Washington Post columnist on Ground Zero mega-mosque: "there's a profound cultural tone-deafness in pursuing this project at this time and in that place"
From Jihad Watch:
In "Balancing rights and prudence" at the Washington Post's On Faith panel, July 20, Tom Flynn not only comes out against the mega-mosque at Ground Zero, but admits that Islamic supremacism in its political manifestation is "not a distortion of Islam; it is a particular understanding of Islam that crops up far too frequently to be so casually dismissed."
This controversy has to be viewed in the context of New York City's 9/11 trauma -- and the context of one uncomfortable truth: 9/11 was a faith-based initiative. The hijackers were operating on strongly, perhaps primarily, religious motivations, and the religion that motivated them was Islam. To be sure, it was Islam as they understood it, and millions of Muslims do not understand their faith in that way. On the other hand, the number of Muslims who do understand their faith as Muhammad Atta did is far from insignificant. What we sometimes call "political Islam" is not a distortion of Islam; it is a particular understanding of Islam that crops up far too frequently to be so casually dismissed.
I'm willing to grant that the Cordoba House organizers have a very different understanding of Islam. For them it may truly be (pardon the politically correct phrase) a religion of peace. But Islam is not always so.
It's time to acknowledge that the understanding of Islam that made Ground Zero into Ground Zero lies within, not outside, the spectrum of Islam as it is understood and practiced around the world.
In the abstract, Cordoba House has the right to build its mosque. When complete it would probably provide downtown New Yorkers with excellent neighbors. But there's a profound cultural tone-deafness in pursuing this project at this time and in that place.
6 comments:
Check out this comment to the article:
The only solution consistent with American values is to let them build their center; and the NYPD protects every citizen's right to conduct a protest on the sidewalk in front of it by tearing violent passages from a Quran.
Actually, as Leonard Peikoff of ARI points out in his comments regarding the mosque, "property rights" have no application to this project and these Muslims have no right to build this mosque in New York. We are at war with them, and it's not even a "cold war". There are two active wars -- Iraq and Afghanistan -- and there have been numerous successful and attemtped attacks. They have no more right to build a mosque here than German Nazis would have had to build a rally field next to Arlington National Cemetery in 1943. The funding is not even coming from this country but from foreign Islamists who are working towards a Caliphate and the destruction of our constitutional government.
It is a good thing for Tom Flynn to reocgnize as much as he has, but he does not go far enough. The core issue here is not "insensitivity". The core issue is an attempt by enemies of this country to establish a center the purpose of which is to undermine our security. Our government, starting locally with New York, should have turned down this project. The mayor of New York has defaulted on his responsibility and the president has no intention of interferring with Islamist infiltration and the spreading of its propaganda and influence.
The commentor is right, all citizens have the right, in fact the duty, to protest this mosque. But it is not "consistent with American values" to let them build it in the first place. The same applies to any mosque in this country that preaches the overthrow of our consitution and the establishment of Sharia. Our leaders are refusing to live up to our values, recognize our enemy, and defend this nation.
RRA,
I agree with you.
However, we are not officially at war with Islam, nor even with radical Islam.
We're at war with terrorists.
So, I guess, if someone attempted to build a Church of Terrorism they would be prevented from doing so.
Of course, it is likely that more than half the Mosques in the US do preach Jihad. But, our leaders are fooled by the 'inner Jihad' bullshit.
AOW,
I like that commenters idea very much.
I bet if people started doing that, they would actually make a law against it. Or perhaps, they would just lock us up for Disturbing the Religion of Peace.
LOL
I think they're currently accepting suggestions for how to liven up the Ground Zero/Cordoba House/Park51 mosque sit-ins later this year. Mine is mylar pig balloons (available at your local party store) but turning Krayons into tissue paper certainly goes to the head of the list. Get a shredder and we can do confetti.
What's it something like 80% of the mosques in the U.S. are funded with Saudi money which means Wahabi influence? And they are not being monitored for preaching of violent jihad because the nice Muslim suits who conduct the sensitivity training for the FBI agents say that would be un-American.
Is "terrorism" back on the PC accepted phrase list, or would someone have to build a church of Multicultural Insensitivity? Even then nobody would take action unless they staffed it with apostate Muslims.
My wife and I came up with an idea for the Mega-Mosque sit-ins.
She's going to do a photoshop of it, and then I'll post it.
:)
Post a Comment