RSS Feed MenuU.S. President Barack Obama has indicated he’s not going to get involved (embroiled?) in the issue of building a $100 million Islamic centre and mosque near the site of 9/11.
Officially he has no opinion — the White House calling it a local issue for local politicians to resolve.
That’s a bit of a cop-out, and not true.
A new mosque near the 9/11 Ground Zero site is, or should be, a national issue, if not an international one. It is so insensitive and inappropriate, that it boggles comprehension why any rational person of goodwill would even contemplate it.
For Obama to view it as a “local issue,” is like saying 9/11 was a local, New York issue, and not a concern of the president. Besides, Obama has no hesitation about intruding in other issues that could be considered local – such as Arizona trying to stem an influx of illegals from Mexico by questioning people who might be in the country illegally, but haven’t done anything criminal.
Obama is suing Arizona because it has trod onto turf that is usually a federal responsibility, and will likely bode ill for Democrats in November’s mid-term elections. Across America, polls show people side with Arizona.
Building an Islamic Center at the site of 9/11 may well be intended as a gesture of reconciliation. Certainly that’s what its proponents say. But it would inevitably be seen as a statement, and is so offensive to the families of those who were killed by jihadists on 9/11, that the argument should be over before it even begins.
We tend to forget that when those hijacked airliners were flown into the twin towers of the World Trade Centre, thousands of Americans headed for the site and saved countless lives from the burning buildings. A few hundred rescuers – cops, fire fighters and others – also died trying to save those trapped.
By every standard, Ground Zero is a place of reverence. While the pro-and-con debate continues, another factor emerges that mitigates against the damned thing being built: Who will build it? Do you think for a moment New York’s construction workers are going to happily work on this symbolic structure?
It can be guaranteed that protests and demonstrations will be endless at the site if construction actually begins. Before being completed, tensions will be exacerbated. Needlessly. Recklessly. Not what most Muslims and Americans want.
The issue has surfaced anew, since the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted unanimously that the present building – the four-story Burlington Coat Factory – is not a landmark, and is already being used as a mosque by local Muslims.
The building was damaged on 9/11 by wreckage from the doomed aircraft.
Incredibly, ground-breaking for the Ground Zero mosque is scheduled for Sept. 11 – the anniversary of 9/11. Does it take much imagination how al-Jazeera and the militant Muslim world will greet that occurrence?
Rightly, Jihadists will see it as their victory.
While feelings run high, there’s no attempt in the U.S. to deny Muslims their right of worship, or to put mosques wherever they have a constituency. But there’s a common sense factor that deserves consideration — and Kuwaiti-born Feisal Abdul Rauf, Imam of the proposed mosque, should be more sensitive than he apparently is.
That also goes for New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has endorsed the mosque for all the wrong reasons. Shut it down before it’s too late.
pampl // Aug 5, 2010 at 2:52 am
The real patriots are the people who believe in free and diverse religious practice. People who believe in religious majoritarianism don’t belong in America.
jakester // Aug 5, 2010 at 2:53 am
I am not a NYC resident, but I live way upstate NY. So my opinion counts too, since they attacked my state. Here it is: the people taking the side of this mosque are the lowest grade of knee jerk useful idiot liberals. You support a bunch of fanatics that makes the Christian Right look like the Woodstock crowd, and makes the Woodstock crowd look like patriots. Good work, make sure all the fascist retards have their rights but none of us who care can even exercise basic rights of our republic.
jakester // Aug 5, 2010 at 2:59 am
pampl,
No you are not a patriot, you are a useful idiot. No one has denied anyone the right to practice their religion, it’s just we think that this mosque int hat location is an affront to the USA. It reminds me of the convent the Polish Catholics built in Auschwitz. But this is even worse since the Catholic Church was not actively supporting the Nazis, though they certainly weren’t some fifth column as some theos would like us to believe either, while the Al Qaeda and the world wide consortium of related Muslim goons are practicing a traditional form of Islam.
pampl // Aug 5, 2010 at 4:43 am
Stop writing “useful idiot”. The only one it makes look like an idiot is you.
Yes, I realize you think it’s an affront to the USA. That’s because you don’t know anything about it and don’t know what the USA is about either.
John // Aug 5, 2010 at 9:08 am
I agree that its a cop-out for Obama to play Switzerland on this issue. He should weigh in. Perhaps his silence relates to lingering fears among teapartiers that Obama is himself a Muslim? Surely, if were to weigh in, he would have to support the decision to build the mosque.
I also agree that building a mosque *near* (the mosque won’t even be visible from the WTC site) ‘ground zero’ will be a statement. But I think it will be a statement that we Americans are better than the fundamentalists who attacked us. That, while we will never forget what happened that day, we won’t blame an entire group of people for the actions of a relative few. Mr. Worthington should be careful when speaking for ‘the families of those who were killed by jihadists on 9/11…” Also, who “tend[s] to forget” that “thousands of Americans headed for the site and saved countless lives from the burning buildings”?
Also, I doubt there will be any difficulty in finding construction workers willing to work on a major project in this economy. Anticipation of protests is a pretty ridiculous reason not to do something, isn’t it? By that rationale, the entire civil rights movement shouldn’t have happened.
Why will jihadists see this as ‘their victory’? Jihadists are interested in spreading hatred – you could argue that they would see this mosque as a defeat. They were unsuccessful in making New Yorkers hate Islam. Take that, jihadists!
“[T]here’s no attempt in the U.S. to deny Muslims their right of worship, or to put mosques wherever they have a constituency.”
Uh, yeah there is. Thats exactly what we’re talking about. duh.
sinz54 // Aug 5, 2010 at 9:10 am
The Muslim world will see this ground-breaking on September 11 as a victory for Islam. That those weakling Americans were unable to stop the Muslims from even claiming part of the WTC area as theirs.
During World War II, would we have allowed a Japanese cultural center to be built just near where the Pearl Harbor attack took place? I very much doubt it. FDR would have denounced it with all the vehemence he could summon up.
Today’s liberals are of a very different stripe. They simply don’t believe in the cultural superiority of America, and that’s what is at the heart of their weakness in the face of Soviet aggression or their willingness to accept this mosque. They think the world will think better of us if this mosque is built. Only their counterparts in Europe, perhaps, may think better of us.
But the Muslim world will be laughing at us. All they respect is power and force. The Quran, arguably more an army field manual than a religious text, teaches Muslims that goodness is whatever advances the cause of jihad.
In today’s politically correct world, liberals tell us that we’re supposed to respect all religions equally. And sure enough, secular liberals have contempt for all religions equally.
But comparative religion is still a legitimate intellectual discipline.
And as far as I’m concerned, modern Islam is a ghastly religion, backward and barbaric, with a higher propensity for violence than either modern Judaism or modern Christianity. Which other religions but Islam teach that lying is a valid tactic of spreading their holy message? Which other religions have millions of adherents today who believe that terrorism and mass murder are valid tactics of spreading their holy message?
The only reason we’re facing terrorism today is that Islam is still stuck in the Middle Ages.
So much for the worse for them.
I see no reason to coddle them, rationalize them, or make excuses for them.
John // Aug 5, 2010 at 9:22 am
Thats a good point, Sinz. Jesus teaches us to hate our neighbors and never forgive. Oh, wait…
The WWII analogy is an interesting one, but wouldn’t you agree that the mass internment of Japanese Americans is generally regarded as an ignorant over-reaction and a stain on our history?
Its possible to embrace Islam as a legitimate, peace-loving religion while at the same time condemning radical fundamentalists who commit horrendous acts in the name of Islam.
Elvis Elvisberg // Aug 5, 2010 at 10:44 am
They simply don’t believe in the cultural superiority of America, and that’s what is at the heart of their weakness in the face of Soviet aggression or their willingness to accept this mosque.
Nope. Our confidence in American culture is unshakable. Our freedoms and our pluralism are at the core of what it means to be American.
Conservatives thought that the Irish were unassimilable, the Italians were unassimilable, the Jews were unassimilable, and that we needed to maintain segregation: “the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically” because of “the median cultural superiority of White over Negro.” This is the eternal conservative id, now raging at the First and Fourteenth Amendments because they give rights to hated minority groups.
Islam is a faith of a billion people. Somewhere between two and a half and seven million Muslims live in the US today. Of course they cannot all be defined by the actions of the 9/11 terrorists any more than Christians are defined by Eric Rudolph or Tim McVeigh. The people who argue today that no mosque should be built within 3 blocks of the WTC site would have argued against the construction of Catholic churches in Boston due to the actions of Sacco and Vanzetti. Happily, the history of America is the history of the triumph of American values over tribalistic hatreds. The construction of this mosque will be another chapter in that story.
balconesfault // Aug 5, 2010 at 10:53 am
Sinz: They simply don’t believe in the cultural superiority of America
Sure we do. We just have a wildly different opinion of what that cultural superiority is.
You believe that our cultural superiority stems from a contention that our religion is superior to your religion.
We believe that our cultural superiority stems from a contention that our pluralism is superior to your tribalism.
When I read Sinz, I become convinced that he’d had been one of the strongest advocates of what many of us consider one of America’s sadder moments – the internment of Japanese during WWII.
Cindyflo // Aug 5, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Maybe Obama does not feel he should get involved because this is privately owned property, which is already acting as a mosque…
more5600 // Aug 5, 2010 at 1:08 pm
I live in the neighborhood near ground zero and am quite familiar with the plans for the community center and its proximity to the ground zero site, I must say the hysteria over this planned building is completely disproportional to the reality of it being built.
Maybe some simple facts:
1. It is not located at the WTC site.
2. It can not be seen from the WTC site.
3. It is not located on a route one would take if walking to the WTC site.
4. It is not visible from any public transportation hub that one would take to get to the WTC site.
5. It will not look like a mosque, no minarets, no ornate religious symbols, no golden dome as the protesters images like to present.
6. The WTC site can not be seen from the community center.
7. The roof of the 13 story community center will be visible from the Freedom Tower, but almost all of Manhattan will be.
8. The community center will be open to the community regardless of religious affiliation.
9. The community center will be modeled after the 92nd Street Y.
10. It is being legally built on private property.
11. The group building the mosque have been serving the lower Manhattan area for decades and are well known and well regarded.
12. The zoning board approved of the community center by a 29-1 vote.
Now lets restart the conversation.
Slide // Aug 5, 2010 at 3:57 pm
As a New Yorker, and a retired law enforcement officer, I am extremely proud that our mayor and city is welcoming the community center. It is the essence of what America is all about. The hatefully insanity of the Muslim haters, exemplified by Mr. Worthington is not only deeply repugnant but manifestly un-American.
So Jackster, sinz and Mr. Worthington, wipe up the hateful spittle from your chin and read the names of the Muslims that died on 911 and tell their families that they shouldn’t have a house of worship in lower Manhattan:
Samad Afridi
Ashraf Ahmad
Shabbir Ahmad
Umar Ahmad
Azam Ahsan
Ahmed Ali
Tariq Amanullah
Touri Bolourchi
Salauddin Ahmad Chaudhury
Abdul K. Chowdhury
Mohammad S. Chowdhury
Jamal Legesse Desantis
Ramzi Attallah Douani
Syed Fatha
Osman Gani
Mohammad Hamdani
Salman Hamdani
Aisha Harris
Nabid Hossain
Shahzad Hussain
Talat Hussain
Mohammad Shah Jahan
Yasmeen Jamal
Mohammed Jawarta
Arslan Khan Khakwani
Asim Khan
Ataullah Khan
Ayub Khan
Qasim Ali Khan
Sarah Khan
Taimour Khan
Yasmeen Khan
Zahida Khan
Badruddin Lakhani
Omar Malick
Nurul Hoque Miah
Mubarak Mohammad
Boyie Mohammed
Raza Mujtaba
Omar Namoos
Mujeb Qazi
Tarranum Rahim
Ehtesham U. Raja
Naveed Rehman
Yusuf Saad
Rahma Salie & unborn child
Shoman Samad
Asad Samir
Khalid Shahid
Mohammed Shajahan
Naseema Simjee
Jamil Swaati
Sanober Syed
Robert Elias Talhami
Michael Theodoridis
W. Wahid
busboy33 // Aug 5, 2010 at 4:43 pm
@more5600:
“Now lets restart the conversation”
Okay — Teh Mooslims are dancing on the graves buried on God’s holy site!!!
Oh, you mean dealing with reality? That’s no fun . . .
gman // Aug 5, 2010 at 8:41 pm
The main terrorist in the Oklahoma City bombing, Timothy McVeigh, was Catholic. A Catholic church near the Federal Building was nearly destroyed in the bombing & needed to be rebuilt. I don’t recall any controversy surrounding McVeigh’s religion nor the that impact of his house of worship on the community.
kosloff2032 // Aug 5, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Do you know what I fail to understand?
I fail to understand why conservatives are going around worrying about the prospect of radical muslims and muslims throughout the world proclaiming “victory” and dancing in the streets like they did on 9/11. People keep on talking about how muslims will see this as a sign that the West has capitulated in these conservatives’ minds.
Firstly, I don’t believe that everyday Muslims either know/give a crap about a COMMUNITY CENTER thousands of miles away, but for the sake of argument lets say they will be happy and declare “victory”.
WHO GIVES A DAMN!!!!
The muslim world is uniformly poor and backwards. Look at NYC, its economic GDP is bigger than that of every single Muslim country on Earth. Any Muslim who thinks they can declare “victory” over the West cause they built a freakin 13 story building in a city more powerful than all of their backwards, 3rd world countries is an idiot and should be laughed at, not scared of. Our country with the push of a certain red button incinerate the entire Muslim world, yet people like Gingrich are scared they will interpret this all as a VICTORY?
This lack of faith in America by conservatives is shameful and makes me sad to call myself a conservative. I for one, know that the United States is powerful enough to handle thousands of Mosques all over our country. Liberals are supposed to be the ones who feel that America is a “sick and weak society”. They are the ones who supposedly “hate America”. Well guess what conservatives, if thats all true, then it is our responsibility to BELIEVE in America, not sound like a bunch of puss** and fear what some idiot jihadist who is hanging out in a cave in a shi* hole of a muslim country.
Joe In NH // Aug 5, 2010 at 10:45 pm
In addition to the 56 9-11 victims with Arab/Muslim sounding names listed by Slide there very well may have been a number others killed by the terrorists who were Muslims. I am talking here about African-Americans who are Black Muslims and have not taken “Muslim” names. And I bet some Bosnians were in the Towers when they went down.Yes- Bosnia is a Muslim country.
Those who argue that this mosque will be disrespectful to the memory of those who were murdered on 9-11 should be required to go to each family of a Muslim who worked and died in the Towers and explain to them how the mosque disrespects the memory of their missing family member.
Finally, it is interesting how all the people talking about another revolution and how we need to strictly follow the constitution are either very, very quiet on this issue or very vocal in trashing the First Amendment.
Sunny // Aug 5, 2010 at 11:37 pm
I’m sort of idly wondering why disagreement of an argument apparently needs to include all the ad hom about the person. But only idly
I’ve enjoyed Mr. Worthington’s pieces, but pretty strongly disagree with him on this.
And for these reasons.
1) It is a local issue. It’s a matter of zoning and building codes, which are applicable to everybody. If the area is zoned for houses of worship, and the building meets whatever criteria NY has established, it gets built. Because…
2) It’s rule of law and equal protection. You can’t deny somebody the right to do what every other person or group can do simply because you don’t like them right now. If you do so — if you deny them the right to build a mosque in a properly zoned area, then …
3) The case goes to the Supreme Court as a religious discrimination case. Where the mosque wins, hands down. There would be no *seeing* it as a victory — it *would* be a victory.
We either are who we say we are, or we aren’t.
And it is hard. I’m absolutely not going to call somebody a Neanderthal because they have strong feelings about it. If I’d lost a loved one in 9/11, I might feel some pretty strong emotion about it, too — it’s normal and natural and nothing to condemn. I would have preferred that the issue had never arisen, but it has.
But the whole purpose of law is to hold an agreed-upon line during times of deep emotion. It keeps lynchings from happening. It keeps things operating pretty fairly for everybody. It’s what we want –but it is also going to mean sometimes the Klan marches in Skokie, and sometimes a mosque gets built in NY.
If there are any Muslims anywhere celebrating this as a symbol of victory (I’ve seen nothing of that as far as evidence) — well, big whoop. I see it as a victory for religious freedom and rule of law. And as a pragmatic matter, it sends a big fat message to all those Muslims living in the US, who *are* patriotic Americans and feeling a little under seige that yes, we do mean what we say.