Preach It, Mr President

Conservative Cabbie

Alex.

Firstly "in God knows how long" is exactly right. how long has it taken him to say something on this matter? Not so long ago, Robert Gibbs was saying that the White House has no comment on the matter because it was a local issue. So why comment now? The spat with the "professional left" perhaps? You value such a cynical approach? Interesting.

Second. It's a mosque at the site of 9/11. So what's wrong with calling it a "9/11 mosque"? Particularly when you are writing on twitter. 9/11 mosque is a lot shorter than Ground Zero mosque. Note, on her facebook entry on this matter she doesn't refer to it as the 9/11 mosque.

Third - Obama refers to it as a mosque in "lower manhattan". That's just a pathetic obfuscation.

Fourth - The question is not whether it is "planned as a tribute to Al-Qaeda", a strawman as Palin has never suggested such a thing. The question is whether the building of the mosque is disrespectful to the victims of 9/11 and whether others in the muslim world will see it as a victory mosque. Judging by the pictures from around the world of muslims cheering as the planes smashed into the twin towers, I suspect there will be a not insignificant minority of muslims who will perceive it as a "victory mosque".

I'd love for you to explain a) why this mosque can't be built elsewhere and b) why you are so disinterested in the feelings of the victims of 9/11?

Conservative Cabbie

"The laws that we apply without regard to race or religion; wealth or status"

Obama is so full of crap. Without regard to wealth? So we won't be seeing tax increases on the wealthy then? Yeah right.

ndm

Alex Massie writes:

-- So, these were probably Barack Obama's best words in god knows how long

Indeed they were.

anit

mr.pres,what about the feelings of the family victims? i think it hurts them.

Wael

As an American and a Muslim living in California's Central Valley, an area that is deeply conservative and where bigotry toward Muslims is not uncommon, I've been disturbed by some of aspersions cast on Muslims in this debate over the New York mosque. And I've been subjected to various racial epithets and discriminatory attitudes for many years, so much so that I moved to Panama for three years to get away from it. So I was deeply moved to read Barack Obama's words. His speech touched me, because it affirmed that I too am American, and I have an equal right to be respected under the law and in society. That may seem obvious, but it has not felt obvious for some time.

Ron Todd

Sometimes Obama’s reminds me of Neil Kinnock on the surface he seems like a good speaker but in a quiet moment if I think about what he said I have to wonder if it made sense.

No mention that building the Mosque in that location cannot be anything other than offensive to the victims and their families, that those building the Mosque must know that selecting such a location will be seen as at least insensitive or more likely as a challenge to western values.

If the builders who Obama claims as moderates, must either be intentionally trying to provoke a reaction that will let them claim victimisation if the building is stopped, or if allowed to plant a symbol of Islamic dominance. Neither suggests a group of moderates willing to integrate into a new country with higher values.

Christina

You know, I have nothing but admiration for Obama, but I'm afraid his backing of the mosque at Ground Zero will have sealed his fate as a one-term President. What a waste of a brilliant man...

Daniel Dare

Barack Obama supports the development of a mosque and Islamic cultural centre close to the ground zero site in New York. I trust that the President can be equally outspoken and supportive of the New York Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender community should they plan a Gay Bar development next to the mosque.

We must all learn to be more understanding of each community’s cultural differences. If it should not be thought provocative by one community to build a mosque close to the ground zero site, then neither should it be thought provocative by the Muslim community to build a New York style gay bar next to a mosque.

Mike

Watching this story from the outside I am utterly shocked and concerned about the attitude of those opposed to this Islamic Community Centre

It is reminiscent of World War 2 Germany and the Anti-Jewish attitude prevalent in the public. It is a dangerously fine line that the American government is treading in allowing such sentiments being openly expressed without proper ridicule.

Must history repeat itself? Must there be another Holocaust but this time of Muslims?

I am glad President Obama has finally stepped out and issued a statement about this situation I only hope that he has not waited too long as it seems the seeds of hatred have sprouted.

Cuffleyburgers

I suspect he only said it because Bloomberg said something similar previously and got away with it.

I've not got a lot of time for Bloomberg, but he's worth 20 obamas.

russell

duck 'n cover Alex....the numpties will be after you....

PaulG

What a surprising ignorance of Islam! It does not take much reading to discover that Al Qaeda is not a gross distortion of Islam, but thankfully it is a gross distortion of many Muslims. This does not show the "strength of our values". But it does show our distinct lack of backbone.

Stylin

You Objectors seem to be forgetting or ignoring the fact that victims of 9/11 included Muslims too and that families of victims are Also in support of this Cultural Centre at its designated location (you guys keep referring to it as a Mosque but it is not)

Do not make it seem like all the victim families are opposed to this.

Do not make this an issue of faith vs the usa as you are doing.. It is not.. to say so is a display of ignorance on such a massive scale that most of the world looks down upon you and assume you to be racists bigots.

If we were to amuse your viewpoint that this is the USA vs Islam (or more accurately Christianity vs Islam).. shouldn't the USA/Christians be deemed the "evil doers" here? considering the hundreds of thousands of civilians that have been murdered by them? Since decades before 9.11?

You see how your viewpoint is rather ridiculous?

Flatdog

Obama is hypocritical to invoke the Founders of the United States of America, given the way he has ridden rough-shod over the Constitution ever since he became president.

Note too that the location is referred to as the Cordoba Building. Check out the significance of the Spanish city of Cordoba in Islamic history, and you will realise how provocative and disrespectful these people really are.

Flatdog

@Stylin August 14th, 2010 9:44am

1. The Cordoba Building will include a mosque, so you are being disingenuous.

2. It is not an issue of faith vs the USA, because Islam is not merely a faith - itis an ideology whose end game is world domination and it hides behind the religious aspect in order to invoke western tolerance for it's nefarious activities. If Islam is a religion, how does racism come into the picture? Nobody here has mentioned race until you did.

Stylin

Race is quite pertinent in this matter if you cannot see how then you are blind to the situation befalling you.

Arabs, hell anyone brown skinned including Indians are being ridiculed by Americans.

You guys are preaching hatred towards a faith and its followers exactly how the Germans were doing it towards Judaism and its followers and you seem willingly ignorant to that fact.

And its not called the Cordoba Building its called "Park51"

You can deny its a faith all you wish and mark it as an ideology but if you do that you can certainly do the same for the other Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) which have ALL had their hand in terrorism and continue to do so.

You cannot have a double standard here where you place blame and accusations on one faith and ignore it when those same circumstances are prevalent in another including your own.

I don't think even those of you who are calling to arms understand the very fine line you are stepping over here. You are leading towards another Holocaust but of Muslim deaths.

Stylin

A further note. I constantly read people harking upon the fact that its named Cordoba and to look at the History of 'Cordoba' like its some sort of villainous term to name it.

Cordoba was conquered by many empires the Roman empire and Muslim Empire and finally the Spanish empire.

The city of Cordoba thrived under the Muslim empire and was the largest most populated and advanced city in the world during this time with its population around 500,000.

Before this time it was a small run down city after the Spanish claimed it the city became decimated virtually in ruins with its population dropping down to the 10-20,000 range.

So what's wrong with using the name of one of the largest most advanced cities for its time, in our history? furthermore it is the name of the charity which is helping back the construction of this cultural centre.

Granted the name is now PARK 51 but if it was Cordoba I can't see why anyone would complain.

As for saying this cultural centre has a prayer room making it a Mosque; this is not true whatsoever.

Have you ever been to any cultural centre?? they allow groups the use of rooms to do with as they please the fact that this cultural centre is allowing a room to be used for prayers does not make it a Mosque.

That's like saying your local Community Centre/Park is a Sports Stadium for MLB/NBA/NFL because there's a field people can use. (ITS NOT THE SAME THING)

Flatdog

@Stylin August 14th, 2010 10:41am

You are being disingenuous again. The Jewish religion does not seek converts, and so anti-Semitism can be equated with racialism. By contrast, Islam not only actively seeks converts, but advocates murdering anyone who resists conversion. Therefore Muslems are members of just about every race on Earth, and so by being anti-Islamic, one is not being racialist. And as Islam is an ideology, being anti-islam is on a par with being anti-communist, not discriminating on the basis of religion.

Contrary to your other claim, the Islamic project in Lower Manhattan IS being named after Cordoba - see the online Telegraph or Daily Mail. That information didn't conjure itself up out of thin air.

Flatdog

@Stylin August 14th, 2010 11:01am

The significance of Cordoba is that it has been part of the expansionist Islamic tendency which has been ramped up since 9/11 - yesterday Europe, today America and the world. Just as the Islamists try to demonise the Crusades, which were an early attempt to prevent Europe being overrun. The Crusaders needn't have bothered - Eurabia is a reality today.

We need to recognise this backward, medieval construct for what it is, or one day, we will all wake up with prayer mats of our own, and then it will be too late.

Stylin

lol im sorry i can't continue a conversation with someone who is delusional and does not see that he is condemning a whole religion due to extremists for exactly what another religion and perhaps all religions have done or are doing.

and it is clear by your "convert or die" belief that you are in fact unclear about the Quran and have obviously nit picked and 'soundbited' the Quran

Again its another condemnation/misunderstanding that can be found in say The Holy Bible; Jesus demanded that nonbelievers were to die as well.

You are literally Blind... and calling the Crusades a preemptive attack?!!!

Im sorry but you need psychological help. You are clearly with some intelligence but it has clouded your rationality, as it does so many.

(and i needn't read the daily telegraph or any other news article to know that the name of Cultural Centre will in fact be Park51; i suggest you look at the Charity involved with the projects website in which they state the name shall be Park51)

To equate the naming of Cordoba with some form of domination is a matter of perspective and a rather weak one; you can look at anything and find a "evil" perspective rather than what it truly is; look at the 'Apple'.

Baron

Stalin, whoops Stylin, you seem to be very knowledgeable, could you perhaps answer the following.

Why did the sponsors of the mosque go for a site that’s so near to the place of the worst atrocity committed on the US soil by the few followers of the creed that wants to build it?

Mike @ 7.00:

Your comparison stinks, go talk to plankton.

Augustus

I think President Bush would have approached the matter differently. Bush was mistakenly reaching out to Islam, claiming it as a religion of peace. But Bush, unlike Obama, has an emotional connection to Ground Zero, and Bush understands his fellow Americans' emotions regarding Ground Zero, something Obama seems incapable of. I think President Bush would have pushed for the mosque to be built elsewhere, and would certainly have been more sensitive to the victims.

Chris

Nothing to do with rights. Everything to do with a sense of decorum and decency, which those proposing to build this building in that place clearly do not possess. THey have every right to do so, but they are wrong to do so.

JohnAnt

Obama's frigidity of manner, his rather conceited rhetoric and inability to empathize are pretty obvious in this speech. He's certainly not helping matters at all. As so often, one wonders if being unhelpful was rather his intention.

CB

I have never understood the objections to this mosque. To prevent the construction of the mosque (apart from construction/structural reasons) a gross violation of the first amendment rights of these worshippers.

In US jurisprudence, such violation of constitutional liberties requires to proceed at the very least a "rational basis" - a legitimate and reasonable use of government power. But what is this rational basis? There is none.

Objections like "Islam is not merely a faith - itis an ideology whose end game is world domination" or "if allowed [it will] plant a symbol of Islamic dominance" are nothing short of Islamophobic. Yes, you heard me right. I-s-l-a-m-o-p-h-o-b-i-c.

Imagine if someone had objected to a synogogue on the grounds that "the jews are an evil brotherhood bent on the control of the world financial system". They would be dismissed as an anti-semitic crank. Or perhaps "the roman catholic church is an ideology bent on world domination" as a legitimate objection to a church being built? Yet here it seems acceptable all of a sudden.

The objections to the Mosque are nothing more than an ugly bigoted reaction of people recoiling at the prominent sight of a faith and culture which they prejudicially and irrationally loathe.

We should not give in to such base, primitive instincts. The Mosque should be built, and without delay.

Tendryakov

Surely the best plan would be to build a multi-faith place of worship, where Muslims could worship, as well as Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhist etc. At the new hospital where I worked we managed to establish such a centre. True, the Muslims fought hard against having to share a place of worship with lesser mortals, but in the end they had to acquiesce. Incidentally, my personal research indicates that the Scottish borders are desperately short of mosques. How about a super mosque in, for instance, Kelso?

Ganpat Ram

As it happens I am a huge admirer of German culture.

I love reading Goethe, Hegel, Marx, Schiller, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Thomas Mann, Brecht......Some of my favourite writers, and some of the grandest ever.

I love the music of Beethoven and Wagner.

BUT........I respect the Germans for having the tact not to demand a centre to celebrate the astounding grandeur of German culture near a notorious site of a Hitler atrocity.

German culture is priceless, but it should not be celebrated where its crimes have shattered innocent humans on a mass scale.

The Muslims in America lack this simple tact.

Obama will pay a heavy poltical price for his inability to see this point.

The mosque near Ground Zero will be a mounment to Obama's human and political stupidity.

Noa Zrk

Like the ever declining number of Spectator posters on a typical tendentious Massie blog, fewer Americans by the day care for what this disaster that passes for a US president says:

"24 per cent of American voters strongly approve of the president’s job performance, almost twice that number, 46 per cent, strongly disapprove. According to Rasmussen, 65 per cent of voters believe the United States is going down the wrong track, including 70 per cent of independents..."

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100050412/the-stunning-decline-of-barack-obama-10-key-reasons-why-the-obama-presidency-is-in-meltdown/

Ganpat Ram

CB:

See my comment above.

I think I have said the last word on this subject?

You make a big deal of decrying "Islamophobia".

But people are RIGHT to fear what is dangerous.

Almost EVERY single Islamic society is a by-word for ruthless oppression of freedom.

Non-Muslims have every reason to fear the growing numbers and power of Islam. That is not prejuduce.

As Muslim numbers mount in, say, Europe, I would be extremely surprised if, in twenty or thirty years, these countries enjoyed anywhere near as much freedom as today.

Flatdog

@CB August 14th, 2010 1:54pm

A phobia is an irrational fear. Fearing people who believe that for murdering you they will go straight to heaven and be rewarded with a harem of 72 virgins, is not irrational by any sensible definition.

ndm

Glenn Greenwald gets to the heart of the matter in yet another astute post on his Salon blog:

-- The campaign against this mosque is one of the ugliest and most odious controversies in some time. It's based purely on appeals to base fear and bigotry. There are no reasonable arguments against it, and the precedent that would be set if its construction were prevented -- equating Islam with Terrorism, implying 9/11 guilt for Muslims generally, imposing serious restrictions on core religious liberty -- are quite serious. It was Michael Bloomberg who first stood up and eloquently condemned this anti-mosque campaign for what it is, but Obama's choice to lend his voice to a vital and noble cause is a rare demonstration of principled, politically risky leadership. It's not merely a symbolic gesture, but also an important substantive stand against something quite ugly and wrong. This is an act that deserves pure praise.

ndm

Conservative Cabbie writes:

-- Second. It's a mosque at the site of 9/11. So what's wrong with calling it a "9/11 mosque"? Particularly when you are writing on twitter. 9/11 mosque is a lot shorter than Ground Zero mosque. Note, on her facebook entry on this matter she doesn't refer to it as the 9/11 mosque.

What is wrong with referring to it as the 9/11 Mosque is that it is not at Ground Zero - it is several blocks away which in a dense urban area makes it well away. The twitter excuse is utterly lame - if saying something on twitter requieres you to lie about it then perhaps you shouldn't say it.

Conservative Cabbbie continues to show his geographical ignorance:

-- Third - Obama refers to it as a mosque in "lower manhattan". That's just a pathetic obfuscation.

The Islamic cultural center is not being built in the Upper West Side; it is not being built on the Lower East Side; it is not being built in Midtown - but it is being built in Lower Manhattan. It is a dangerous combination of ignorance and bigtry that has opponents of the center deny that truth.

Conservative Cabbie goes on:

-- The question is whether the building of the mosque is disrespectful to the victims of 9/11 and whether others in the muslim world will see it as a victory mosque. Judging by the pictures from around the world of muslims cheering as the planes smashed into the twin towers, I suspect there will be a not insignificant minority of muslims who will perceive it as a "victory mosque"

There is already a prayer room at the site of one of the 9/11 attacks - the Pentagon. Is that also disrespectful of the victims? Of course, not. It respects the freedom of religion for which they died and whic remains a core value of the American consitution. The only people who perceive it a s a Victory Mosque are bigots and racists in the Republican Party and those who support their bigotry.

This issue reminds me of the case of Terry Schiavo where a core part of the Republican Base takes hold of a terrible idea and captures the party with its stupidity. This capture was so bad that Bill Frist, the Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a doctor, even went to the extent of "diagnosing" Schiavo from his office. As then, we now have a Republican Party, enslaved to stupidity, making judgment on this cultural center, its location and its motivation - all from the Wasilla twitter.

ndm

Flatdog writes:

-- A phobia is an irrational fear. Fearing people who believe that for murdering you they will go straight to heaven and be rewarded with a harem of 72 virgins, is not irrational by any sensible definition.

It is only not irrational because it is paranoid

AY

ndm

Would you support building Christian cultural centre, named after Hagia Sophia, somewhere in the Arab/Muslim Middle East?

Or in Europe, or in the US, in the place where there is significant local Muslim population?
In Bosnian Srebrenica, in particular?

If not why not?

Ganpat Ram

NDM:

Your point is mysterious indeed.

If someone is paranoid, surely he is irrational?

To be fair to the Muslims, the Koran is no more full of virulent denunciation of unbelievers and misbelievers than the Bible, particularly the Old Testament - though there are many ferocious passages in the New Testament, too.

David Holbrooke once wrote a very enlightening essay pointing out that Westerners' bibiolatry had generally blinded them to how horrific a book of lethal threats and denunciations the Bible actually is.

The great difference between the Westerners and the Muslims is that over the centuries, drawing on the heritage of Graeco-Roman pagan culture - far more free in its tendencies - Westerners largely liberated themselves from the tiny, gloomy, totalitarian world-view of the Bible. The Muslims did not have that luck. They remain in the Middle Eastern mindset.

As I always say, had the Jews not been exiled, Israel would today be no more liberal than Saudi Arabia.

ndm

One thing that puzzles me about comments on this issus in the Spectator is: why do people outside the US seek to restrict the freedom to practice religion of Americans? It is one thing to complain that a country restricts some right or other of its citizens but surely another to complain about the free exercise of that right.

Captain Christy

I was in a betting shop the morning after 9/11.It is used by a lot of Muslims (yes, they do gamble) and it was just one parade of "High Fives" and celebration. I cannot believe that the President of the USA wants to allow this mosque - can he not see what is happening in the world ? God help us all !

Conservative Cabbie

ndm writes:

"What is wrong with referring to it as the 9/11 Mosque is that it is not at Ground Zero - it is several blocks away which in a dense urban area makes it well away."

So far away in fact that the building this mosque is designed to replace was damaged by the undercarriage of one of the planes that smashed into the Twin Towers. Nice try.

He goes on:

" it is not being built on the Lower East Side; it is not being built in Midtown - but it is being built in Lower Manhattan."

We all know that. We also all know that Obama was being disingenuous by referring it to Lower Manhatten and not it's actual location - Ground Zero, the families of the victims certainly think the mosque is being built their and I'd rather go with their feelings than yours and Obama's callous obfuscation.

Conservative Cabbie

Mike writes:

"Must history repeat itself? Must there be another Holocaust but this time of Muslims?"

Oh good. The godwin-ists have arrived. Because the battle over one building is just like the holocaust. Get a grip.

Snowman

Alex Massie writes:

So, these were probably Barack Obama's best words in god knows how long

Indeed they were, chips in ndm.

I, too, concur that the words were his best for a long time, it’s his deeds that stink.

DavidDP

When leading Republicans start talking about "Americans and Christians" against "Muslims and Foreigners" it becomes increasingly clear where the motivation for attacking the Muslim centre comes from, and it's not concern for the feelings of the 9/11 victims relatives.

normanc

Imagine if Germany wanted to build a monument to fallen bomber pilots in the East End of London (would they be so crass? I doubt it). And that was 3 generations ago.

You're not even close to how Americans must be feeling.

The best suggestion I read was to let the mosque go ahead, then build a tittie bar at one side of it and a gay club at the other.

It's not about freedom to practice religion (NY already has more than 30 mosques), it's about where it's situated.

Beefeater

Mike:

You say:
"It is reminiscent of World War 2 Germany and the Anti-Jewish attitude prevalent in the public. It is a dangerously fine line that the American government is treading in allowing such sentiments being openly expressed without proper ridicule.

Must history repeat itself? Must there be another Holocaust but this time of Muslims?"

Stop spouting this increasingly common meme. It should embarrass anyone who has even the smallest pretension to being educated in history. There is no comparison between the Jew-hatred of WW2 and the current "Islamophobia". I shall not list the many reasons why, but point out one big difference: no Jew, no group of fanatically religious Jews, ever declared war on Germany (or any other country in Europe), or murdered thousands of Germans in the name of Judaism or Zionism. The point being:
antisemitism is not a for-cause hatred or fear.

Prejudice against any individual Muslim for based on the history of Islam - including the recent history of Al Qaeda, Hizbullah, Hamas and the many others of the Jihad franchise - is not the mark of a civilized man, and in the civilized West, the law does not permit it.

No Muslim - including the iffy "moderate" Rauf and the property developed Gamal - is being barred by the state from building on private property. Muslim compounds, schools, cultural centers are being built a-plenty. Actual sedition is being preached in certain mosques with impunity.

And then there is the fact that certain Muslims not only deny the actual holocaust against Jews, but advocate a more thoroughgoing one. It is preposterous that Muslims (particularly Arabs, who joined Hitler) and those who wish to protect the constitution (rightly) should expropriate the holocaust for Palestinians, and panic about "Islamophobia" bringing about a holocaust against Muslims, when Muslims on this very day are targeting random Jews all over the world, and are listening to sermons on wiping out the sons of apes and pigs. History might well repeat itself - against the Jews.

That some Americans ask for "sensitivity" in not putting up a "bridge" between cultures on the site of the 9/11 attack (the building as hit by the landing gear of one of the planes) does not make them bigots.

Calling them bigots suggests a bigotry of another sort.

And one last point: your statement that the American government is "treading a dangerously fine line" in allowing "such sentiments" to be expressed "without ridicule" shows a totally incoherent view of constitutionally exercised free speech, the limits of government power, and the power of government propaganda - quite aside from the moral confusion in comparing the "sentiments" to Nazi antisemitism.

Beefeater

Ganpat Ram:

"As I always say, had the Jews not been exiled, Israel would today be no more liberal than Saudi Arabia."

Stop saying it. It is absurd.

DavidDP

"Imagine if Germany wanted to build a monument to fallen bomber pilots"

The only way that analogy would work is if they were building a memorial to the suicide bombers. Which they aren't. So as an argument it doesn't work.

Vern

Tiresome misdirection as usual from Commander Massie of the pious and self-righteous squad.

Few dispute Feisal and his unknown backers have the "right" to build the mosque. Even if he has never denounced Hamas etc. It's whether it's in good taste or a needless provocation of local sensibilities that's the issue.

It certainly isn't building bridges between communities. 60+ per cent of the US populace are opposed, and as 60% of Americans are not Republicans it's hardly a right wing issue, although the factually challenged Mr. Massie would rather conceal/elide this fact as is his custom.

Do I have the right to open a titty bar next to a church? Yes. Should I? No. Should today's Germans, who are no more Nazis than all Muslims are members of Al Qaeda, apply to open a branch of the Goethe Institute at Auschwitz? Probably not, not even if the German lessons are really good and you can get lots of Schiller for free from the library.

It's that simple, but beyond the grasp of our esteemed blogger evidently. Still, I know why he keeps posting on it. Makes him feel a little less lonely when he scores a few comments.

Beefeater

Stylin:

You too are spouting nonsense about an American holocaust against Muslims.

You say, "Have you ever been to any cultural centre?? they allow groups the use of rooms to do with as they please the fact that this cultural centre is allowing a room to be used for prayers does not make it a Mosque."

Any room or building can be a "mosque". Like a synagogue, a mosque is a gathering place. It is the gathering of the community for prayer - and other reasons - that make it a mosque.

The distinction between mosque and community center is irrelevant to the debate. Islam is a way of life, and a system of laws for governing every aspect of ilife, not merely five-times daily prayer. Park 51 (deliberately changed from "Cordoba House" to avoid arguments about imperial Islam) is a "bridge" between a culture of freedom of religion and speech and a religious culture that is not free. Islam has to be "interpreted" (against its own premises and authorities) very nimbly to sit comfortably with the constitution. Which is not to say that Muslims should not be permitted - like most religious people and leftists - their hypocrisy, as long as they resolve it with an "internal", not armed, jihad.

porkbelly

You will be saddened to hear, Alex, that the Islamic-Scholar-and-Apologist-in-Chief has attempted to backpedal his remarks: now he says he wasn't actually endorsing the Ground Zero mosque, just the general principle of religious liberty.

Right.

My suggestion: allow the mosque, let them bray praises for Al Qaeda from it to their hearts' content, but insist that a reciprocal Christian/Jewish "cultural center" be built in the heart of Mecca. After all, why wouldn't the Muslim world leap to prove that it is, after all, the Religion of Peace?

Baron

ndm @ 6.26 quotes approvingly another deluded pseudo-liberal: It's not merely a symbolic gesture, but also an important substantive stand against something quite ugly and wrong.

hmmm, so Obama’s entry into the fray happens to have a symbolic value, right? Building a mosque as near the place of the worst atrocity on the US soil is just a matter of utility, you know, the right of a couple of hundred followers of a creed getting to pray together.

Osama must be laughing all the way to the cave.

Ganpat Ram

BEEFEATER

I am surprised at your dismissal of my obvious point that if the Jews had not been exiled, they would have been no more tolerant than any other Middle Eastern nation such as the Saudi Arabians.

What is wrong with that assertion? You must admit that it was the many centuries of absorbing Western critical and tolerant ideas, derived from the heritage of Greek civilization, that Jews could become liberal in their attitudes. This is a matter of history. It was the French Revolution which abolished the ghettoes in much of Western Europe.

Snowman

one thing that puzzles me about comments on this issue in the Spectator is: why do people outside the US seek to restrict the freedom to practice religion of Americans?, asks ndm @ 7.03.

you drunk, cannot read or what? Nobody is seeking to restrict the freedom of religious practice of the Americans. ‘Build the mosque anywhere not there’ is what everyone has been saying. Why do you have to distort what people say? Is it the only way you can debate?

if the building of the mosque was indeed a question of pure utility rather than symbolism, it could have been built somewhere else, as were the other NY’s mosques. Nobody would have objected, including Palin, the Republican barbarians, the 70% of the unwashed.

and another thing: as you well know, some time back a Danish paper published a number of cartoons of Mohamed that the followers of Islam objected to. None of the papers have republished them, the reason given was ‘we have to be sensitive to the followers of Islam’. What about some reciprocity here, how about the minority of Muslims showing some sensitivity to the majority of the non-Muslims community, ha?

David Lindsay

Of course, in principle, Obama is right. Religious freedom, private property, nothing to do with "al-Qaeda", and all that. But whom do those who wish to build this mosque think that they would be helping? And whom must they consider that they would be harming profoundly?

Still, so much for smug, if not necessarily inaccurate, talk of "Eurabia" from Amerabia, where the muzzein's Call to Prayer has for a number of years echoed around Harvard Square. And where it really does now look as if a mosque is going to be built at Ground Zero.

William Jay

"Mischief in Manhattan"

"We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation"

Two board members of the Muslim Canadian Congress give their take on the story and it's quite "interesting".

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mischief+Manhattan/3370303/story.html

DavidDP

"Osama must be laughing all the way to the cave"

Indeed, certain people are doing their best to prove his claim that American is antagonistic to muslims correct.

Flatdog

@DavidDP August 15th, 2010 8:55am

That's a load of crap. Why wouldn't people be "antagonistic" to a group whose followers murdered over 3,000 in the worst ever attrocity on US soil, a group that has never condemned the actions of (as they would have us believe) "a handful of renegades", and countless thousands of whom were seen worldwide on 9/11 dancing in the streets?

These are the same folk who will see the 9/11 mosque as a symbol of victory for Al Queda, and on the day it opens, we will all be treated to another disgusting spectacle of these creatures celebrating in the streets.

The organizers of the "Cordoba Initiative" aren't fools - they understand all this, and it is exactly what they are working towards.

Baron

This is the third attempt to make this posting (amended). If it gets stopped again I shall shout on all other blogs next door that you or your guard dogs censor postings.

one thing that puzzles me about comments on this issue in the Spectator is: why do people outside the US seek to restrict the freedom to practice religion of Americans?, asks ndm @ 7.03.

nobody is seeking to restrict the freedom of religious practice of the Americans. ‘Build the mosque anywhere not there’ is what everyone has been saying. Why do you have to distort what people say? Is it the only way you can debate?

if the building of the mosque was indeed a question of pure utility rather than symbolism, it could have been built somewhere else, as were the other NY’s mosques. Nobody would have objected, including Palin, the Republican barbarians, the 70% of the unwashed.

and another thing: as you well know, some time back, a Danish paper published a number of cartoons of Mohamed that the followers of Islam objected to. None of the papers have republished them, the reason given was ‘we have to be sensitive to the followers of Islam’. What about some reciprocity here, how about the minority of Muslims showing some sensitivity to the majority of the non-Muslims community, ha?

DavidDP

You seem to be hell bent on proving Bin Laden's claims the the West will oppose all muslims correct. I'd prefer to oppose Bin Laden and his sort, not join in with his take on life as you do. You are just on the same side as him.

And people wouldn't be antagonistic to this group since, not generally being a follower of the Bin Laden world view like yourself, they understand that you don't treat all people the same and that because, say, a Catholic blows up an office block in London, you don't blame all Catholics.

Flatdog

@DavidDP August 15th, 2010 11:03am

Your analogy is just B/S. If a Catholic blew up a building in London in the name of Catholicism, (which is highly improbable) and the Catholic Church failed to condemn the act, (which is highly improbable)and thousands of Catholics danced in the streets worldwide, (which is also highly improbable)then there WOULD quite understandably be a backlash in Britain agnst Catholics.

Frank P

Flatdog

All your comments on this thread are rational, justified and a necessary antidote to counteract the naivety of the post and the disingenuous trolling of the usual suspects. The American government has been usurped and as a result the West is in its secondary stage of meltdown. We must wait until November to see whether the American electorate have awoken from their Obamesmerism and prevents the tertiary stage of this political syphilis. If not we are truly fucked, for this Nation has already been merged with the EUSSR and is therefore already neutered. Islamic jihad is winning the Propaganda war hands down, aided and abetted by bloggers such as the author of this post.

Pot Head

Flatdog Catholics blew up a pub in Long Acre that very nearly killed my dad, and from the Catholic church not a word.

Augustus

If "our enemies respect no freedom of religion", so too do the great swathe of religious leaders of whom the President so obviously approves. And this newly acquired territory will without doubt be exploited by the 'few' who did condone 9/11 in their temples of hate. A crowning insolence indeed
to the families of that horrible accounting,
of the charred and mangled bodies, of the shattered minds, of the broken hearts and homes.

Flatdog

@Pot Head August 15th, 2010 2:01pm

Firstly, the bombing was perpetrated by Irish republican terrorists, whose religion is unknown. The IRA is not and was not exclusively Catholic. Therefore, the Catholic Church was under no obligation to comment on the incident, although it has repeatedly condemned the violence stemming from Northern Ireland in the past.

Secondly, get a sense of perspective. Blowing up the bog in "The Sussex" hardly ranks right up there with 9/11.

ndm

In response to the following which I wrote:

-- one thing that puzzles me about comments on this issue in the Spectator is: why do people outside the US seek to restrict the freedom to practice religion of Americans?

Snowman writes:

-- you drunk, cannot read or what? Nobody is seeking to restrict the freedom of religious practice of the Americans. ‘Build the mosque anywhere not there’ is what everyone has been saying. Why do you have to distort what people say? Is it the only way you can debate?

If a Muslim group seeks to build a community center with a prayer room in Lower Manhattan and people say you can't build it there BECAUSE you are Muslims then people ARE rectricting the freedom of Muslims to practice their religion. As it is Muslims can already practice their religion at one of the 9/11 sites - the Pentagon quite correctly has a Muslim prayer room.

Baron

Alex, sincere apology, you donâ™t censor, but the systemâ™s dreadfully slow.

ndm

AY asks:

-- Would you support building Christian cultural centre, named after Hagia Sophia, somewhere in the Arab/Muslim Middle East?

-- Or in Europe, or in the US, in the place where there is significant local Muslim population?
-- In Bosnian Srebrenica, in particular?

-- If not why not?

If people want to build a religious centre anywhere they should go ahead and do it.

However, in invoking foreign parallels to Muslims building a cultureal center in Lower Manhattan AY implicitly repeats the idea proposed by Gingrich that the United States predicate its behavior on that of others. The freedom to practice religion has been central to the concept of America since the pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock in 1620. Americans should certainly not restrict their own rights because people in other countries do not possess these rights.

ndm

In praising Flatdog, FRank P writes:

-- All your comments on this thread are rational, justified and a necessary antidote to counteract the naivety of the post and the disingenuous trolling of the usual suspects. The American government has been usurped and as a result the West is in its secondary stage of meltdown. We must wait until November to see whether the American electorate have awoken from their Obamesmerism and prevents the tertiary stage of this political syphilis. If not we are truly fucked, for this Nation has already been merged with the EUSSR and is therefore already neutered. Islamic jihad is winning the Propaganda war hands down, aided and abetted by bloggers such as the author of this post.

This is not so much a demonstration that the American Government has been usurped but that Frank P is clinically insane.

Baron

ndm, if a Muslim construction consortia were to apply to build a mosque exactly on the spot the Twin Towers stood you would also be in favour, right?

You must be, following the rationale of your answer @ 7.23: if you said â˜you can't build it there BECAUSE you are Muslims then you WOULD be restricting the freedom of Muslims to practice their religionâ™.

look, have no desire to keep on pushing the issue forever, just one last point.

the small number of the followers of the Islamic creed I mix with are all opposed to it, they donâ™t give a shite about any principle of freedom to worship, any symbolism, the outcome of the November count, their reasoning runs something like this.

the siting of the mosque there is likely to raise anger and suspicion amongst the non-Muslim unwashed (as indeed it has already done), and that anger in everyday life will be directed not against the anointed of Islam, but against ordinary Muslims in one form or another, mostly surreptitiously, against people who like the majority of the non-Muslims unwashed want just to get on with their lives, do a job, feed the family, have a good time, pray.

people like you and Alex and of course Obama may feel noble by sticking to absolute principles and stuff, they cannot afford the luxury, they have to live in a society thatâ™s often more than tough. The mosqueâ™s siting makes it tougher still, if anything it enlarges the gap between us and them. Just the opposite what DavidDP you and some others want.

Augustus

ndm -
WTF have the Pilgrim Fathers in 1620 got to do with it? They certainly didn't bring any Muslims with them. You'll be saying next that Islam has always been part of America.
...Oh wait, the President already said that. Nice one! Using the occasion of Ramadan to rewrite US history.

ndm

Augustus asks me:

-- WTF have the Pilgrim Fathers in 1620 got to do with it?

Religious freedom.

Augustus seems unaware of the centrality of the Pilgrims to the modern American view of itself. Thanksgiving, the celebration of the Pilgrims, is THE national holiday of America.

Robert Bruce Lewis

It is not an issue of faith vs the USA, because Islam is not merely a faith - itis an ideology whose end game is world domination

Actually, this is only ONE kind of Islam--of which there are many different kinds, just as there are many varieties of Christianity. Doesn't ANYONE realise that there are at least SEVERAL varieties of Islam that would advocate putting up this mosque as REPARATION for what the 9/11 terrorists did in Islam's name? I say, let them build it, monitor what they preach in it, and IF it is jihadist triumphalism, THEN pull it down, but if it is moderate, law-abiding Isalm (as I suspect it will be, then WELCOME its contribution).

And, as for the suggestions about churches and synagogues in Mecca--which you KNOW would be a calculated provocation against those folks' idea of "pilgrimage," may I suggest that the British and American governments should jointly petition the rulers of Saudi Arabia for permission to fund the construction of an Islamic Centre and library in Mecca, staffed by British and American citizens and mullahs, who would work to disseminate OUR version of Islam, and to counter the Wahabbi sectarianism that has led to what moderate Muslims consider to be the mis-interpretation of jihad.

Both my suggestions are POSITIVE and CONCILIATORY, as well as hard-headed--as opposed to all this xenophobic drivel being spouted here.

ndm

Baron writes:

-- ndm, if a Muslim construction consortia were to apply to build a mosque exactly on the spot the Twin Towers stood you would also be in favour, right?

-- You must be, following the rationale of your answer @ 7.23: if you said "you can't build it there BECAUSE you are Muslims then you WOULD be restricting the freedom of Muslims to practice their religion".

I don't care whether or not an Islamic Cultural Center is built on Ground Zero. The hallowed ground is aleady being desecrated by the construction of large commercial skyscrapers. On further reflection, building an Islamic Cultural Center on the site may not be such a bad thing because it would show to Muslims that our concern is not with them or their faith but with the microscopically small percentage of Muslims who abuse their faith in the name of violence.

william b. huber

A few months after 9/11 Muslims began kneeling on prayer rugs each Friday afternoon from 12 -2 PM for blocks around the site of the attacks in lower Manhattan. These days the numbers are in the thousands. I lived in the area for years without seeing one Muslim on a prayer rug , ever. As far as I know Muslims do not pray on the streets anywhere else in the city. So the location is not a coincidence . And the building of a Muslim shrine within the shadow of the 9/11 murders is likewise neither a coincidence nor is it meant to be an exercise in multi cultural education or understanding. It is a deliberate provocation , no more no less. On 96th and 3rd Avenue there is an enormous mosque where tables are stacked each day with inflammatory hate literature calling for the extermination of the Jews and death to the infidels.
Now residents of this city are being subjected to lectures by the political class--and imbeciles in England--about our insensitivity because polls indicate that most of us would prefer that in those few square blocks a building that will stand as a victory to twisted minds who continue to celebrate hatred and murder.
The downtown mosque might be built , but it will be gone--as will the
Mosque at 96th & 3rd--in a few years. New York has a way of eliminating intolerance.

Archie

Why this comparison with Jews under Hitler? I have never heard of an incident in 1930s Germany where Jews flew an aeroplane into a building! Or is that argument too simplistic for the word-contortionists here?

Flatdog

@ndm August 15th, 2010 8:04pm

A qualified psychiatrist, are you? Well, Professor, your ability to make clinical diagnoses by dint of reading blog entries is nothing short of astounding. You should share your technique with the rest of the mental health community, and become rich and famous.

But seriously, the Soviets used to brand as insane all the people who refused to fall for their tripe, and filled their mental hospitals with them. I suspect you are of the same ilk. The last refuge of a marxist who is losing the argument is to cast aspersions on the opposition's sanity.

Flatdog

@william b. huber August 16th, 2010 4:16am

Amen to that, buddy!

Beefeater

ndm:

You say (not for the first time): "The hallowed ground is aleady being desecrated by the construction of large commercial skyscrapers."

The original Twin Towers - the World Trade Center - were towers of commerce. Are you perhaps of the quaint view that trade is infra dig, or dirty, not gentlemanly? Is it a Jesus money-lenders/temple thing? Or is it that you believe that original towers - symbols of American wealth and dominance - were a provocation, and that those Little Eichmanns working in the towers - in Ward Churchill's words - were asking for it? How does this square with your view - expressed in another thread -that the victims were martyrs, dying for the Constitution and its protection of rights to freedom of worship (and commerce). Surely it would be a fitting memorial to the Americans who died in the Trade Center to build another one.
Or maybe you are just a Pavlovian anti-capitalist whose knee jerks to kick business without thought.

Flatdog

@Robert Bruce Lewis August 15th, 2010 11:18pm

On the contrary, your suggestions indicate that you are bending over naiively hoping for lubrication. When the Great Man instructed us to turn the other cheek, those weren't the cheeks He had in mind.

Beefeater

Ganpat Ram:

The Jews did "absorb", as you say, over many centuries a lot of "Western critical ideas and tolerance". It is indeed a matter of history. They absorbed most of it after the French Rev, though. Out of the ghetto into the camp. Work shall make you free. Etc.

What might have happened politically had Judea remained as a state under or independent of Rome, and if it had not succumbed to Arab, Crusader, or Ottoman, and if Islam had not subjugated it along with all other Middle East countries, demands an historian with extraordinary powers of clairvoyant hindsight. What would have happened to Jews intellectually is beyond even such powers. What is certain is that Jews have contributed to the intellectual store of humanity at all times and wherever they have been allowed to play a part. The golden rule was an idea found in Greek philosophy and Judaic law. The history of liberalism - tolerance - could not begin without the Jewish contribution to moral philosophy. Nor could it end without recording the lesson that the Jews taught the West about its own tolerance.

Stuart Seacole Smith

Blimey, not for the first time common sense takes a flying leap out the window on a Massie post. And the nauseating comments by the would be islam experts just sound increasingly desperate. You know:
- it's not islam, it's islamism that's the problem (semantic bollocks)
- it's only a tiny proportion of muslims that perpetrate outrages in the name of islam (yeah, I know, but a frightening proportion of them either agree with it, or at least feel sympathy for those who do it).

I'm not saying all muslims are a problem (which they patently are not), or that they shouldn't be free to practise their religion. But it pays to honestly recognise the scale and scope of the problem, before trying to deal with it.

And as far as support for this ground zero mosque goes, well, it seems a lot of bleeding heart liberals wouldn't recognise a poke in the eye with a sharp stick if sharp stick came up and poked them in the eye. They might want to bend over and take one for the team, but I don't see why the team should bend over and take one for them. Bunch of plonkers.

aristeides

Should we not now add onto the end of Obama's comments:

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque" near Ground Zero, he told reporters during a visit to the Gulf Coast. "I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding."

Emphasis not needed or wanted, one suspects.

normanc

"The only way that analogy would work is if they were building a memorial to the suicide bombers. Which they aren't. So as an argument it doesn't work"

That's why I said in the next line 'You're not even close to how Americans are feeling' because it's a terrible analogy, one that doesn't even come close.

I can think of no other analogous situation in history. I wonder why?

Indy

Surely it is not the President’s job to give planning permission for the building of a mosque in New York City. If the builders have planning permission and comply with all the legal requirements it would be idiotic of the President of the United States to interfere with that. It’s not his responsibility. The fact that he says Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in his country is a simple statement of fact and as President that is a position that he strongly supports. If people want a President who doesn’t support that I guess they can vote for Sarah Palin can’t they?

Not for the first time, it seems to me that it is Obama’s clarity of thought which appears to count against him. Perhaps he would be more popular in the US if he thought less and talked more.

ndm

Josh Barro has a good post at NRO that ends with:

-- If it were generally the case that Muslims are being welcomed into our communities, and allowed to build their houses of worship without public hostility, then it would be possible to condemn the Cordoba House’s site without worrying about alienating and excluding Muslims generally. But unfortunately the complaints about Cordoba House are just the highest-profile example of a wish that Muslims would stay out of our neighborhoods - the trouble being that everywhere is somebody’s neighborhood.

-- In addition to being morally objectionable, undermining the integration and acceptance of Muslims in American society is a huge strategic error. Newt Gingrich doesn’t want mosques in Lower Manhattan until churches are allowed in Mecca - making the bizarre case that our level of religious liberty is fine so long as it is no worse than in Saudi Arabia. But Cordoba House presents an opportunity to show how we are better than Saudis - and that it is no skin off our back when mosques are built in America, even in the Financial District of Manhattan.

http://www.nationalreview.com/agenda/243752/very-long-post-cordoba-house-josh-barro

Ganpat Ram

BEEFEATER:

My main point is that the Koran is not substantially different from one of stern books of the Old Testament, like the Books of Moses. The same single-minded monotheism and promises of retribution to those who dissent from it.

Mohammed indeed is known to have associated with Jews and Christians in Mecca and to have absorbed ideas from them. The Koran is a later version of Mosaic monotheism, in Arabic. Moses is a central prophet of Islam.

These things need to be pointed out today, when people readily assume that Judaism and Islam have nothing to do with each other. In fact, without Judaism there could have been no Islam, a daughter faith.

It is hard to see how a Jewish community that had no secularising experience in the West could have been any freer than the Arabs; indeed, the Jews of places like Yemen were no different from their Arab fellow-citizens in civilizational outlook.

As for Jewish contrbutions to thought, no-one disputes this in the modern age. But the civilizations of Greece, India, China, Egypt and Mesapotamia all contributed incomparably more in terms of science and philosophy than Israel, in the Ancient World. The Bible is striking in its absense of the kind of abstract philosophy that Plato engaged in. Nor is there a huge contribution by Jews to science until the ghetoes were destroyed by the French Revolution. It is unfair, to say the least, to suggest that has something to do with Hitler's crimes. Hitler went out of his way both to uphold Christianity and to explicitly denounce the "liberty, eqality, fraternity" doctrine of the French Revolution.

verity

Indy - the City of New York gave permission. Nothing to do with the president. See, planning permission is granted within various jurisdictional areas. For example, the Mayor of Dallas is able to operate within Dallas. The Governor of Texas would have no role.

Are you seriously daft enough to think the president of 300m people studies applications for planning permission in thousands of jurisdictions?

That wouldn't leave him much time for conquering the world for alla!

Beefeater

-"But Cordoba House presents an opportunity to show how we are better than Saudis - and that it is no skin off our back when mosques are built in America, even in the Financial District of Manhattan."

Show whom?
"Skin off our back" is a spectacularly stupid metaphor, given the circs.

Indy

Verity - before you accuse other people of being daft perhaps you ought to read the comments you reply to.

"Surely it is not the President’s job to give planning permission for the building of a mosque in New York City. If the builders have planning permission and comply with all the legal requirements it would be idiotic of the President of the United States to interfere with that. It’s not his responsibility."

cg

For those of us who oppose Islamic terrorism, the likes of Flatdog and Beefeater are an acute embarrassment. They come across as ill-informed pub bores who are unable to understand basic principles. The centre in NY is not a memorial to terrorist bombers as they imply. All Muslims are not eveil, as they imply. What is certain is that if the likes of them had their way, every Muslim in the world would be driven to support Bin Laden. Is that what they want? I suspect it is. And sorry chaps but I doubt Obama will be a one term President, especially if he is up against Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich. Only in your deluded bubble could you think that those characters are attractive.

Beefeater

Beefeater:

But are Islamic terrorists an acute embarrassment for the Muslim promoters of Park 51 and their leftist supporters? Not acute enough.
Have a read of what that moderate Muslim bloke - ex-editor of Al Hayat, now at Al Manar TV - says about the stupidity of Muslims building a mosque near GZ in a commercial center. How it will reinforce identity of Islam with the mass murder, be a center for and focus for anti-Islam feeling (which will itself recruit Muslims -especially youf - into extremism).
Don't bother to answer. I'm off to the pub.

tommyt

In all fairness we have been creating ground zeroes near mosques since 2001.

Margate Sands

Mike and others who seem to equate the resistance to mosque with antisemitism in Germany before the war... Could you please tell me at which point Jews have done in Germany something even remotely similar to September 11 in US? Just so I have better perspective and understanding of your point, please...