Mosque Meant To Be Provocation

Well of COURSE it is. This has nothing to do with the Muslims' right to worship. It has everything to do with building a shrine to the very religion responsible for the deaths of 3000 people on 9/11. It is a slap in the face to every American, not just the families of those who died. This mosque is meant to be a testament of Islam's victory in America, and our wimp of a president won't take a stand with Americans, 70% of which oppose this atrocity:

New York currently boasts at least thirty mosques so it's not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as "Fitna," meaning "mischief-making" that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

Obama's mamby-pamby talk about freedom of religion is laughable. He did not mention once the families that were devastated on 9/11. He's much more concerned about the feelings of those responsible. Charles Krauthammer has a great piece up at NRO.

Which makes you wonder about the good will behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy “an accessory to the crime” of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, “I’m not a politician. . . . The issue of terrorism is a very complex question.”

I certainly don't wonder about Rauf's "good will." I know Krauthammer is being facetious, he knows as well as I do what the intent here is. It's too bad our supposedly intellectual leaders can't seem to figure it out.

JASmius adds: ....a few more highlights.

***Hamas, by the by, is a big fan of religious liberty:

A leader of the Hamas terror group yesterday jumped into the emotional debate on the plan to construct a mosque near Ground Zero -- insisting Muslims "have to build" it there.

"We have to build everywhere," said Mahmoud al-Zahar, a co-founder of Hamas and the organization's chief on the Gaza Strip.

"In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer," he said on "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" on WABC.

"We have to build the mosque, as you are allowed to build the church and Israelis are building their holy places."

Hey, that's great, there, Mahmoud - how about you sit down and shut up and let the Jews rebuild their Temple on the Temple Mount? By the latest archeological understanding, they wouldn't even have to dynamite the Dome of the Rock or al-Asqua. Sound like a plan?

***The Obamedia is also discovering the wonders and glories of religious freedom:

If you go full force on the offensive, every Democratic candidate in every competitive race in the country will have three choices, none of them good, when asked about the Islamic center: side with Obama and against public opinion; oppose Obama and deal with the consequences of intraparty disunity; or refuse to take a position, waffling impotently and unattractively at a crucial time.

Say what you will about the wisdom of Obama's policies overall, but his belated commentary on religious freedoms clearly was not done for political gain. Quite the contrary. the President knew that he and his party would almost certainly pay a political price for taking a stand, especially this close to the election, and with few prominent leaders, other than New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, on the White House's side. The reaction since the President spoke has been vitriolic and unvarying from leading voices on the right, painting Obama as weak, naive, out of touch and obtuse (not to mention flip-flopping, after his confusing follow-up comments Saturday suggested to some that he might be hedging his position).

Yes, Republicans, you can take advantage of this heated circumstance, backed by the families of the 9/11 victims, in their most emotional return to the public stage since 2001.

But please don't do it. There are a handful of good reasons to oppose allowing the Islamic center to be built so close to Ground Zero, particularly the family opposition and the availability of other, less raw locations. But what is happening now — the misinformation about the center and its supporters; the open declarations of war on Islam on talk radio, the Internet and other forums; the painful divisions propelled by all the overheated rhetoric — is not worth whatever political gain your party might achieve.

It isn't clear how the battle over the proposed center should or will end. But two things are profoundly clear: Republicans have a strong chance to win the midterm elections without picking a fight over President Obama's measured words. And a national political fight conducted on the terms we have seen in the past few days will lead to a chain reaction at home and abroad that will have one winner — the very extreme and violent jihadists we all can claim as our true enemy.

Well, Mark, perhaps if your "some kind of a god" had kept his mouth shut about GZM, thereby nationalizing [heh] the issue, Republicans wouldn't have a fight to pick. Savvy? Indeed, one almost wonders if that's precisely why The One burbled out such "measured" low-hanging fruit - cultural outrage as a distraction from his crappy economy. Give us so many choice, juicy cudgels that we'll end up like the burro that starved to death between multiple bails of hay.

Oh, and Mark, one other thing: Doesn't our "true enemy" already have lots of self-conjured reasons for wanting to wipe us out? Most, if not all, of them malignantizing out of their "religion of peace"? There wasn't any GZM "controversy" going on nine years ago, Mark; your last faux deity spent eight years going out of his way to duck a fight with bin Laden. So what "chain reaction" "provoked" al Qaeda into creating that big hole in Manhattan that you think Rauf should get to dominate?

***The New Reformation is also reaching the lofty towers of the Donk Politburo:

Senator Robert Menendez, who is leading the Democrats' campaign to retain control of the U.S. Senate, this morning said Republicans are only jeopardizing their political chances by trying to score political points from the controversy surrounding the proposed construction of a mosque near the Manhattan site of the 9/11 terror attacks.

"There is a price to be paid," Menendez (D-N.J.) said in an interview after a news conference in Garfield. "When I think of the Constitution and the oath I took, it is to support Jew and Gentile, Protestant and Catholic, Muslim and Christian. It doesn't have a limitation to it. I think it's incredibly dangerous for them to move down this path and it undermines a lot of their other arguments about the Constitution and the preservation of the Constitution and the importance of the Constitution and all of the rights that are derived from it. If they constantly talk about the motto of 'let's save our Constitution,' well here we go let's save it."

Alright, then, Bobby, are you prepared to summarily shut down the ACLU once and for freaking all? No more "separation of church and state" lawsuits to expunge every last cross, every last Decalogue, and every last other Christian symbol from the public domain? Restore prayer to the public schools along with an engraved apology and the desecration of Madelleine Murray O'Hare's moldering grave? Demand that Saudi Arabia lift its ban on all non-Muslims being barred from Mecca and Medina and allow churches and synagogues to be constructed right along side the Muslim holy places? Or the tanks will roll? After all, it's about freedom of religion, not freedom of Sharia, right?

***The New Light has even plumbed the crazoid asylums of academia:

Republicans have good reason to push the issue, said Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos. “Who gets moved by these comments? The answer is independents.” Paleologos said. “Independents are driven by issues like this.”

But can Republicans get traction if the Democrats are careful not to engage? A Democratic leadership aide revealed that the Dems do, in fact, have a counter strategy; they just haven’t deployed it yet. Republicans, the aide said, are trying to manufacture a national issue at the expense of focusing on local issues — like jobs. “It provides more evidence that they [Republican candidates] are not independent,” the aide said. “That they are beholden to D.C. puppet masters.”

Puppet masters like....seventy percent of the American public.

And again, it wasn't the Republicans who made this a national issue. They COULDN'T.

Remember headlines from nine years ago like, "BASTARDS!" - in the San Francisco Chronicle? Most Americans do. Filthy quisling animals like Dave Paleologos don't. And his preferred party is caught squarely in the middle, where being "right" in the lib Bizarro World is politically lethal in the Real World.

Only it isn't really a distraction from the Obamapression. Or ObamaCare. Or ObamaDebt. A common thread runs throughout: Comprehensive ideological and cultural contempt of and hostility to everything America has ever stood for and the majority of its people that refuse to be "transformed".

The Hindenburg was destroyed by one bolt of lightning. Two or three or four additional bolts wouldn't have canceled out the first one; they would just have caused the German blimp to crash and burn faster.

Nice bit of psychological projection, there, David. I've never heard THAT idea before.

***But as is always the case, there always have to be bigoted, intolerant throwbacks who just can't live and let build:

“The First Amendment protects freedom of religion,” spokesman Jim Manley said in a statement. “Senator Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else.

The fun part of this is that it's Dirty Harry "look[ing] weak, unorganized, cowardly, and unwilling to take a stand for principles [he] plainly believe[s] in" in service to a cause - saving his own worthless, wrinkled ass - that is doomed. If Pencilneck is going to go down, might as well go down entertainingly.