News outlets are now reporting that the Imam behind the Ground Zero mosque is being advised by Manhattan Jewish Community Center officials.
I suppose this is meant to allay the concerns of mosque opponents in some way, because if the Jews are OK with it, it must be OK, since everyone knows, if the Muslims are after anyone, it’s the Jews.
But, believe it or not, Jews have been wrong before, and these particular Jews are wrong on this.
A small number of the 9/11 families also evidently support the creation of the uber-mosque just blocks from the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history — an attack done in the name of Islam, radical or otherwise. And neither of those facts matters at all because those well-meaning folks are missing the point and offering an argument that doesn’t cover the actual issue.
They are buying the PC bullpucky – that the issue is religious freedom – which is exactly what the Jihadists are counting on.
The JCC’s rabbi is “calling on Jewish and Christian institutions to accept the couple behind the project…because clearly what this whole controversy has unleashed is a tremendous amount of misinformation, lack of knowledge about Islam that we need to address.”
Not the point.
Let’s assume this “cultural center” and mosque, and the people behind it, are absolutely “moderate” Muslims determined to “build bridges.”
If that were the case, why, considering the national and international uproar this proposed project has unleashed, would the builders refuse to do the “moderate” thing and build the project somewhere else?
An alternative site has even been offered by New York’s governor, and rejected. And that, in my opinion, is proof that the project’s backers are about something other than bridge building. Or even mosque building. They’re about building a mosque right there.
In an interview, the JCC’s rabbi rejected former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s analogy comparing the project to Nazis erecting a monument near the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington. She described the controversy as being more like periods in early American history when some colonies outlawed the building of synagogues.
But she’s clearly wrong, since no one is even proposing outlawing the building of mosques, just suggesting an alternative location for this one.
No one is trying to keep anyone from practicing Islam and there are mosques all over New York and the country that have been built without controversy.
It’s the site that’s the problem, and anyone trying to make it about Islamophobia is mistaken or lying.
If it were about trying to abridge American Muslims’ religious freedoms, people would be demanding the dismantling of existing mosques, and no one is doing that. If that were where the project’s opponents were coming from, it would look more like Pakistan, where the Taliban recently announced plans to start murdering foreign aid workers whom they believe may be trying to spread Christianity as they rescue victims from the flood waters there.
Just a snapshot of what we’re really up against in our fight against radical Islam.
No, what’s going on with the project’s opposition is mostly about the message its location overlooking the 9/11 hallowed ground would send to our enemies – the ones that danced and handed out candies as they watched the towers fall.
And despite Jon Stewart’s admittedly funny appeal for us not to care what the crazies think, what they think too often translates into what they do, so what they think matters.
And this, to me, is outside legitimate concerns about where the project’s funding is coming from. But both concerns boil down to emboldening the Islamists, who seek world domination though Jihad, both violent and stealth, and who could use this uber-mosque for their own purposes even if that’s not its builders’ intentions.
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here