines of it space. This happens all the time with communities rejecting Walmarts, Targets, garages, movie theaters and even churches and such even though the buildings would be on private property. The community should have the final say as they will have to live with it. The government should not be involved.
I am against such a mosque but am not fired up over it. I simply have better things to do than getting out of wack for such a thing. If it happens, so be it. You will not see me in a picket line anywhere.
Final word – I ain’t going away anytime soon.
and I admitted to being electronically challenged when i posted Chill’s artiuclate and well spoken comment. However I cannot take credit for itl. See above.
On the other hand, I am happy to defend the point. Go for the fight no matter what eh?
Cordoba People are terrorists
Codoba People are associate with 911 terrorists
we are at war with Islam
the Cordoba People are all bent on destroying the US and transforming it in a caliphate (my word not yours)
a national armaggedon is coming if the mosque is built
Rauf is a known terrorist
opponents hate Muslims
CHill, truer words have not been spoken. There is a reason they named this project Cordoba. And like it or not, the reason was NOT benign. They thought the American sheeple were too dense to figure out what Cordoba meant. But lo and behold. we DID figure it out. Hell, if it were so benign or meaningless, they would not have changed it to Park 51. LOLOL
Hog Heaven: Bigot! Did you not understand the concepts that I just wrote concerning logic fallacies? Are you just looking for more straw for me to harvest? Now I truly do wonder about what is going on here.
I was called a bigot based on a post that I wrote. Following so far?
It was the classical ad hominem circumstantial argument where the attacker is trying to prove that I came to the conclusions I did because I am a bigot. Following so far?
My challenge to the attacker was rather than do personal attacks, let’s have a discussion and he can tell me where I am wrong. If successful, then I will change my mind which automatically negates his earlier ad hominem circumstantial argument that I was a bigot since bigots are that way because they cannot (for whatever reasons) change their minds. This is the end.
Do you see any indication of me calling anyone a bigot. I was called the bigot not any of you. I do not play that silly little liberal game. I will admit I am wrong if given persuasive evidence, logic or common sense.
You really need to relax a little. I do really believe you guys are doing a great job.
@DKK #54:
Islamic law is interpreted differently by different Muslims. There is no “one size fits all” understanding of Sharia. As I wrote before:
Perceptions of what Sharia is and how it should be implemented and to what extent varies greatly amongst Muslims. Most want democratic principles and religious values to coexist in their government. They see a straying away from religious values as one of the causes of secular government’s inability to govern morally and justly.
Most Muslims polled, like many Christians, believe that their own religion and values should play a role in government. Like conservative Christians, they share a deep concern over how modern secularism has led to a perceived decline in faith and family values. John Esposito’s The Future of Islam, pg 41:
They express a desire for Sharia (basis for religious values) as “a“ source of law; but the same majority do not want Sharia as “the“ source of law. BUT, neither do they want to live under a theocracy. Pg 146, The Future of Islam:
On Rauf and Sharia:
No. I was just trying to be helpful after you and I got off on the wrong foot, for which I accepted responsibility and blame.
Well, “courteous” isn’t how I’d describe your “tone”; but you’re right that you didn’t enter in here, insulting anyone. And if you look at my first responses to you in #43 and #45, I pretty match you in tone and tenor. If you see anything insulting there, please let me know. I think how you received those comments and how I replied back was the beginning of my rudeness, for which I take ownership and apologies once more.
No, of course you do. What I am just trying to make you aware of, from the authors’ perspective and those who have been following the discussions and debates over weeks now, is that it becomes wearisome to reply to the “same ol’ same ol'” for every new wordslinger that arrives into the saloon, itching to express what’s already been covered again and again. I don’t mean to demean your opinion. Just letting you know why I and Mata might seem a bit irritable. Isn’t your cross to bear; it’s ours.
So if it was extremists who murdered our citizens on 9/11, can you understand how Muslims who share the “same” faith might take it personally when their faith is made to be indistinguishable from al Qaeda’s Qutbism and Taymiyyahism? That not all practitioners of Islam are salafi and wahhibis? That many Muslims who disassociate themselves from the global jihad movement believe what al Qaeda did was an un-Islamic thing to do? Some can argue the point, but it remains that many Muslims sincerely believe it was un-Islamic.
So when opposition to this project includes rhetoric about how “we’d never allow Japan to build a Shinto shrine at Pearl Harbor”, it basically equates the attacks of 9/11 as being perpetrated not be “Muslim extremists” as you call them, but by Islam itself.
I don’t support the Cordoba House project; but neither do I confuse who it was that attacked us on 9/11. That is why for me, if this goes through and is built and funded by those other than the global jihad movement, I don’t really consider it a “slap in the face” or a “monument to Mohammad” or an “Islamic victory flag planted at Ground Zero”.
The symbolism is only as powerful and as meaningful as the power we give to it. And we’ve given this a lot of power, entrapping us into creating a win-win situation for the al Qaeda network and affiliates who are at war with us. Because now, after all the media attention and some of the vitriolic rhetoric which includes Islamophobic comments in the national spotlight, we are “damned if we do, and damned if we don’t”. If the Project goes through, yes, Zawahiri and bin Laden can have a smile of satisfaction knowing that it causes us pain, even though they had nothing to do with the building and funding of this. If the Project gets derailed due to the stiff outcry over it, then they can propagandize this as proof-positive to the Islamic world that Muslims are indeed persecuted by the U.S., when they themselves failed in the endeavor to make majority Muslims believe it, and buy into their Qutbist ideology.
Thanks for the civil and courteous discourse. Much appreciated.
As Mata pointed out to you on another thread, I’m just one of the barkeeps, but not the owner of the saloon. I hope you stay a while. Drink’s on the house. And no need to tip-toe around here. Make as much din as you care to make. Just realize that if you choose to play rough, don’t cry foul if someone hits back hard.
What I take issue with in regards to the “chickenhawk” style of arguing, is that it is a tactic designed to shut down debate. And you’re someone who professes to want “intellectual discourse”.
Because you lost friends and live in NY, somehow that makes your opinion more “right”? More “knowledgeable” about Rauf and what this Project may mean in the grand scheme of things? Ok, then none of us will dare challenge your opinion since we lack the credentials.
There actually is some merit in the value of experience. But realize that sometimes two people can have the same exact experience and come away with totally different lessons learned from it.
Karen Hughes wrote an excellent opinion piece in WaPo. One I can agree with.
Yes, I believe my point of view is more right. Not because of my experience personally, but because it should be a balance of the equities.
Balance a possibly sincere desire of a religion to outreach to the community, which may or may not be using the 13 story citadel as a community center or a Trojan Horse, compared to the pain of the victims of 9/11 families and loved ones over whose remains they want to build and who vehemently oppose it.
Sorry, it comes square out in favor of the families and loved ones who don’t want it. They can build elsewhere. And they should.
@DKK: I respect your opinion on that. Everytime I see this:
I see it knowing full well that it is the moment, seconds before my friend, his companion, and their 3 year old son were murdered.
Everytime I see this:
And all the video footage captured of it at different angles, it is their murder captured forever on film.
If Park 51 gets built, the reason why it won’t cause me anguish is because my belief is we are at war with the global jihad movement of takfiri terrorists. The al Qaeda network and their affiliates. Not with Islam. To me, we do Zawahiri and bin Laden a favor by subscribing to the narrative they tell the Muslim world, that the West and U.S. are at war with Islam. That’s al Qaeda’s message to the Muslim world, to rally a movement. That it is U.S. imperialism that is the cause of Muslim suffering in the world; that we are persecuting them and their religion. So when
and when an FA commenter says we should grenade the Mosque (not an exact quote), we merely accomplish a favor for the global jihad movement by giving validity to the false propaganda and narrative. And we undermine this message:
America haters and radical Islamists do not need an excuse to war with the west and scapegoat all their dysfunctions and problems onto us as the cause of it. But the anti-American propaganda and conspiracy theories have a difficult time overcoming the reality of the record. And eventually, that rubber has to hit the road and potential jihadis have to reconcile the reality of Muslim presence and prosperity within the U.S., with America’s record of rescuing Muslims, liberating them and then leaving, providing disaster relief to Muslim countries, and put it up against the fantasy that the American boogeymen are out to get them.
Honestly, I understand all that. And I also have read how bin Laden and company are using any anti Muslim sentiment to their advantage. But there is a middle ground- where allowing the citadel to be built where it doesn’t hurt– again –those whose lives were destroyed by 9/11 terrorists.
No one is saying the mosque should not be built. All they are saying is just don’t build it THERE. I for one support outreach and community involvement and social intercourse between all cultures. But Muslims in general who want to extend themselves to the community simply should not seek to trump the feelings of people whose lives were destroyed in 9/11. I can see how that would be a slap in the face. And frankly, I don;t get it. If moderate Muslims genuinely want cross cultural understanding and tolerance, then they really ought to start practicing a little of it, too. It would be a great show of respect.
DKK and Wordsmith: (Deep sigh of relief) These last two posts once again justifies my continued presence here. Very, very good responses. As a conservative living in Southeast Asia (after three years in China where a lot of stuff is blocked) it is often difficult to find information that provides both sides to the issues in one place. My position on this issue tends to be with DKK. I do not put much stock in the gleeful reactions of terrorists one way or another. Those terrorists in charge know what they are doing and will use whatever they can or make it up to keep their followers fired up. Being afraid to express my opinions because it may do this or do that, simply is not part of who I am and what I believe. Political correctness at its ugliest. Even if we hugged and kissed all the Muslims in America every day for the rest of our lives, these terrorists would find a way to use it against us. To say these issues do such and such in the Muslim world is not very logical. In fact, even yo, Words, pointed out that their really is no such thing as a Muslim world where people follow Islam uniformly.
Also, I do not put much stock in the belief that the Cordoba mosque or the controversy about Obama’s religion is distracting voters away from the real issues surrounding the economy. They, for me, are not distractions but simply symptoms of the real and present dissatisfaction with this current government and it’s policies. Kind of like firefighters fighting a huge forest fire all day and taking a break to relax but ending up in brawls or loud arguments to blow some steam off from the real task at hand. If is frustrating to see this wretched government operate and we citizens can do nothing about it because the guys in charge are not listen. The Cordoba mosque issue and the Obama religion issue allows some of us to vent and at least have some input that is being picked up by the MSM. They are sideshows that do not detract from the economy in which all Americas have to live with each day. This economy and the unemployment remain the main fire burning across America.
Now, I have a question that has been nagging me for some time. Historically, how do you guys and others figure out what is true and was is false about Islam. A great example was the concept that the Christian church in Cordoba was taken over after the conquest of Spain and turned into a victory monument (mosque) and this has been common practice among Muslims. Somebody (maybe you Words) painted a very pleasant picture of what happened. Immediately, someone else presented a totally different picture of the events. How does one REALLY get to the truth. Islam apologists paint rosy pictures of the peace and wonderful societies Islam offers. Islam haters paint nearly the exact opposite picture. The histories are polar opposites.
I have the BBC series Crusades hosted by one of the Monty Python guys (he is indeed a noted historian). His account of what happened, although most was pretty accurate as far as I could tell, was very, very negative toward the Crusaders and when there were any doubt, he always slammed those ignorant Europeans destroyers of the wonderful civilization the Moslims had built.
For example, one of the causes of the Second Crusades was when the Caliphate of Jerusalem burned down the Church of the Nativity. (This is off the top of my head so it is conceptual and not detailed). Word of this got back to the Pope and he began organizing a second crusades (obviously for other reasons as well). This series portrayed the Caliphate as realizing his mistake and rebuilding the Church out of remorse for being unIslamic. Other historians (a minority), place the cause of the rebuilding as fear of the coming onslaught that his spies were informing him of.
Some historians believe that the “enlightened” concept of Islam during their successful years in Spain and elsewhere was overdone to maintain a balance of power. If the people of Europe who gaining power and prosperity at the time knew the truth about the ongoing barbarity throughout the holy land and in Spain, the Pope and company would lose control. Of course, this is poopooed by the majority of scholars (all of which are bona fide liberals) as simply bigotry. These minority historians are, however, not dumbies and have backed up what they wrote with some interesting and convincing proofs. The majority dismissed them as bigots simply for not following the party line.
What to believe? What to believe?
CHill, starting when I was about 20 years old, I wore around my neck a cross, a star of david and a medal that said “allah” in arabic. With the wisdom of that age, I thought I was bridging the gap. Were it only so easy.
Chill…
You raise a very good point. I’ve been left wondering what it is that gives such faith in Rauf’s moderate islam. The issue of taqiya has been raised many times, and it is scorned as simply islamophobic propaganda. The issue of the intent of islam to conquer the world for islam has been mentioned, but we are assured that only a relative few are jihadists, the rest of the muslim world just wants to live in peace. The fact is – to me, at least – that both statements can be true. There may in fact be only a relative few muslims who intend to conquer the world through force…but that doesn’t negate the possibility that others have every intention of imposing islam on the rest of the world through “peaceful” means. I’ve raised the issue of the islamic behavior in Europe and GB, only to be told that “our” muslims are a much “better” class of people – more willing to live in a western style “tolerant” society, and are ready to respect other religions. The issue of the Muslim Brotherhood plan (which is non-violent – strictly political) for the US has been raised, but even given the demonstrable progress that the plan has made in the last 40 years, that too is given no legitimacy, because the MB is seen as belonging to the extremist “few”.
All that said… assuming that there are in fact such moderates in islam, given that there are also radicals, what gives Aye, Mata and Word the confidence that Rauf is one of the moderates, and not one of the radicals intent on deceiving us? That question has not yet been answered to my satisfaction.
suek: I have just spent the last fifteen hours or so reevaluating research I had done years earlier on why I believe that Islam is not the religion of peace the Muslims and the liberal oriented Westerners would have us believe (in some cases, force us to believe). I have not changed my mind. What I found really interesting is the Muslim sites that defend the religion of peace and they try so hard to come off as unbiased and objective. Unbiased and objective when every time they mention Allah they follow it with May Allah Be Praised. And, of course, when they mention Muhammad it is followed by such words of praise as well. For one to use these articles to establish a conclusion would be dishonest. These Muslims have dogs in the hunt. They are incapable of discerning any imperfections in their Quran and other writings and thus bend reality to meet their objectives.
The same can be said for people who try to present arguments against Islam. There purpose is not to present the truth for truth sake but to attack Muslims. They, too, have dogs in the hunt. These articles refuse to address the good that can be found in the writings of Muhammad.
One of the most interesting articles can be found here:
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0302/201.html
This is written by an Indian Hindu who discusses why people are incapable of reading texts and admitting what they read when they have their dogs in the hunt. He readily admits problems in the Hindu sacred writings. His article discusses the obvious violence that Islam supports and even commands its adherents to follow.
I am also in the process of rereading Karen Armstrong’s biography MUHHAMMAD which has been praised as one of the best. It was a gift from a Moslim student I had from Bangladesh (imagine, if you will, a Moslim giving such a gift to a known bigot.. Ha, Ha). What struck me early on is the complete negative portrayal of the early monks who were executed in Cordoba at the hands of the Moslims. Her conclusions are that these killings were totally justified as the monks were crazy people.
I thought this strange so I went to the Catholic historical records of the time and read them. A completely different historical record is given. What the heck, I said to myself. I then Googled Karen Armstrong and – well, let us say that her dog in the hunt is really, really big. She is a FORMER nun who obviously has little love for Catholics. The liberals all love her which should tell honest people all they need to know about her. I will, however, finish her work of obvious fiction.
Anyway, back to your comments. While doing the research, it struck me that those who support the building of the mosque in order to NOT give the terrorists propaganda to use to recruit other terrorists are, in fact, allowing the terrorists to dictate what they say and how they act. Welcome to Terrorism 101 – the basic objective of the terrorist. Can’t say this because the terrorist will use it against me. Can’t do that because the terrorist are watching. Talk about puppets on a string!
And, also, I am insulted by the almost universal condemnation by the left and a few of our sponsors of anyone who dare speak out against the mosque as bigots or publicity seekers. New Yorkers suffered the loss of its citizens. What I see in the protests are genuine people speaking out against something that is hurtful and divisive. But, say our beloved sponsors, this pain is not real and should be overlooked in favor of dancing to the terrorists strings so that we do not give them ammunition to work against us. As I said earlier, IMO, we could kiss, love on, dance with, celebrate with Muslims every minute of every day and the terrorists would find something to justify their hatred and attacks. The terrorist actions and thinking do not enter the equation when in I research, ponder from my experiences and come up with my conclusions. They are, for me, total none players in my academic and intellectual life.
Watch the dancing puppets, so cute and sweet
Hidden up above them are the stings that meet
Perceptions undiscovered that we can’t see
Forcing away the protection known as liberty
Silently it creeps into the cloudy night
Controlling the dancing puppets left and right
Hiding in the concept what might will be
Forcing away the protection known as liberty
Smile all ye puppets with your strings so tight
But be careful with smiling so not to cause a fight
Dream of love and charity at the end of your string
But most of all dance to what the terrorists sing
If the Imam in question is truly trying to build that bridge he will not build the mosque with so much controversy behind it. Building it with so many people against it means only one thing = it is not about building bridges.
Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims
Schools across America have dropped the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslims around the world and encourage terrorism against the US. A government-backed study has revealed it found most liberal teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting Muslim students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.
“We must never insult our American Muslim students,” said the President, “because this would send the wrong message to Muslims around the world who would then immediately add to the number of terrorists already lined up at our borders trying to get in to kill us.”
In addition to the Holocaust, the President listed the following historical events being deleted from history books:
11th Century Crusades – western histories tend to contradict what is taught in local mosques
World War II- Moslims are portrayed as joining the Nazis and helping Hitler eradicate Jews from the earth. Current American history text books teach this was a bad thing while local mosque teachings indicate it was a good thing.
Founding of the USA – Moslims are not given their rightful place in the establishment of the United States. This shows how anti-Islam the country really is. Deleting it would insure that no new terrorists would ever be recruited again.
American Civil War – Moslims are offended by this event because if one studies the origin of slavery in Africa the students could potentially find that almost all the slave trading originated with Muslims slave traders. This would go against the teachings of the local mosques that states Muslims are without sin. By dropping this subject, the President also agreed that this would be beneficial in proving how evil the Americans really are.
The study, funded by the DNC, looked into ‘emotive and controversial’ history teaching in primary and secondary schools. It found most liberal teachers are dropping courses covering the above events at the earliest opportunity over fears that more Moslims will be recruited to terrorism. The report also said teachers were unable to confront anti-Semitic sentiment and Holocaust denial among Moslim students.
Also forbidden was the teaching of the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict unless it was approved by the local mosques. Researchers warned that teaching such subjects could very well multiply the number of terrorists in the world by several thousand.
“Researchers warned that teaching such subjects could very well multiply the number of terrorists in the world by several thousand.”
Indeed. Adherence to this philosophy virtually guarantees the radical agenda’s success. For the rest of us- Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. Must be nice to be the vocal minority who can work it out where they always win. And then to get a bunch of sheeple to buy into it, who are so afraid they are “violating” someone else’s culture that they destroy their own.
It’s a sad tonight.
@ post #76: The factual content of this is nil.
It’s a variant of a chain e mail that was originally circulated in the UK in 2007. It was subsequently circulated in the US, with changes and additions tailoring it for a US audience.
Maybe it’s time to reconsider the anti-Muslim strategy, when someone like Ron Paul starts using words like demagoguery.
I don’t know whether what you say is true or not, but in practice CHill’s observations seem to be true. Politicos argue out both sides of their mouths about what we should and shouldn’t do. I have read recently that the more we challenge the mosque venue, the more “islamophobic” we appear. Gee. whatever happened to free speech? It seems that every time you object to it, you are called racist, or worst. Somehow, I just have a problem with that, since my personal objection is based on a past horrific terrorist event and is presently based on a request for respect for those who would be offended by the mosque in Ground Zero neighborhoold.
Word for the day-
“Dhimmitude.”
Greg et al: It is a parody. I only used the first two or three sentences of the original and then added the rest to enhance the concept of “puppets on a string,” dancing to our fears.
It is a joke meant to be funny. It is not real. Hello.
I thought the event “founding of the USA” and then how “deleting it” would stop terrorism was pretty funny.
Wordsmith: You ain’t got nothing on me.
@CHill:
Ah… *S*
My uncle forwarded me something with a similar opening line in total seriousness. Your post may escape into the wild and eventually reappear in my mailbox.
Reality is sometimes stranger than fiction. This is _not_ a joke. I ran across it trying to find the name of the muslim woman who is on the California Textbook Approval Commission (and I just made that name up – it’s what they do, but they probably have a different name).
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/1937
Can you imagine what would happen if schools had a section where they “lived as Christians for two weeks, and observed the old strictures of Lent”? My point is not that either _should_ be taught, but rather – once again – the double standard. Christianity bad, islam good.
By the way…here’s their article on the mosque. They have some good links and basic info.
http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/4486