Few people know that this giant crescent actually points to Mecca, or understand the religious significance of this orientation. A crescent that points the direction to Mecca is a very familiar construct in the Islamic world. Because Muslims face Mecca for prayer , every mosque is built around a Mecca direction indicator called a mihrab. The classic mihrab is crescent shaped. Here are the two most famous mihrabs in the world:
Left: the Mihrab of the Prophet, at the Prophet’s mosque in Medina. Right: the mihrab of the Great Mosque in Cordoba Spain.
Face into the crescent to face Mecca
As with the Medina and Cordoba mihrabs, a person facing into the Crescent of Embrace will be facing Mecca. In the image below, superimposed red lines show the orientation of the Flight 93 crescent. The green qibla circle is from an online Mecca-direction calculator:
Cordoba Center, is it a symbol of Muslim imperialism or a gesture of friendship and understanding? Only Imam Rauf has the answer; if it is a symbol of Muslim imperialism, he will never admit it, if it is a gesture of friendship and understanding, he has almost no one convinced. If Imam Rauf is manipulating our laws to build his Coroba Center as a method of asserting the omnipotence of Muslim influence in the land of the Infidel, a strict reading of the Constitution and our laws can find precious little to prevent this travesty from transpiring. Thus we find ourselves echoing Antony’s cry in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, “O Judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts…”. If Imam Rauf is genuinely reaching out a hand of friendship to the Great Satan, he has already generated enough ill will to neutralize any feelings of compassion and understanding the Cordoba Center might have generated and his idea is at best ill conceived.
Like the building of the Islamic Crescent that points to Mecca over the crash site of Flight 93 as a memorial, the building of a Mosque or Islamic Community Center near the site of the Twin Tower atrocity is circumspect causing resentment and anger among Americans and especially among the relatives of those who perished. Understandably, no Muslims have been bold enough or stupid enough to suggest an Islamic Memorial on the grounds of the Pentagon, to commemorate the Islamic struggle in North America nor a Muslim Prayer room to commemorate the site Major Hassan’s homicidal Jihad contribution to the improvement of relationships between Muslim and Infidel.
If the Imam is truly concerned with showing compassion, he should have realized by now that his great plan has failed miserably and that his idea might be better served by building a University and offering scholarships to the relatives of those killed and to the first responders and their children who suffer health problems because of these cowardly Muslim assaults on America.
Americans would be more likely to trust the extended hand of a Muslim, whose Koran encourages Muslims to lie to the Infidel, if the offers of compassion were actually helping to undue the effects of Muslim atrocities, rather than building a community center/mosque that can be interpreted as a monument to the blood lust of the Muslim and their quest to subjugate the Great Satan that will provide a new sense of pride to the braggadocio inclined illiterate and perverted Muslim mind of the Middle Ages.
The public feeling against Imam Rauf and his overtures of compassion and community goodwill are obvious, if he wants to really work to reverse the resentment and distrust Americans have for the Muslim, it is obvious he should try a different strategy; if he refuses to change course, his plan will come under even more scrutiny and and distrust. In America, his plan is distasteful and disrespectful, like it or not, that is the country he emigrated to and that is the culture of America; perhaps Imam Rauf should consider assimilating into the culture rather than changing the culture.
A professional horseman for over 50 years, Skook continues to work with horses. Skook has finished an historical novel, Fifty Thousand Years, that traces a mitochondrial line of DNA from 50,000 years ago to the present. The story follows a line of courageous women, from the Ice Ages to the present, as they meet the challenges of survival with grit and creativity. These are not women who whimper of being victims, they meet the challenges of survival as women who use their abilities without excuses or remorse, these women are winners, they are our ancestors.
Fifty Thousand Years is available in paperback and e-book, it is getting great reviews. You can purchase a copy here; Visit me on Facebook.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Dylantheauthor
@Skook Well said you old Islamophobe! Rauf said in one of his articles that it is the goal of every Muslim to emulate the deeds and actions of Mohammed. If they do… that’s a butt load of violence and murder coming our way!
SKOOKUM AS USUAL, it’s right to the point, this has been named abomination,
I also disagree with MAYOR BLOOMBERG,when he said that if they dont built it,
the TErrorist will be please to know the intolerance of AMERICA, they forget that,
AMERICA is at war and they allowed the MUSLIMS to emigrate in to give them the freedom,
THAT AMERICANS ENJOYE because of the CONSTITUTION’S laws that is to stay in AMERICA
forever: SO why the MAYOR SHOULD BE CONCERN ABOUT WHAT THE ENNEMIES OF THIS’
BEAUTIFULL TOLERANT AMERICA, WHAT they think is not the problem to give as excuse to because he agree with that building to be built. bye thank you.
Every time I pass wind I make sure my buttocks are facing mecca.
A telling argument against Islam in general is how the actions of Mohammed would be perceived today. Would he be seen by the world as a true prophet of a new religion, or would he be seen as an evil cult leader likened to Jim Jones or worse?
Mohammed’s life was one of violence and subjugation of others to his ‘will’. I find it hard to believe that a God(the same stated God mind you), would send us a figure like Jesus, who preached compassion, understanding and the forgiving of others, would then send us a maniacal figure bent on the destruction or enslavement of others. Common sense should tell one that Islam, particularly that version practiced by fundamentalists in Iran and other, smaller groups around the world, is not the equal of christianity or judaism or buddhism, when it comes to people living free.
Sure, you can cite examples of other religions, particularly christianity and judaism, not practicing acceptance of others, and you can even cite examples of other religions acting immorally in the name of their religion, but today we understand those actions for what they are. Islam is nothing like that. After all, has Islam ever produced a figure like Mother Teresa?
Wow. Another
deadly accurate postIslamophobe.You guys just don’t get it. This Islamic structure is just another way of showing America
how it is being conqueredIslam just wants to get along with other cultures. This is another means ofturning this country into an Islamic statebeing sensitive. It’s purelyintentionalcoincidental that the crest points right toward Mecca.And it’s good that we have among us so many who are willing to
surrender without thinkingbe tolerant of these good will gestures.I’m here to defend Skookum from your charges, Donald Bly. As many of us have tried to explain, to no avail, simple opposition to Cordoba House does not constitute ‘phobia. Depends upon what you want to do about your opposition, and your base intents. Is it just the location? Or is there a war against Islam in general? Too many have expressed the latter.
None of us like the idea, and I daresay all of us who have weighed in wish that Rauf never embarked on this path. Then again, I don’t like what Obama does either, yet he forced us onto a path of socialism… our biggest immediate threat. Not the Cordoba House, mosque, community center, or whatever you prefer to ID it as.
The bottom line for my own opinion is, am I offended more by the presence of Cordoba House? Or about attempting to bend or alter our rules of law in order to stop it? For me, the latter was priority.
Skookum, instead, took the same approach Palin did. He suggested that the Cordoba Initiative back down voluntarily since if it’s hearts and minds they wish to win, they are off to a bad start. I agree.
Skookum also expressed opposition without pronouncing personal judgment on Rauf as a confirmed terrorist or terrorist supporter. Ironic you can condemn someone who did, indeed, ostracize the 911 bombers as definitely not Islam or Muslims simply because he refuses to sign a petition by an ex Muslims organization. Are we to ignore the interfaith seminars the Cordoba Initiative have organized since 2003, in conjunction with both Jews and Christians, because it’s an inconvenient fact?
Nor did Skookum make up terrorist funding lies – impossible since that hasn’t even begun. And when that capital campaign does begin, it’s under the auspices and federal scrutiny of a non profit that has yet to be created. (The building was purchased by major partner, Soho Properties, for $4.85 million – chump change for the company which dropped over $45 million for Chelsea Building within a year later).
Skookum also didn’t say that Rauf was lying about the genuineness of his intent, and he made his case without attacking Islam itself. Just as Palin did. A very classy approach that more should attempt. If you’re hoping to sway the Cordoba Initiative into voluntarily backing down, such venomous commentary against him personally, and against Islam, is hardly effective.
Therefore I do not see Skookum’s objections as demonstrating any extremes or phobia.
On the other hand… how would you classify the below remarks, and do you see anything similar to these in Skookum’s post?
Then, of course, your own offered edit of the 1st Amendment, designed to exclude all Muslims from Constitutional rights, can be tossed in there as well.
Why only Islam? Isn’t the socialist agenda of Pelosi/Reid/Obama equally – if not more immediately – dangerous, and a proven agenda to overthrow this country as we know it? When politics is used as the criteria for moral rights, the Constitution and the principles of the Founding Fathers is dead as we know it.
I might also add that if you wish to condemn Rauf for not condemning Hamas specifically, when he has condemned both jihad and the killing of innocents quite often, then you have to accept the same when you do not condemn remarks such as the above.
Oh wait… you were one of those.
Again, I ask… do you see any venom of this kind in Skookum’s post?
Thought not….
C’mon y’all. islam is the religion of peace dontcha know? What with honor killings, stonings, beheadings, jihad, calls for the re-establishment of the caliphate, Jews being apes and pigs, “Death to America” and anyone else that disagrees with them, riots and murder over cartoons, gee folks isn’t that enough to convince you? They just want to assimilate into western culture.
Two beautiful teenage girls are dead at the hands of their own father because they dared to date Christian boys and were becoming “too American”. And this is just ONE example of the “tolerance” that islam preaches. Unfortunately, there are many more and more that can’t be reported as honor killings for fear of insulting the practitioners of this “religion”.
And as one would expect, knowing that it is wrong, in THIS country (for the time being at least) to kill his daughters, even though it is approved by mohammed himself, this “peaceful” follower of islam has disappeared into thin air.
I know!! Let’s Build a mosque or “islamic cultural center” or whatever you wish to call it at the scene of the most dastardly attack on our soil in our history!! That will show them how tolerant we are of the forementioned behavior of these practitioners!
Oh…..wait………
Just a little reminder of how some parents and relatives of the “religion of peace” react to the news that their daughters might want to discard the beliefs of pedophilia, misogyny, and human rights in favor of entering the 21rst century.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wimTs3P8FG0&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rT_jm0pW6c&feature=player_embedded#!
In the words of Geert Wilders in his “10 point plan to save the West:”
#2. “Stop pretending that Islam is a religion”. “Islam is a totalitarian ideology”. “In other words, the right to religious freedom should not apply to Islam”. “Death for Apostasy” 4:89, Sahih Bukhari
All I need to know about islam I learned on 9-11-01
When my wife and I came back to the USA after being the first gulf war in saudi for a year, we were coming through customs in Miami and She was crying. The customs guy asked “what’s wrong with her?” I told him She was so happy to be back in the US. “She’ll get over it” he said.
People here just don’t understand living in an islamic jail(moslem land) Thank God we’re here!
Yes, and like most nutjobs, they are being tracked down by law enforcement to pay for murder in our justice system. As we’ve noted, all religions must operate within the scope of our laws. Even UK prosecutes and condemns honor killings within their judicial system. It’s the western way. You think this is going to go away with building mosques anywhere in the US?
Or is murder somehow even more heinous by the extreme Muslim than by just the average nutjob? How about the Christian Scientists who choose not to let their children be treated for their illness? How about the crazy woman who threw her kids off the bridge? Or the one who drowned them in a bathtub? How about Scott Peterson? Are their crimes somehow more excusable than the minority of American Muslims who engage in such behavior?
I never much believed in “hate crimes” since I fail to see any “love crimes” in contrast. A life lost, no matter what imbalanced individual took it upon his or her self to end it.
Mata,
I have no intention of getting into a pissing contest with you. I respect your opinion and all I ask in return is that you respect mine.
In far too many of these cases, the perpetrator simply returns to his country of origin, never to be seen or heard from again. Does the U.S. have an extradition agreement with Egypt, the birthplace of the father of these two girls? If, in fact we do, do you REALLY expect that he would be returned here to face our judicial system?
Moral relativism in relation to crimes of passion or neglect/omission v a “religious” edict is a stretch at best.
You have your position, I have mine. I will respectfully agree to disagree.
Rides, the respect for you is returned, nor do I have any appetite for further pissing matches. That said, I don’t believe my response to you bore any resemblence to that. You pointed out some whackjobs, and I, in response, pointed out that in our western developed worlds, we prosecute those whackjobs. Nor are such acts confined to Muslims or religion.
Prosecuting these acts is not likely to change. And if any attempt were made to do so, we’d all be united in our fight. But even as GaffaUK points out, Shariah courts in the UK doesn’t allow for exceptions for Muslims INRE such acts under UK law.
Certainly none of those you point to as examples would be allowed to “build a mosque”. Nor should they. But it’s equally unfair to point to those examples in order to make the leap of association to Cordoba Initiative. Heaven knows if this was in Rauf’s over two decades of history here as a New Yorker, stopping the construction would be a slam dunk.
Get the surveyor to fuck it up by pointing it toward the Kensington Rune Stone in Minnesota.
That would sure frost their asses…
@Mata Harley 11
Problem is that he was not “just” a whack job… his religion and culture and LAW TOLD him it was OK. It was not insanity. In his home culture and country it is EXPECTED for him to do this… and he was trained since a young age that this was OK…
Then we let him into America… where we did not check on his assimilation (and yes, there were a LOT of danger signals in this case)…. and he killed following his Cultural/Religios programing.
You call ‘HIM” insane…. I say his Cultural Religious programing, is insane…
>>Or about attempting to bend or alter our rules of law in order to stop it.>>
You know…you and Aye and Word keep saying that. Just _what_ rules of law has anyone attempted to bend or alter?
How about the Kelo decision – where do you stand on that? Bending or altering?
>>Yes, and like most nutjobs, they are being tracked down by law enforcement to pay for murder in our justice system.>>
Apparently not. He disappeared, is believed to have returned to Egypt, and nothing further is being done. Full review of the situation tonight on Fox news, and probably over the week end, including interviews with the wife, who apparently still lives in Tx alone. They also have a son who is living in Egypt. No indication from this AM’s headliners about how the wife is supported.
And how about the NJ judge who decided that the muslim husband wasn’t guilty of rape of his wife who refused him sex, because the man’s imam explained to the court that islam required the wife to comply with her husband’s demands? Fortunately, that one was overturned, but still …
suek, take your pick of any of the comments I reposted @in my comment above and you’ll see the examples of altering and/or bending our Constitutional rights suggested.
Also I don’t believe that current zoning and landmark architectural criteria, that currently allow this building to go forward, should be changed merely because the developers are Muslim. That has also been suggested in the various threads, and that’s another example of altering/bending our laws. Zoning is often changed… that’s true. But it’s not necessarily done in order to discriminate against a particular religion. And if so, that’s taken to courts and should rightly be struck down.
Many have suggested they allow a bar on one side, and a BBQ joint on the other. I’m of a different mind. I think they should park an FBI *and* CIA office on one side, and an all-branch military recruiting office on the other.
Sorry… didn’t mean to miss this one:
I’m most definitely not in support of Kelo’s expansion of eminent domain in order to benefit private developers. Yet that is what was also being suggested… first by Geller/Spencer’s SIOA landmark landsuit, and others who have suggested it be seized by the feds as a memorial site. Yet how would you justify seizing just that one building, and not others that were also damaged as a result of that attack? That would pull other owners, not Muslim, into the eminent domain net as well.
So exactly how do you square your opposition to Kelo with supporting either landmark or memorial suggestions as a stopper to Cordoba House? Both are also eminent domain actions that you apparently don’t like…. right along with me.
Lastly, INRE Yaser Abdel Said and his whereabouts. There is an FBI warrant for his arrest. But he certainly isn’t the first, the last, nor the only bad guy on the lam.
INRE the NJ judge, his erronous bench call was overturned by a higher court. He was an idiot, and personally I firmly believe he should be stripped of his robes.
None of this has whit to do with Cordoba House, since not one of these individuals are those applying for permits.
Mata – Happy to see three of my comments made your list. No change in my opinion since they were posted. Here’s another; Rauf is one of this countries enemies and the building of the Cordoba house is nothing more than rubbing salt in this nations wound that was 9/11/2001. It’s a trophy mosque for the ragheads and you know it. Had the asshat liberals in NYC denied Bloomberg another term, this mosque would not be being discussed. Political correctness is destroying this nation.
According to the handy-dandy Wiki list, the US has had extradition treaty with Egypt since 1875, Rides A Pale Horse. How often it’s exercised, or it’s details I am not aware of.
Doesn’t mean we always find the bad guy, or that he went back to his nation of origin. He’s most likely escaped to a country with no extradition treaty.
Yes, @Minuteman26, you were a particularly fertile fishing hole there. I think we pretty much got the gist of your opinion. 😯 However I felt no need to divulge the sources of the comments above. This you volunteered on your own.
Bloomberg’s loss of election would have nothing to do with the planning council’s decision. Nor whether the debate would be taking place. It was the planning council members – also elected ones – that decide after weighing the pros and cons of the neighborhood denizens against the current law. If they had decided to deny their petition strictly because of public opinion, it would be headed for the courts… as well it should.
As Wordsmith has pointed out time and time again, it’s always been a rock and hard place for us, and a win win for jihad. Object, they win. Deny they win even bigger.
Skookum…. you’ve been defended by MataHarley on your position…. you old Islamophobe you!
I’ll be sending your official “I’m and Islamophobe” badge as soon as the ink dries.
Anyone want to comment on how Muslims/Islam have been exempted from participating in ObamaCare’s mandate to purchase health insurance or the requirement to pay the penalty for not carrying insurance.
With the O calling the penalty for not carrying insurance, a tax… why would anyone be exempt from a TAX based on religion.
Seems like this is dimmitude…. they get free health care and the rest of us get taxed for being non-muslim.
I haven’t the slightest interest in not painting Islam for the gutter religion it is but I have not taken a stand on their right to build a mosque in downtown Manhattan. If no union worker will work on the project, one can’t claim that it is government interfering with their 1st amendment “right” to practice the worship of their pagan god. As long as they are practicing their first amendment rights, I will practice my first amendment right to criticize their ideology. I expect Mata, Aye and Wordsmith to back up my right to exercise my free speech. I’m certain however, that they won’t do so without the minor sniping and name calling of people, labeling people as Islamophobes, or some of the other insulting names proffered.
Mata – For the record; are you a secret raghead?
Nope, Minuteman. Devout Constitutionalist American.
@Minuteman26:
… and I’d be living in a Hooverville underneath the Brooklyn Bridge. Do you even live in NYC? Why should I even consider anything you have to say when it comes to how the city I’ve lived in for over twenty years should be run? (it’s a rhetorical question, you don’t have to answer it – I’m not going to.)
Also, you should know that turbans are not exclusive to the Islamic faith. If you’re going to get offended when someone calls you a racist, you may wish to reconsider your use of the term “raghead.”
@Donald Bly #21:
Sure.
What label would you prefer when it comes to your “gutter religion” opinion of Islam? Whatever label you choose, your words speak for themselves.
What is it with the hysteria and hyperbole that has Mata, Aye, or myself labeling all the opposition “Islamophobic”, anyway?
Palin’s comments? Not bigoted. Not paranoid. Respectful.
WSJ open letter I linked? Respectful.
Mark Williams’ “monkey god religion” comment? Geller seeing Islamic boogeymen behind every mosque? The opposite of “not bigoted” and “not paranoid”.
And I’d say minuteman’s comments speak for themselves:
@Rides A Pale Horse:
This is one of those bumpersticker slogans that I rank right up there with “peace is patriotic” and “Support the troops- bring them home”.
It’s like saying, “All I need to know about Asia I learned on 12-7-41”
Narrow it down to even read “Japan” and it sounds just as foolish.
Now Wordsmith, you can’t credit all those negatively bodacious comments to Minuteman. He did have company, ya know… As I said, I felt no need to divulge the source. Minuteman decided to step up to the plate, and claim three of those strikes as his own.
@Minuteman26 #18:
This is a top fave:
Skookum wrote:
Must be taqiyya [/sarcasm]:
I was wondering something. Mata and Word, if it came out that the mosque is being built with funding from those that support terrorism–in words only, would you still say they mosque should be built?
Under what circumstances would you support the denial of the mosque’s construction?
As for Rauf, you left out other things he said.
1) America was an accomplice to 9/11
2) America should be more Sharia compliant
3) Refuses to condemn the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas as terrorist organizations.
#3 in my eyes would negate his “condemnation” of terrorism and jihad as nothing more than a lie.
1 and 2 are further evidence that he is hardly the moderate some are pretending he is to justify their stance on supporting the mosque.
Here’s an interesting article on Rauf’s ties. He comes off looking like the (phony) clean cut frontman of a radical supporting network.
http://www.terrorfinance.org/the_terror_finance_blog/2010/07/fsm-exclusive-ground-zero-mosque-imams-radical-connections.html
While him being a radical may not make him a terrorist, it does not mean he is not the enemy of America. As an Imam he has the ability to convert others into supporting terrorism or actualy committing terrorism. It seems some still haven’t learned that one radical Imam can generate multiple terrorists.
Speaking of @top faves, Wordsmith, I rather like the irony of this one:
uh huh…. 🙄
Wordsmith… you are the one that claims to have read the koran and also claim that you can’t tell if Mohammed’s life was filled with violence, murder and the admonition to others to perpetuate such atrocities on infidels.
Rauf claims that it is the goal of every Muslim to emulate the “prophet”. Well… that pretty much sums up his views… regardless of what spew he has you believing, his words are clear to me.
You can call me an Islamophobe all day long…. I hope you don’t mind me thinking of you as an Islamofacist Apologist that prefers to keep their head buried rather than face 1400 years of history and facts.
@Hard Right, absolutely if the funding were coming from terror groups, it should not… and would not… be built. However the funding has not yet commenced, and when it does, it’s under the scrutiny of the feds with a non profit capital campaign structure. And BTW, I know I have said this before.
I would support any halt to the mosque that was within our rules of law. I’ve said that too. But I’ve also said let’s not be Pollyanna here. Geller and Spencer could care less about the architecture of the old Burlington Coat Factory. It was just another avenue to support their goal, based on their hatred of all of Islam. Yet if it was successful, I would be just fine with it.
1)…. so did many a lib/prog… many of them serving in our Congress as elected officials. Deny Rauf rights, and not the rest?
2)…Not correct. You must be listening to Hannity screw the facts with his memorized mantras. In fact, Rauf has written in his books that both democracy and the US Constitution are already Shariah compliant. Both Hannity, and PJ Media’s Alyssa A. Lappen are happy to point that out… followed rapidly by the “he’s lying” accusation. A Muslim Brotherhood “flexibility”, they say. Just another word for the much overused taqiyya.
What’s a Muslim to do?
Like I said, do you know anything about the interfaith seminars that Cordoba Initiative has been running multiple times a years with Christians and Jews since 2003?
3)… the petition he refuses to sign is the Ex Muslims United. However he did sign a petition that denounces war as criminal because of the killing of innocents, put out by that other “terrorist” group he’s associated with, Perdana.
As Word noted above, he’s condemned the 911 and London bombers, ostracizing them completely from Islam as he interprets it. He’s condemned terrorists acts quite often, but it’s never enough for some. What’s the point? No matter what he says, it’s always taqiyya to those who refuse to accept anything else.
Don’t you wonder how such an “enemy of the United States” has managed to live in harmony with his Jewist and Christian neighbors for over two decades, with nary a move to overthrow the government?
I noticed when I went thru the past threads that you have stated you would not be opposed to Cordoba House if terrorist funds weren’t being used. No argument with you there. You also, erronenously, stated there was evidence he did have terrorist funds. We did ask you for those links, which you didn’t supply. Mostly because you couldn’t. As I’ve pointed out, the building was purchased by Soho Properties for chump change (in their commercial world), and that the funding and non profit hasn’t even begun yet.
Considering your previous comments, HR, shouldn’t this mean that you may remain emotionally opposed in it’s poor taste and principle… of which I agree with you there… but will remain neutral until you find out where the money is coming from?
I understand that the Muslims next major mosque is planned to be built in the center of the Pentagon building.
@Donald Bly:
You’re hearing what you wish to hear. I don’t deny Islam’s bloody history. What I recall is offering you a perspective on why Rauf saying every muslim should emulate the prophet should not be so alarmist. Just like the name “Cordoba”, as well as Islam itself, these things may have a different significance to him than they do to you.
Rauf might be in denial over inconvenient truths about Quranic verses. After all, Islam is his religion. Does he have to hate his religion and its prophet in order for him to qualify as a “moderate” Muslim?
Just what is it with your obsession over the labeling?! If the shoe fits, wear it. If it doesn’t, then don’t try it on!
Nope. I’m comfortable with what I’ve written in regards to Islam and Islamofascism/radicals/extremists/militants/Islamo-nazis/Islamic terrorists/salafis/wahhabis and the global jihad movement.
@MataHarley #32: We’ve already been through all this. HR’s been there since around the beginning. I’m sure he’s already read our responses to such things as this:
How many more times do we have to do the same dance?
Maybe HR would like me to write up another post so we can just do a simple link everytime he or someone new brings up the same-same?
The irony Mata, is that you appear to be distorting someone’s point for your own purposes. Note that I say APPEARANCE as I am not looking at all of that person’s posts.
I see the posts you’ve quoted and I disagree with you that not allowing the mosque is oppression. An example of oppression would be not allowing mosques anywhere or denying most of them.
I actually do agree with Abraham Lincoln and FDR (a rare agreement with the socialist) that the Constitution is not a suicide pact. When enemies of America want to use the Constitution as a cover I do not feel we are obligated to let them do so. This is where certain folk will probably try the fear and definition game. They will ask what is the definition of an enemy and who decides it? Then they will go on to say that it could be used by leftists against us Conservatives and so forth. Booga booga…red herring. There are entirely legal means to stop the mosque if so desired.
Mata and Word among others, feel that Rauf is not a radical or the enemy of America. After what I have seen, the evidence strongly supports that he is as are the those who are behind the financing of the mosque.
At this point I expect some to claim that the evidence against Rauf is tenuous, “guilt by association”, Islamophobia, etc. As I have stated before, many a person has been correctly convicted on circumstantial evidence. The standard being required by mosque defenders seems to be video of Rauf declaring his support for jihad. Without a blatantly smoking gun, they give him the benefit of the doubt despite the gunshot residue found upon his person. This denial is absolutely necessary in order reconcile their desire to fight America’s enemies while preserving our Constitution in their eyes.
Here is an interseting article that I also think will be labeled as “guilt by association” by some.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-ground-zero-mosque-developer-muslim-brotherhood-roots-radical-dreams/2/
HR, good grief. You just linked the very same article I linked for you, to prove that the man has documented that the US Constitution and democracy are Shariah compliant. An article I picked specifically since it was an anti-thrust on the issue, and that the same authors dissed his writings as lies. Again by the six degrees of separation. “Flexibility”. Remind me to never approve you for jury duty on any case I’m involved in. You see only what you want to see, and I guess Wordsmith was right about you. Why bother…. been here, done that.Sorry… was going to link that article, but thought PJ’s was a better smear job….Actually, I have links to all of the above comments, HR… I’m not going to “out” anyone in a public forum, but if you’d like to go revisit yourself… and you will find quite a few did not want mosques anywhere, as they say above… I suggest you click on the “Ground Zero Mosque” category under the title of this thread, and give yourself a fresh read thru it all. I understand you think it’s an “appearance”, and I thank you for just not leaping to any nefarious assumptions. But I think if you give yourself a round two read, starting from the earliest threads, you may see things that perhaps you glossed over the first time in the heat of the moment.
The “not a suicide pact” is a SCOTUS thing, and is highly misused and abused by any and everyone to make their case. Drives me crazy when ya’ll use that one… LOL In actuality, Slate has a pretty good history on that phrasing from back in 2002. Used by Justice Jackson in a dissenting opinion in Terminiello v. City of Chicago (1949) – a case against a (self-declared but real?) Catholic priest spewing some pretty ugly rhetoric. Oh wait… that’ can’t be. Only Muslims do that, right? LOL Anyway, to make a long story short, the High Court let the “priest” off for his public hate speech for 1st Amendment rights… which triggered Jackson’s dissent about the “suicide pact”.
That, in itself, is an ugly comparison to bank… because I would have let the SOB off too for Constitutional reasons. Yet it was uttered by a guy who wanted him locked up for the offensive speech.
It came up again 14 years later with majority opinion writer, Justice Goldberg. But this time in relationship to a draft dodger case.
It’s that last line that so many are counting on to justify slashing the rights of Muslims in general. However we are not at war with Islam. Well, perhaps some are. But then, that makes Dubya a liar, doesn’t it?
Now, if you’re turned off by a Slate reference, you might find it more palatable to read the FindLaw history of the phrase instead.
BTW, even tho Lincoln did utter many similar sentiments when he suspended habeas corpus rights, he never used the phrase himself. FDR, to my knowledge, has never used that phrase. Justice Jackson is the first where it’s documented. A bit of trivia history for you from my archives. Not like it’s a new argument, ya know. :0)
Now, let’s address something else here, HR:
I see no evidence he is. And again, now you outright lie about the financing of Cordoba House. There is NO financing because they don’t have the money. There’s only $1 mil plus assets there. The money must be raised. Read, damn it, man. Read. You sound the fool when you repeat horse manure that can be factually disputed.
And based on what you all have come up with, and compared to his actual history of events and writings, I still see no evidence. Happy to change my mind if you all can do something besides allude to several times removed acquaintances. Other than that, I don’t pronounce him a “moderate” (since I have no clue what that criteria is…). I simply just don’t pronounce him guilty. I’m kinda picky about that innocent before proven guilty bit. And considering how ill-read people are on his activities in the past, I don’t believe their presentation of “circumstantial” evidence has any credibility. It simply doesn’t jive with over two decades of reality by those who interface with him.
So I can assume you were just talking out your azzt when you said if there wasn’t any terror funding, you’d be okay with this… right? Because now, you say he’s guilty by your jury vote.
I’m giving HR the benefit of the doubt here, Wordsmith. As far as I can remember, none of us have ever linked to the status of cash in our myriad of sniping. The media disinformation has confused enough that always on the lips of many are “where did they get the $100 mil! It has to be from terrorists”.
So in case HR didn’t know that Soho Properties was a major partner in the purchase of the building for $4.85 mil, and that the $100 mil needed to build Cordoba House is not even a glint in Allah’s eyes yet, he does now. HR, refer to @the links in my comment above.
Well, I see we’re singing the same song.
Which verse are we on?
Just saw your post Mata, and in reference to proof of funding, I missed where you asked for it. The most recent link does provide significant leads on that, IIRC.
About the Sharia compliant comment, I think you miss the other part of the comment.
“[Inviting] voices of all religions to join the dialogue in shaping the nation’s practical life, [and allowing] religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws (22).”
To me that looks as if he is calling for significant religious influence in government, daily life, and allowing sharia to take precedence over American law. I don’t see claims that he wants America to be more Sharia compliant as disingenuous. I also don’t see that as the comments of a moderate.
Word, I don’t live on this forum so I do miss things you have said. In fact I came back from a trip to Vegas to find you had carpet bombed FA with your pro-mosque views. Frankly, it looks like a copout on your part to post what you did in response to my question. What I have seen is you widely painting those that disagree with you as Islamophobes. Yes, some are, but not all.
I repeat it for Word and Mata again. The evidence indicates that Rauf is NOT a moderate. He appears to be a terrorism supporter and radical. The funding is coming from highly suspect places. I am against this mosque being built for these reasons. It isn’t about emotion, but is about what the information points to. New information could change my mind or reinforce my beliefs. Could I be completely or partially wrong? Absolutely. I feel I am going where the data leads, whether or not I want to.
With all of the above said, I will say that for me, this is a mere disagreement. I do not think you are “dhimmis” or any such crap. This may shock and horrify Word, but I have come to respect him and his opinions. Mata already knows or should know she is also held in high esteem by me.
Well, HR… it seems I struck out that first paragraph unnecessarily. What you link to is the very same article I gave you in my comment #32, right back at your comment #29.
Again I say, you see what you want. PJ’s writer specifically states that Rauf has written the US Constitution and democracy are Shariah compliant. Then calls him a liar.
Secondly, it’s a May 14th article… not new, and not proof of anything. This article has already been bandied about a lot with it’s six degrees of separation. It’s “proof” only to those that are desperate to hang him as a terrorist or terrorist supporter and gain traction.
I might also point out another glaring research area of the PJ author’s article. She states that Cordoba Initiative was started in 2004. Now how would that be when they had held their first interfaith seminar with both Christians and Jews in the spring/summer of 2003? ick on so called “journalists” these days.
Gee… wonder how all those Jews and Christians escaped with their lives from that event?
Now wait a minute. First you demand evidence of funding. Then you say it’s a lie when presented. Who is being dishonest here? It isn’t me.
Talking out my ass? Nope. I’ll leave that to you and Word. The evidence is very strong that Rauf supports jihad. I think you disagree because you don’t want to see it. You say I see it because I do want to. Actually, I don’t. It would make things much easier if I didn’t. Like I said, I am not for allowing terrorism supporters to build a mosque at that location. Remove those individuals and terrorism funding supporters and it’s okay by me.
To paraphrase, I think those behind this mosque are the minority of Islam we are fighting. So imply that I’m lying all you want. I have made clear that we are at war with Islamic fascists, but not all of Islam. there is a big difference between the two.
EDIT: This is getting us nowhere but ugly. I disagree for the reasons I have stated and that is all there is to it. Mata, hate to see you go, but I hope the flowers you are stopping to smell are twice as sweet. Watch out for idiot drivers and take care.
The “IIRC”? Please point to that text.
What the article says is that Imam Rauf says that New York Muslims provided nearly $5 million in cash to buy the Park Place building. Then she wanders off into ASMA funding… which includes Carnegie Foundation and the Holland Millenium Goals fund. What Rauf says is true. It was purchased along with Soho Properties as a major partner. What the heck does ASMA have to do with the Cordoba House funding that… once again I will remind you… has not even begun collecting for it’s construction? Just a straw man… like the rest of that article. Keep going long enough, and every bit of it will lead back to Obama some how….
If you truly do “want to see it”, then why are you talking about money that has nothing to do with Cordoba House, HR? The feds will have easy access to that non profit fund raising. One would think you’d want to wait until the money rolls in and see who’s providing it before casting aspersions.
I’m very glad to hear that from you, HR. You never made that specialized ‘phobe class IMHO. Now if we can just straighten out what terrorist money you’re trying to claim is there, when it isn’t.
One error does not negate an entire article. Questioning it’s acuracy as a result? Understandable.
As for the article we both posted, I had it ready to post before you did. It was just a matter of timing.
One error??? The entire tone is quite obvious, HR. When they take what the guy writes, then call him a liar without any substantive proof, one has to take the entire article with the validity we normally reserve for Wiki, fer heavens sake.
You trying to get rid of me? LOL Well, HR… for the moment, I’m apparently off the band wagon more than I wanted. But I appreciate the kind words.
No Mata, not trying to get rid of you. I thought you were leaving blogging to enjoy life more. Is that not the case?
As for the funding, I must be mistaken. It was my understanding it had started arriving from overseas.
I’m trying, HR… but this issue is like a slow cancer. Keep getting sucked in. Besides that, it’s not easy to separate yourself from even a cyber family after so long.
INRE the funding… From DNA News May 17th…
From AOL News two days ago – “Why Ground Zero Mosque Still Has a Long Way to Go.
Now, since there’s some firms, surfing the internet looking for bloggers to sue for copyright infringement, I’m going to briefly excerpt the remainder. The writer goes thru the four steps… *after* they get the non profit status to use for fund raising… all before the actual construction begins.
Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3: THEN they get the funding… they have to have a target goal to meet for development, yes?
Step 4:
Not so cut and dried anymore, is it? All I can say is if they plan on a Sept 11th grand opening, it’s likely to be Sept 11th, 2015 or so. And there’s many hoops to hurdle under close scrutiny of many a federal agency.
@Hard Right:
Ah…my apologies. Explains why a couple of times you’ve also linked to things previously seen or mentioned, like the Alyssa Lappen piece.
Lol…a premature launch, prompted by yet another Sunday Funnies comment section turning into yet another GZM debate. S’pose my fault for the “provactive” lead ‘toon.
HR,
I was serious about doing a post. You’re not the only one who keeps bringing those charges up.
If you went through all those comments- hundreds made in the space of just the weekend alone- you might understand why it’s not a “copout” but a weariness of having to repeat myself over and over again. Especially for some commenters who had gotten responses to their points; then make the same points, same questions all over again, without ever evolving from the previous challenge to the points.
I’m not up for digging back and sifting through, but I’ll do my best; and also I’ll just rehash what I can for your following questions:
As Mata says, he’s expressing a viewpoint (you might want to provide the exact quote- was it the 60 Minutes interview?) that echoes so much of the liberal political beliefs on American foreign policy. It doesn’t make him a radical Islamist when the other 99% of his comments are in condemnation of Islamic terrorism and specifically on what happened to all of us that day, including his loss of congregation members- victims of the attacks. Basically, his supposed “blame America” is of the “let’s analyze and understand what motivates the terrorists” variety of criticism, no different than those expressed by anti-war hippy pacifists on the left, and even some like Ron Paul and Michael Scheuer on the right who also say the same thing in regards to “blowback”.
Mata’s addressed this before (oddly enough, also linking to your same Lappen article)- more than once. Rauf sees no conflict between the Constitution and his personal views on Sharia (which is not the same as, say, the Taliban’s interp of Sharia).
I linked to the following interview where Rauf is asked to explain Sharia.
Rauf also wrote a piece in WaPo regarding his view of Sharia.
In the piece I linked above,
Now you and I can disagree with him and his own views of Islam and Sharia; but it hardly makes him out to be the monster radical terrorist supporter, simply because he expresses love for his faith, believes Muslims should emulate his Prophet, and is a fan of Sharia. Now, if he expressed a love for these things through the negative lens that Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller sees all things Islam, then he’d probably be repulsed by it as well. And if he’s not repulsed by stonings, beheadings, etc…then he’s not the kind of Islamist I could get along with.
Short skip to
@Hard Right #42:
And focusing on the meaning of the word itself (although I don’t think this is what you were getting at when you used the term), this is a prime example of how his words can be distorted. What if he said he loves “jihad”? Well, you’d have to understand that for one, he’s been quoted extensively in condemning terrorism.
Ex:
And #2, then you’d have to understand what that term means to him and how he distinguishes it from how Islamic takfiri terrorists view “jihad”:
So Rauf believes the PC-ified meaning of “jihad”.
If there are actually believers out there who practice a pc form of Islam, then more power to them. I could care less about bursting their bubbles to the “realities” of the “religion of hate”, telling them what their Quran tells them to do to infidels. If they don’t subscribe to it, why convince them that this is what they must believe? To kill or convert infidels?
Today’s version of the loyalty oath, the “freedom pledge”? From what I recall, only Jasser and one other major Islamic leader signed it? Or have more jumped aboard since? Regardless, this isn’t a sign of radicalism and terror support. It can be viewed as insulting. And for those taqiyya conspiracists, if he did condemn Hamas specifically, the Islamophobes would simply say he’s lying, telling us one thing while he does another.
The man has a 27 year history working in Lower Manhattan, promoting interfaith dialogue. He’s worked with the FBI. He’s said more things right than not if you look at all the quotes you can find from him. His political views rub his conservative critics the wrong way because they are views aligned with those of liberal multiculturalists. Don’t confuse that with radical Islamist terrorist-lover (I understand how hard that can sometimes be not to do- really, I do!).
If you know something the FBI and Homeland Security doesn’t, about the man, please share your information!
Very generous of you, HR. I’d shake your hand for it, after the beating we’ve been receiving over this issue. So it’s nice to debate with someone who disagrees and who can do so without the disrespect. I hope I treat you with the same.
Blech…had to do some editing of my comment (never satisfied). I think I’m done with editing and rephrasing, now.
I have been working all day; however, I have enjoyed the commentary by glancing at my blackberry occasionally. I was sitting in IHOP and caused other customers to feel unsafe when I started laughing out loud at some of the comments.
I tried to walk a thin line between writing as an Islamophobe and paying respect to the Constitution; in the process, I hoped to muddy up the water ad fire emotions, “Mission Accomplished.”
The title was to be the key to unlock my nefarious plan, by being an ambiguous and complex metaphor. “Above The Law and Into Culture”, we assume that the devious ‘Islamo’ can use our system of laws and our Constitution to alter our culture, in a a manner similar in nature to that of the Progressive Socialist in the White House. In our fear of being over rum by enemies we tend to doubt the strength of our Constitution and wonder if it can stand against our new, more clever enemies; unfortunately, if we forsake the principles that have kept us unique in the world, we will be not that much different than those who hope to destroy us.
This mosque that appears to be an insult may actually work to correct some problems or it may, if things are a covert plan of infamy, serve to galvanize us as a nation and cause us to seek retribution and unleash a Hell on Earth directed at those who have wronged us. Although, the Progressive Socialist is weak except in verbal clashes and underhanded and dirty tricks, the rest of America is strong and resolute. We can correct and we can learn, if the constitution needs a clarity or an amendment regarding war and religion, we can do it, at least we can if we do more than get mad and read blogs and grumble to our neighbors. We can learn from the Socialists, during the last election they preyed upon the naive, the disenfranchised, they played the race card, gamed the young with texting and made them feel they were part of the Obama Team, at least until the polls closed. It is much easier to point the shortcomings and failures of Obama than it is to offer ideas and solutions or even to put in time for the defeat and embarrassment of the Socialists.
It is fairly easy to pick up a rifle and go to war, but it is much harder to do war on an intellectual level with a group that has been building a base of the naive and disenfranchised for decades. We are now in a war and our country is at risk like never before, but it isn’t the war in the “sand box” that is the threat, it is the enemy at the head of the Progressive Socialists who are closer to bringing this country down. The enemy is here and he doesn’t even need rifles to bring this country to its knees and getting us to compromise our principles in desperation and fear only aids our enemy.
Building a mosque so close to Ground Zero leads me to think the region is considered conquered territory by specific members of Islam. If so, the completion of this mosque would be perceived, by the global ummah, as Islam’s iconic symbol of victory over the Great Satan.
Indeed. And those who would ignore warngin signs under the guise of the Constitution and tolerance. Our tolerance is being used against us as it was already.
I said it before and I will say it again:
Rauf claims to be a bridge-builder. A bridge connects two sides. One cannot connect two sides when one side is totally inflamed by the action.
New York and the majority of the country is resistant to the mosque being built in the shadow of the Twin Towers.
If Rauf is truly a bridge builder, he would withdraw and build his alleged “community center” elsewhere and most would congratulate that decision.
Rauf’s recalcitrance puts the lie to the arguments of those who are so willing to sit unmoved and allow these monuments to the triumphs of radical Islam to be raised.
WITH the IMMIGRATION AGENCY RESPONSABILITY to AMERICA’s EQUITY on all facts of life:
HOW is this came to reality, where so many where allowed to immigrate this AMERICA and all the free world; DONT they have the brain to give more research to the demands for immigrations
from groups known to be able to do harm to the trues citizens who have history of their allegances,
WHY is that not taken into serious reflection? before it comes to serious conflicts that are to be expected for sure.
KEEMA: hi, YES, IT seems like it is already done deal,with the MAYOR BLOOMBERG promoting that building publicly with such excuses as he gave, to not please the terrorist, therfor build a MOSQUE on that ground still unstable bye the movement of humans remains. bye
I quit reading the comments after this one, because it references the source of my hysteria and hyperbole:
The problem I had was that you see fit to label the opposition.
As you well know, the dirtiest of dirty tricks by those on the left to silence any and every opposition to their agenda is to hurl shouts of “racist!” whether applicable or not. If nothing trumps the race-card, then playing the race-card effectively ends the argument. Why the author’s (and his fellow contributors’) hysteria, if not to stifle the debate and demean the opposition?
I may not agree with the basis of some of those opposing arguments, but to lump all opposition into the “that which is unclean” bin is indefensible. You sound like you may have gotten that editorial directive from your pals on the infamous journOlist.
Personally, I think the mosque-not-mosque has proven its unifying value. Not in the us-and-them holding hands and singing kumbaya manner of unity, but in the US-unity…without them.
The first evil America faces is the enemy, but the second and more insidious is the enabler. If you’re the opposition to the opposition, fine. That’s a good thing. But if you’re the one attempting to silence the opposition by branding them/us as bigots, your label is backfiring.
Instead of shaming us into silence, you’re presenting yourselves as “part of the problem” and have reduced your credibility, at least as far as I am concerned (and I hope that many of my fellow Flopping Aces readers agree) to zero.
Again I’ll say that the problem I have is in your willingness to label the opposition as you have.
If only the bigots and racists are right, then reluctantly, I stand with the bigots and racists. In my world, and I know this is shocking, there are far worse things than bigotry. Like being a victim. Or enabling those who would make me one.
To Skookum:
Thanks again for lending your steadying influence and wisdom to the debate.
@jeff:
Once again, you are engaging in the same sort of broad sweeping generalizations and accusatory arguments that you imagine in us and then cry out in outrage over.
I’ve already addressed this once but you didn’t bother to respond.
I’ll state it for you again so that perhaps you won’t miss it this time: Not all of those opposed to this mosque project are bigots or ‘phobes. Got that? Not all of them.
And none of us here have made that argument.
Now, are there those within the opposition who are bigots? Yes, there are. Are there those who have expressed bigoted viewpoints on this very blog regarding this issue? Yes, there are.
If you’d like to read some of the garbage that has been spewed regarding this subject just scroll through the discussions. Some of the most blatant violations of our rather lenient community standards here at FA were deleted simply because of their inflammatory and vile nature. Ample examples remain. And where they remain they have been rightly called out.
If a commenter came over to your blog and posted comments of a racist or bigoted nature, would you allow it to stand?
What would you prefer that we do?
Should we allow members of the Islamic faith to be called “ragheads” or “towel heads” or “sand niggers”, or other sundry terms of derogation, while we just keep quiet about it allowing those examples and our silence to live in infamy?
If that is what you expect as a response from us, then you underestimate our commitment to fairness and decency.
If you can find an example where we’ve specifically applied a label or term to someone inappropriately, feel free to point it out.
Now, let’s look at those of us who are on the other side of this issue. We are a far cry from cheering the mosque project. Mata laid out in great detail the spectrum of people who have expressed opinions.
You’ll notice that none of us, NONE, have taken the position of both accepting it and liking it. In fact, NONE have expressed an opinion of even liking it.
Yet, we’re derided and slurred and besmirched.
Your broad brushing of those of us on this side of the issue does you a great disservice and your efforts to shame or insult us into not expressing and defending our positions is not working for you.
If you want to debate and discuss the issue, as well as the positions that we have taken on it, rather than engage in presumptuous assumptions about what you think we think, then feel free to do so.
Be aware, however, that if you continue to conjure up ideas and positions in your head and then attempt to attribute them to us, then you can rightfully expect that we will confront and challenge you on it.
If you wish to participate in the discussion of this topic, then that’s great.
I would suggest that the place for you to begin is with my prior responses to you on the other thread.
From there, we can move forward.
Word – Ref 26; my opinion hasn’t changed. No where in my copy of the Constitution does it say we have to allow the enemies of this nation to build on our soil.