Posted on 08/06/2010 5:14:07 AM PDT by SJackson
This is one time the ADL is on the correct side of an issue.
Harvard speaks.
The usual vileness.
>>Supporters argue that the proximity of the mosque to the site of this crime sends a powerful message that there are many Muslims in the world who identify with the victims rather than the perpetrators.
OMG. How stupid are some people?? This mosque is the muslims planting their flag at the site of their victory. Its presence there makes any anti-muslim statements or protests made at Ground Zero a hate crime because you’ll be doing it in front of a place of worship. I’d bet that somewhere inside is a shrine to the 10 muslim Jihadists that died at Ground Zero.
Americans need to wake up from their slumber. Our political correctness will destroy us.
Gingrich: ‘Radical Islamists’ Are the Enemy
Explaining his opposition to the construction of a mosque near New York’s ground aero, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich “dramatically refocuses” understanding of the threat posed by radical Islamism.
That’s the view expressed by Andy McCarthy, author of the new book “The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America,” in an article for National Review Online.
The threat posed by Islamism “is not just about terrorism that’s just a small part of the offensive,” McCarthy writes, summarizing Gingrich’s assertions.
“We are confronted by a mainstream movement that seeks gradually to infuse sharia, Islam’s legal and political framework, into our legal, political, financial, economic, and educational systems and throughout our culture.”
In an essay for Human Events, Gingrich observes: “One of our biggest mistakes in the aftermath of 9/11 was naming our response to the attacks ‘the war on terror’ instead of accurately identifying radical Islamists (and the underlying ideology of radical Islamism) as the target of our campaign.
“Many Muslims see sharia as simply a reference point for their personal code of conduct. They recognize the distinction between their personal beliefs and the laws that govern all people of all faiths.
“For the radical Islamist, however, this distinction does not exist. Radical Islamists see politics and religion as inseparable in a way it is difficult for Americans to understand. Radical Islamists assert sharia’s supremacy over the freely legislated laws and values of the countries they live in and see it as their sacred duty to achieve this totalitarian supremacy in practice.
“Some radical Islamists use terrorism as a tactic to impose sharia but others use non-violent methods a cultural, political, and legal jihad that seeks the same totalitarian goal even while claiming to repudiate violence. Thus, the term ‘war on terrorism’ is far too narrow a framework in which to think about the war in which we are engaged against the radical Islamists.”
Gingrich’s essay goes on to describe the troubling advance of the sharia agenda in the United States, and why a true understanding of the ultimate goals of Islamists should shape opposition to the proposed mosque in Manhattan.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the man behind the mosque proposal, “is an apologist for sharia supremacy,” Gingrich notes, and in a recent Op-Ed he actually compared sharia law with the Declaration of Independence.
“This isn’t mere dishonesty; it is an Orwellian attempt to cause moral confusion about the nature of radical Islamism,” Gingrich writes.
“We need to have the moral courage to denounce it. It is simply grotesque to erect a mosque at the site of the most visible and powerful symbol of the horrible consequences of radical Islamist ideology. Well-meaning Muslims, with common human sensitivity to the victims’ families, realize they have plenty of other places to gather and worship. But for radical Islamists, the mosque would become an icon of triumph, encouraging them in their challenge to our civilization.”
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
If the Mosque is built, and without the cooperation of local authorites or any interest by either banking regulators or Homeland Security in the funding, that's likely.
I think a better analogy than than Auschwitz would be the many zoning battles which have gone over building plans in the vicinity of National Parks and Monuments. Ask Disney, or WalMart or numerous developers and landowners.
But if it's built in the end, perhaps a compromise. A display on the evils of radical Islam, which caused the deaths of thousands on the site. Include the opression of women and universal religious intolerance. Death sentence for gays. And Islamic expansionism, a bit on al Aska and the original Cordoba, and what the building of a Mosque at the site of an Islamic victory means. And a big arrow pointing to the new Cordoba Mosque, noting that the 11th century invasion of the US begins here.
I was actually surprised that Foxman opposed it, because usually the left-wingness of the ADL takes precedence over its Jewishness.
Dershowitz is just a dhimmi fool.
The date of the building dedication and opening is 9/11/11.
Noooo.... has nothing to do with 9/11/01... of course not.../sarc
If the mosque is built, America will regret it. This is NOT about freedom of religion. This is about a political ideology that wants to control its victims.
Did he mean a Shinto shrine?
And the German people under Nazi-ism did not enmass embrace atheism and paganism during the war years, then mostly all shift back to being Christian as soon as it was over. The Nazi's used language calling Jews ‘the killers of Christ’ to evoke racial hatred and justify their extermination.
It would be easier perhaps to turn a blind eye to the long history of European animosity towards the Jewish people, and thus fail to recognize that the Holocaust was the latest of these violent pogroms. But the vast majority of the people in Germany who approved of the Nazi's and supported the Nazi's in Nazi Germany, called themselves Christian both before, during, and after the war.
Were all the other pogroms in history also transitory upwellings of pagan and/or atheistic sentiment? How compatible ARE these two ideas, in total opposition; one in which the supernatural exists in all things (paganism) and the other which denies the supernatural? VDH couldn't go with one or the other, so mashed them together? Clumsy.
Dershowitz 0 - what a putz
You’re certainly right about the German people, but the official, largely failed, religion of the Reichschurch was a form of paganism with some Christian appearances. I think his point was that Islam is directly implicated in the motivation for the 9/11 attack, Christianity wasn’t a factor in the the motivation of constructing Auschwitz. Thus the case against the Mosque is greater than the controversy at Auschwitz.
When Dershboy speaks, you don’t have to read a single word. You can be sure he will support the Muslim position no matter what. There is a 100% historical of this.
He always supports the Muslim position and the drapes his tallis over it to attempt to give his opinion more power.
His consistent theme is, “I’m a Jew! I’m a Jew! Look at ME! I’m Jewish and even I see that the Muslims are right!”
Whatever Jewish credentials this guy may have had at one time have expired long ago. He has become nothing but a Muslim advocate. He may as well just go ahead and convert.
He supports all forces against Israel and any expression of Judaism in America.
He supports Hizbolla, Hamas, the PLO, and Iran. His positions are more Muslim than many Muslims.
He should just convert to Islam already. The only reason he doesn’t is because then he would lose his cherished ‘dafka’ effect of supposedly being ‘Jewish’ and supporting the positions of Muslim terrorists.
Money? Fame? No matter why he does it, he is the worst kind of Jew just like in Germany.
May he have health and long life.
It’s consistant, he’s been known to be critical of the left, though it doesn’t get much publicity. If a right wing group had made the statement, their bigotry would be trumpeted on the front page of the NY Times and WP
>> This is NOT about freedom of religion.
This is about the “one, true religion” triumphing over all others. How long before the Pledge of Allegiance is replaced by “There is no God but Allah...”?
Amazing the only “racist” involved in this issue are the Muslims.
A religion that says “Convert or Die” and then moves to make that a reality, is the problem.
a horrendous crime committed in the name of Islam by extremists who do not represent their religion.
Alan is totally wrong here, those jihadists who
brought down the Towers DID represent their religion,
the violent bigoted fanatic aspect of it.
Why this effort to divorce their actions from their
culpability as representatives of their religion?
Just ask them, they are PROUD of the fact!
I agree with VDH’s points though - and have posted the same analogy as he about a Japanese cultural center and (Shinto) shrine at Pearl Harbor; or perhaps a Mormon cultural center and temple at Mountain Meadows; a Russian cultural center at Katyn; I like the American cultural center and/or Christian church at Hiroshima analogy - that is a good one as well.
I say let ‘em build the damn mosque ... encourage them even. Let ‘em build it big and tall. Fill it with muzzies and I’m guessing it would not take long to round up a few pilots with a death wish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.