Jump to content

Vote Endorses Muslim Center Near Ground Zero


Casino67
 Share

Recommended Posts

26muslim.html?scp=1&sq=mosque%20ground%20zero&st=cse
NYTimes:

After a raucous hearing, a Manhattan community board backed a proposal on Tuesday evening to build a Muslim community center near the World Trade Center.

The 29-to-1 vote, with 10 abstentions, followed a four-hour back-and-forth between those who said the community center would be a monument to tolerance and those who believed it would be an affront to victims of the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The board’s vote was advisory — it did not have the power to scrap plans for a center — but it was seen as an important barometer of community sentiment.

Middle school students and rabbis were among the more than 100 people who testified at the hearing, which was held a short distance from ground zero. Some carried pictures of family members killed in the attacks; others brandished signs reading “Show respect for 9/11. No mosque!”

C. Lee Hanson, 77, whose son Peter was killed in the attacks, said he opposed the center not because he was intolerant, but because he believed that building a tribute to Islam so close to the World Trade Center would be insensitive.

“The pain never goes away,” Mr. Hanson said. “When I look over there and I see a mosque, it’s going to hurt. Build it someplace else.”

Jean Grillo, 65, a writer from TriBeCa, said shutting out any faith undermined American values. “What better place to teach tolerance than at the very area where hate tried to kill tolerance?” she said.

The proposed center, called the Cordoba House, would rise as many as 15 stories two blocks north of where the twin towers stood. It would include a prayer space, as well as a 500-seat performing arts center, a culinary school, a swimming pool, a restaurant and other amenities.

The group behind the project, the Cordoba Initiative, is seeking to make major structural changes to the five-story building at 45 Park Place, which was built in the late 1850s in the Italian Renaissance palazzo style.

The group needs the approval of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, which could decide as early as July if the building merits historic protection.

In addition, the center faces intense opposition in the United States and abroad. Over the past few days, Community Board No. 1, which represents Lower Manhattan, was flooded with hundreds of calls and e-mail messages about the proposal, most of them from outside New York, according to Julie Menin, the board’s chairwoman.

Some of the board members who abstained said they wanted time to learn more about the Cordoba Initiative, but the board rejected a motion to delay the vote a month.

The days leading up to the vote were marked by a feverish exchange of words, culminating in remarks about Muslims from a leader of the Tea Party, Mark Williams, that were widely dismissed as racist.((They just couldn't resist.))

But Mr. Williams was not the only critic. Many families of Sept. 11 victims fervently opposed the proposal, saying they were offended by the idea of building a prayer space so near the site.

“That should be a serene site,” Bill Doyle, a leader of a group of 9/11 families, said in a telephone interview. “Now you’re going to see protests and demonstrations there all the time.”

City officials, including Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg; the City Council speaker, Christine C. Quinn; and the Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer, have rallied behind the proposal.

The City Council has the power to overturn decisions on landmarks, but Ms. Quinn pledged on Tuesday to help shepherd the center to completion.

“I’m very confident we could find a way for both the landmark concept and the development of the mosque to move forward,” she said.

The center is estimated to cost $100 million, but exactly how the Cordoba Initiative will finance the project remains unclear.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who has led services in TriBeCa since 1983, told the board the center would help “bridge and heal a divide” among Muslims and other religious groups.

“We have condemned the actions of 9/11,” he said. “We have condemned terrorism in the most unequivocal terms.”

The center is expected to create more than 150 full-time and 500 part-time jobs, and it would offer a range of cultural events, modeled on the 92nd Street Y.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

shoutCasino 67! Thanks for the post!

 

I think the nub of this post tells us that they own the land, they've submitted plans to build & they've been darn near unanimously accepted by the local board, we have a President that is sympathetic to Islam, people that support Obama dominate politics in New York, and finally that the only religion in America right now, with carte blanche, is Islam..............this mosque is going to be built. We can cry & complain, but really, no body with any power to do anything, cares one whit about stopping the construction.

 

What can we do? Can we make them accept "terms of use" to build there? Can we make stipulations against recruitment for terrorist activities?

 

Islam is a religion, but it is also a politically driven religion. Throughout it's history, it has allowed some secular laws to be written into it's codified structure. One tool used by non-Muslims to accomplish peaceful co-existence with Islam is called a firman. One of the earliest firmans[still honored by Mulims today] is called the St Catherine's Monastery Firman, and is reported to have the handprint of Mohammad on it, and the request that Muslims do not destroy the monastery, which is on the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula; "...for God-fearing men live there." Many firmans have existed in the past, and some are still honored today, because it is a religious edict, and Muslims honor their religion. One of the greatest firman's is known as, Firman 1311 of the Ottoman Empire, also the "Status Quo" that governed peace in Jerusalem and it's holiest religious sites. Until the defeat of the Ottoman Turks during WWI, it had existed for over 700 years. Apportionment by the British and then the United Nations, removed the power of the firman, and now secular laws determine Jerusalem proper, but religious sites such as the Dome of the Rock [islam] and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre [Christianity & Islam] and a few others, still honor the terms of the firman; which was so structured that cleaning & repairs of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, were didvided between 3 Christian religions, and in mid 1800's a monk cleaning windows in the wrong area was removed from his ladder & the ladder remained for 150 years. Examples of firmans are below, with actual documents on the left & translations on the right. They include the "Tughra" or Monogram, Sacred Seal & Signature of the issuing Caliph.

 

Historical Archives of the Custody of the Holy Land

 

 

Here is a description of a visitor to Jerusalem describing the time during the Ottoman firman. It is called, "A Peaceful City of the Ottoman Empire: Jerusalem"

 

A Peaceful City of the Ottoman Empire:Jerusalem

 

Here is a translation of the Jerusalem firman, that gave security to Jews, Christians & Muslims for hundreds of years.

 

The Firman of Jerusalem /Status Quo

 

Here a simple description of Staus Quo.

 

Description of Status Quo

 

I think most Americans would consider Ground Zero a holy site and hallowed ground. In the past, where Islam has conquered land, it has planted it's flag & religious symbols over the ground of the dead, and over the religious sites of the conquered. That, more than anything is what American's are in anguish about. We can't stop this mosque construction from happening, but if Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a man of peace & reconciliation, as he says he is, as well as the guiding religious figure involved, he can be a signatory to a firman executed by the other major religions [Christian & Jewish] as well as the top secular entity, either the Federal lawmaker [Congress] or New York State Congress, as signatories to the Firman of Ground Zero, or the Firman of 911. All signatories are bound by the whole of the document, and provisions against terrorist recruitment, or financing, can be a stipulation of that agreement; with consequences & penalties for breaking the terms. They would be bound by religion to a formula that worked for hundreds of years, and whose spirit is still honored today. Technically, they would be considered dhimmi's or "protected subjects."

 

Some background on Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf:

 

He established the Cordoba Institute, a religious charity & organization. The Caliphate of Cordoba was considered the acme of Muslim rule on the Iberian peninsula [spain & Portugal] after it's conquest by Moorish invasion. All lands from North Africa & including the Iberian peninsula were under Muslim rule; and trade & culture flourished. Many masterpieces were created, including the "Great Mosque of Cordoba." The Cathedral of Our Lady of the Assumption, was built on it's ruins & using it's materials, and stands today. So, he's creating a new monument of Islam, yes, but we have to ask if it is a monument to peace & reconciliation, as he says, or if it is something else.

Below is an interview from March, 2002, that shows Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and some of his thoughts & plans; is he a man of peace? Read & decide.

 

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf-Man of Peace & Reconciliation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pollyannaish

I am on the record as saying that I would not mind a mosque as a part of a larger interdenomination/religional effort.

 

HOWEVER, after doing more research on this group and listening to the folks who see this land as the graves of their loved ones, I have to retract my statement. This needs to be stopped. It is wrong.

 

Let me put it this way. If it was discovered that catholic priests had molested children in certain location, would it be appropriate to build a daycare on that site? We know that those priests belief is not that of the church, and yet there would be something deeply disturbing about the juxtaposition. I think that is the same issue here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

I am on the record as saying that I would not mind a mosque as a part of a larger interdenomination/religional effort.

 

HOWEVER, after doing more research on this group and listening to the folks who see this land as the graves of their loved ones, I have to retract my statement. This needs to be stopped. It is wrong.

 

Let me put it this way. If it was discovered that catholic priests had molested children in certain location, would it be appropriate to build a daycare on that site? We know that those priests belief is not that of the church, and yet there would be something deeply disturbing about the juxtaposition. I think that is the same issue here.

Pollyannaish!

 

I know you're upset by this mosque thing. I am, too. MrsSr is livid. I presented an avenue for making more palatable; a situation over which, we may have no control. If you read about the Imam, you may find some things that would help you believe he is a man of peace & reconciliation. I hope so.

 

I don't follow your example of catholic priest pedophilia and the day care center; as opposed to the violent ending of life for 3,000 souls in a few blocks of downtown NYC.

 

I know it is fashionable to mention this because the Catholic Church is a good target for the media [they won't cut your head off, though], and I'm not angry, but I've been a Catholic for 57 years, and spent my early years being educated in Catholic schools. I've never had any contact with a pedophile priest. I don't know anyone that has, including my two brothers & sister. I've served daily as an altar boy for my 6th grade through 8th grade years- no pedophilic contact.

 

Philip Jenkins [a Protestant] has a definitive study of pedophilia & the Catholic church. The national average for Catholic priest pedophilia, according to his study, is 0.53%----a study of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia [May,2002] shows a rate of .2% to 1.7%---a 1992 study of the Archdiocese of Chicago [1951 to 1991] had (59) allegations of abuse, out of a total serving number of (2,252) priests. Although some were false accusations, that represents 2.6%, even if they were all guilty. The national average of pedophilia in the total population [uS] is 4%, and the rate for Protestant clergy nationwide, is between 2-3% [pedophilia] with 10% as a figure for Protestant sexual misconduct [not necessarily pedophilia.] Again this is from the Philip Jenkins study. By the way, some of the pedophilia is actually miscategorized; as some of it, is homosexual predation upon young males. It just all gets lumped together in the paper & in studies, and the Catholic Church with it's priestly vows of celibacy, attracts a higher percentage of homosexuals to the priesthood. This fact is downplayed in the media out of deferrence to the homosexual lobby.

 

I respect you, and know you are speaking out of a great concern for the mosque situation, and I include the figures above, solely for your reference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shoutSrWoodchuck -- see the article from Pajamas Media posted by saveliberty in the Coffee Shop and Geee here in News and Opinion titled, "Ground Zero Imam: 'I Don't Believe in Religious Dialogue.'" Sounds like he says one thing in English and another in Arabic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

pollyannaish

I am on the record as saying that I would not mind a mosque as a part of a larger interdenomination/religional effort.

 

HOWEVER, after doing more research on this group and listening to the folks who see this land as the graves of their loved ones, I have to retract my statement. This needs to be stopped. It is wrong.

 

Let me put it this way. If it was discovered that catholic priests had molested children in certain location, would it be appropriate to build a daycare on that site? We know that those priests belief is not that of the church, and yet there would be something deeply disturbing about the juxtaposition. I think that is the same issue here.

Pollyannaish!

 

I know you're upset by this mosque thing. I am, too. MrsSr is livid. I presented an avenue for making more palatable; a situation over which, we may have no control. If you read about the Imam, you may find some things that would help you believe he is a man of peace & reconciliation. I hope so.

 

I don't follow your example of catholic priest pedophilia and the day care center; as opposed to the violent ending of life for 3,000 souls in a few blocks of downtown NYC.

 

I know it is fashionable to mention this because the Catholic Church is a good target for the media [they won't cut your head off, though], and I'm not angry, but I've been a Catholic for 57 years, and spent my early years being educated in Catholic schools. I've never had any contact with a pedophile priest. I don't know anyone that has, including my two brothers & sister. I've served daily as an altar boy for my 6th grade through 8th grade years- no pedophilic contact.

 

Philip Jenkins [a Protestant] has a definitive study of pedophilia & the Catholic church. The national average for Catholic priest pedophilia, according to his study, is 0.53%----a study of the Archdiocese of Philadelphia [May,2002] shows a rate of .2% to 1.7%---a 1992 study of the Archdiocese of Chicago [1951 to 1991] had (59) allegations of abuse, out of a total serving number of (2,252) priests. Although some were false accusations, that represents 2.6%, even if they were all guilty. The national average of pedophilia in the total population [uS] is 4%, and the rate for Protestant clergy nationwide, is between 2-3% [pedophilia] with 10% as a figure for Protestant sexual misconduct [not necessarily pedophilia.] Again this is from the Philip Jenkins study. By the way, some of the pedophilia is actually miscategorized; as some of it, is homosexual predation upon young males. It just all gets lumped together in the paper & in studies, and the Catholic Church with it's priestly vows of celibacy, attracts a higher percentage of homosexuals to the priesthood. This fact is downplayed in the media out of deferrence to the homosexual lobby.

 

I respect you, and know you are speaking out of a great concern for the mosque situation, and I include the figures above, solely for your reference.

 

The point I was trying to make, clumsily I admit, is that initially I thought "what's the big deal, most of Islam, we are told, is much more moderate than the hijackers" and in the things I'd read this particular Imam seemed to be very open to our way of life and just wanted to be part of the dialogue. That kind of internal moderation of Islam is exactly what we need in order to reduce the risks to us. But then I did more research and discovered that language was just a cover for radicalization which made 9/11 possible which is NOT ok. Then I began to listen to the families of the victims and realized they absolutely deserve the final say.

 

And I COMPLETELY agree with you that the issues in the media regarding the Catholic Church are way, way overblown and unfairly and broadly applied—and my only intent in using that as an example from Christianity because it is in the news currently. I could use many, many other issues with ANY other denomination including my own. I apologize for rubbing salt in that particular scratch—it was insensitive.

 

The point I was trying to make is, that even though the percentage of Christians that do horrible things is small, there are just things that are inappropriate when bad things have happened. It would be wrong to memorialize the location of say, the murder of a gay person by those Phelps Baptist folks by creating a gay reorientation center there. It would be wrong to memorialize those harmed by wayward priests by building a boys school there. And it would be wrong to memorialize 3000 murders of innocents as part of Jihad by putting a mosque on the ground. It muddies the issues and implies tacit endorsement of evil behavior.

 

In each of these situations (and I'm not trying to create moral equivalency between the acts themselves) the entire group of Baptists, Catholics or Muslims are tarred by the bad behavior of some. And in each of these equations, it's best for the main group to step back and give the victims the space to mourn/heal in their own way and not insert themselves into the process.

 

I guess this is just a long way of me saying that I've come to the conclusion that the fact they would insensitively insert themselves into the situation in this way is proof that their intentions may not be pure.

 

Hope that clarifies my original post. I feel horrible that I wasn't more clear. I hope you know it was not intended as a denomination-wide smear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

shoutSrWoodchuck -- see the article from Pajamas Media posted by saveliberty in the Coffee Shop and Geee here in News and Opinion titled, "Ground Zero Imam: 'I Don't Believe in Religious Dialogue.'" Sounds like he says one thing in English and another in Arabic.

shoutNickydog!

 

I agree with you, that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf seems to be two-faced & following the Quranic formula for dealing with infidels. Here is a very interesting vid:

 

 

The question becomes, how do we deal with this situation, if it's going to happen? May I suggest:

 

Phone calls/e-mails to US & NY State congress critters, and to the local board members that OK'd it, to stop. Followed by threats & actions to remove them from their positions. [This is probably happening in NYC]

 

Lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit-tie them with legal tape & bleed them for years. [Need deep pockets & probably being done]

 

Pack the board that decides if a building has "Historic Value." The mosque may not be built, if the building has any historic value. [This may be the best avenue to stop + it provides really embarassed officials with an easy out.]

 

They are living in our country and are subject to our laws:

 

Use their Quranic tactics of dhimmitude [a heavy poll tax for using the mosque.] Make them sign a "Firman" as I described above, and in a public ceremony; requiring a strict set of rules for building & using the mosque, including how it is presented to the world [No "Mosque of the Magnificent 19"], absolutely no revenue raising for terrorist, no terrorist activities or harboring-with heavy penalties & closure, if they even tweak a rule. Make heighth, and other restrictions to the construction, so that it doesn't tower over Ground Zero.

 

All this may be met with screams of outrage about treating Muslims different. Remind them, that if they are citizens, they have pledged allegiance to the United States & it's Constitution. No special treatment for their religion, over the way other religions are treated. If they are visitors, show them the door, and invite them through it, if they can't behave [treat them like infidels are treated in Dar-al-Islam]

 

We are dealing with the hallowed ground of American Martyrs to the great war against Islam. It is a disgrace that no fitting memorial has been erected since the clearing of Ground Zero, besides pools & lights. Why? I'd like to know.

 

As hallowed ground where American citizens were violently killed, it maybe should be a National Monument, with the protected status, that entails. They won't get it built by November. Change Congress, and pursue that avenue. I doubt they'll get it up by 2012 [especially if lawsuits can run interference.] Change Presidents & issue an executive order-make it a campaign issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

Hope that clarifies my original post. I feel horrible that I wasn't more clear. I hope you know it was not intended as a denomination-wide smear.

shoutPollyannaish! We're good.

 

I know what you meant. I read the papers about the priest abusers & I want the strictest punishment for the priests that engage in this, and also, I'm close to many priests that are hurt by this and are loving & pious men of God & good shepherds to their flocks. The media is driven by scandal, and nothing sells better than sex, religion & money. The lawyers are driven by greed and many, many instances of "abuse' are lawyers & their clients chasing the buck, from a church with "deep" pockets. Although it isn't the "church" in Rome that pays the judgements, it's the US Catholic parishes that pay up [Like the US taxpayer getting stuck for everything] including having judgements that dissolve parishes & sell churches, schools & church lands to satisfy those judgements.

 

The media never mention that the Catholic church in the US:

 

Operates 637 non-profit hospitals, that treat 1 out of 5 Americans [not just Catholics]

 

Operate thousands of Primary & Secondary Catholic parochial schools [enrollment open to all faiths] at a cost to the church of $10 billion dollars, and saving the US taxpayer $18 billion dollars.

 

Send their Catholic college students [also open to all] on to graduate school at a rate of 92%.

 

I completely understand your post, respect your opinion and know you didn't intend it as a smear of Catholics. I enjoy debate, and different viewpoints, as are represented here at TRR. If we're always in agreement, how would we ever learn anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shoutSrWoodchuck -- see the article from Pajamas Media posted by saveliberty in the Coffee Shop and Geee here in News and Opinion titled, "Ground Zero Imam: 'I Don't Believe in Religious Dialogue.'" Sounds like he says one thing in English and another in Arabic.

shoutNickydog!

 

I agree with you, that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf seems to be two-faced & following the Quranic formula for dealing with infidels. Here is a very interesting vid:

 

 

The question becomes, how do we deal with this situation, if it's going to happen? May I suggest:

 

Phone calls/e-mails to US & NY State congress critters, and to the local board members that OK'd it, to stop. Followed by threats & actions to remove them from their positions. [This is probably happening in NYC]

 

Lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit-tie them with legal tape & bleed them for years. [Need deep pockets & probably being done]

 

Pack the board that decides if a building has "Historic Value." The mosque may not be built, if the building has any historic value. [This may be the best avenue to stop + it provides really embarassed officials with an easy out.]

 

They are living in our country and are subject to our laws:

 

Use their Quranic tactics of dhimmitude [a heavy poll tax for using the mosque.] Make them sign a "Firman" as I described above, and in a public ceremony; requiring a strict set of rules for building & using the mosque, including how it is presented to the world [No "Mosque of the Magnificent 19"], absolutely no revenue raising for terrorist, no terrorist activities or harboring-with heavy penalties & closure, if they even tweak a rule. Make heighth, and other restrictions to the construction, so that it doesn't tower over Ground Zero.

 

All this may be met with screams of outrage about treating Muslims different. Remind them, that if they are citizens, they have pledged allegiance to the United States & it's Constitution. No special treatment for their religion, over the way other religions are treated. If they are visitors, show them the door, and invite them through it, if they can't behave [treat them like infidels are treated in Dar-al-Islam]

 

We are dealing with the hallowed ground of American Martyrs to the great war against Islam. It is a disgrace that no fitting memorial has been erected since the clearing of Ground Zero, besides pools & lights. Why? I'd like to know.

 

As hallowed ground where American citizens were violently killed, it maybe should be a National Monument, with the protected status, that entails. They won't get it built by November. Change Congress, and pursue that avenue. I doubt they'll get it up by 2012 [especially if lawsuits can run interference.] Change Presidents & issue an executive order-make it a campaign issue.

All good thoughts and good ideas, shoutSrWoodchuck. I hope at least some of them are pursued and we never see this mosque materialize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

righteousmomma

shoutpollyannish I am proud of you! You are a rare person these days --someone who actually employs critical thinking and "research".

re your:

 

HOWEVER, after doing more research on this group and listening to the folks who see this land as the graves of their loved ones, I have to retract my statement. This needs to be stopped. It is wrong.

 

The point I was trying to make, clumsily I admit, is that initially I thought "what's the big deal, most of Islam, we are told, is much more moderate than the hijackers" and in the things I'd read this particular Imam seemed to be very open to our way of life and just wanted to be part of the dialogue. That kind of internal moderation of Islam is exactly what we need in order to reduce the risks to us. But then I did more research and discovered that language was just a cover for radicalization which made 9/11 possible which is NOT ok. Then I began to listen to the families of the victims and realized they absolutely deserve the final say.

 

I do not think your explanation was one bit clumsy. I understood you perfectly. The ole political correctness sound bites are so ingrained in all of us by now that sometimes we use their implications without being aware because we do not want to be thought of as racist or bigoted or narrow minded or whatever. You have Common Sense.

 

I guess this is just a long way of me saying that I've come to the conclusion that the fact they would insensitively insert themselves into the situation in this way is proof that their intentions may not be pure.

 

Could not have said it better. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rush today June 2 discussing fact that the mosque will perhaps be built before Trade Centers are finished on the Twin Tower site.

 

Discussing with a guest on the introduction of sharia law into New York.

 

Expect to rebuild the 15 story mosque on 10th anniversary of 9-11

 

 

Guest was Andy McCarthy

 

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTI4YjUzZTBiNTRkYmVlOGQ2MmUzMGZkZDgyMWM4MzE=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

righteousmomma

Rush had a long interview with Andy McCarthy yesterday. Here is an excerpt on just the mosque:

 

RUSH:..... They're building a mosque near the site of 9/11.

 

MCCARTHY: Right.

 

RUSH: A giant mosque. In the shadows of 9/11. That mosque might be built before the World Trade Center is rebuilt. Now, everybody associated with the mosque says, "No, no, no, this is not about anything but good will and outreach." What's your take on this mosque? What if the purpose of this mosque is indeed to get a foothold of Sharia in New York City right there near Ground Zero? Is it possible?

MCCARTHY: Yeah. Rush, I think this has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. It's supposed to be named The Cordoba Islamic Center, as I understand it. Cordoba was the name of the caliphate that conquered Spain and ruled it, often brutally, for about half a millennium -- actually longer than that. The guy behind the project is someone who has said that he would like to see Sharia law more insinuated into American law. The Islamist strategy is largely a propaganda strategy at this stage. The thought of having a mosque erected over the ruins of two of the great pillars of the Western economy and Western Civilization would be an enormous propaganda victory -- and the most perverse thing of all is, the thought that it's being done in the name of tolerance. You know, "We have to have the mosque because otherwise we're intolerant." We have 2300-plus mosques in the United States. There are probably a couple of hundred in the New York area. If you went to Mecca and Medina, you not only wouldn't see a Christian church or a Jewish synagogue, you wouldn't see a non-Muslim. They're closed cities. Non-Muslims are not allowed to enter. Yet we're told that we have to have this mosque in this place where Muslim terrorists relying on a construction of the Koran, mass murdered thousands of Americans. It's an affront not only to common sense, but it would be a major victory for the enemy in a an ongoing war -- and, you know, we ought to remind people we're still at war.

 

RUSH: All right, now, something that always fascinates me in monitoring and studying the left is motivation. I've had a lot of people say, "It doesn't matter, Rush. They gotta be stopped no matter where they're doing it." I'm still fascinated by it. In New York some city counsel or some regional part of the downtown council or whatever, the vote was almost unanimous to allow this to happen, I think it was 40 to 1 or 49 to 1, whatever it was. How does this happen? What...? Is there a guilt complex that has overtaken these people? Is it fear? Or do they actually buy into this notion that, "Hey, you know, this might actually bring peace between our peoples"?

 

MCCARTHY: I think what you have there, Rush -- and we don't know who are behind these community board members. I think the vote was 29-1.

 

RUSH: 29 to1, okay.

 

MCCARTHY: But it was not reflective of what the actual feeling of the rank-and-file in the community is. And I think this is being driven by leftists, by Islamists -- and frankly, by useful idiots who, you know, whether we had 2300 or 23,000 mosques in the United States, if we said that you couldn't build a single one on that site, they would say we were intolerant. As far as I'm concerned, with those people, why bother? They're just not... They're beyond convincing, so what's the point.

 

RUSH: And this is a huge mosque, right? This is not just some neighborhood mosque.

 

MCCARTHY: Oh, yes. Oh, yes. Absolutely. I think the site was a Burlington Coat Factory and now they're planning to turn it into a mega-mosque.

 

RUSH: Fifteen stories high this thing is going to be, I think I read.

 

MCCARTHY: Yes. And you're quite right to say that it would be built before the Trade Center is rebuilt. The Trade Center is still a big old hole in the ground.

 

RUSH: Right.

 

MCCARTHY: They expect to get this thing up and running on the tenth anniversary of 9/11.

 

RUSH: This is mind-boggling. It's like so much of everything else the left is doing in this country: They're telegraphing it, they're telling us what they're going to do, they're showing us what they are doing and people still have their heads in the sand over it. This, though, takes the cake.

 

MCCARTHY: I think so. I can't imagine something more reprehensible. I think this is even offensive in many ways to well-meaning Muslims who don't want this problem. You know, they see in common sense --

 

RUSH: Yeah.

MCCARTHY: -- that that's not a good spot for a mosque.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

righteousmomma

The whole interview is at

http://tinyurl.com/23qkhvl

 

.... I want to get your bona fides out on this. Describe for people very briefly your resume with the Southern District in Manhattan, your trial and your work prosecuting the blind sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman.

 

MCCARTHY: Right. I was a federal prosecutor for close to 20 years. Back in 1995 I was the lead prosecutor on one of our first big terrorism cases in Manhattan federal court. That was the case against the blind sheik and 11 other jihadists, who not only had carried out the bombing of the World Trade Center but also were plotting something even more ambitious, a simultaneous attack on New York City landmarks -- The Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the FBI's lower Manhattan headquarters, and the United Nations -- and you should know, Rush, in the events that people don't think terrorists are irrational, the reason that they wanted to take out the UN was because, as we all know, it's a great tool of American foreign policy in the world.

 

RUSH: (chuckles) Yeah, right. So, now Mr. McCarthy, ladies and gentlemen, has made the study of jihad, militant Islamism almost a life's work, and this book -- The Grand Jihad, How Islam and the Left Sabotage America -- that's a provocative title, lumping the left with Islam.

 

MCCARTHY: Yeah. Well, you know, there are so many historical examples, Rush, of leftists and Islamists working together, and there are so many current examples. You look at the Al-Qaeda and the litigation that's gone on since 9/11. Who's their lawyer in most of those cases? Well, the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is a leftist radical organization started by Bill Kunstler back in the sixties. You look at the ACLU's litigations against the Patriot Act and other national security measures, and they're frequently joined by CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. If we look at the health care debate, one of the organizations that was front and center championing Obamacare was the Muslim Public Affairs Council, which is another Islamist organization. So we see this. It's not just, you know, there was some Khomeini working with communists to overthrow the Shah. It's not as if that happened and that's all there's been. We've had numerous historical and present examples, and my book really sort of tries to explain why that should be taken as a given and then tries to examine why it happens, why it's true.

 

RUSH: I read an interview you gave to Michael Walsh on Big Journalism. I like this first question. After he asked you why you wrote the book, he said, "Surely, you're overstating the threat to the American way of life from radical Islam." You know, a lot of people think that, that there's a little bit too much alarmism here.

 

MCCARTHY: Yeah, I think they do and, you know, look: To this extent I think that's a fair criticism. If somebody said to me, "On a scale of one to ten, what is the threat?" I'd have to answer that it's not going to happen tomorrow. This is a very gradual campaign, but it's a very comprehensive campaign, it's a well thought out one. And what I want people to get out of the book is that it's about a whole lot more than terrorism. It's really an assault on the freedom culture on a variety of fronts: legal, social. The terrorism is part of it, but it's only one part of the equation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SrWoodchuck

Walid Shoebat-Former terrorist, now fighting Islamic takeover of the US, and his comments on Ground Zero Imam & plans for Islamic "Embassy" that will never be allowed to be torn down......once built.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shoutSrWoodchuck!

 

That's a great clip. Am listening to it now. Will send it on, too.

 

We have so many camel's noses under our collective tent. We are no longer a nation, we are a zoo.

 

Walid Shoebat-Former terrorist, now fighting Islamic takeover of the US, and his comments on Ground Zero Imam & plans for Islamic "Embassy" that will never be allowed to be torn down......once built.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

righteousmomma

Just some thoughts from wiki worthy of consideration regarding the future:

 

Most predominately Muslim countries are dictatorships.

 

The majority of Muslims belong to one of two major denominations, the Sunni and Shi'a. Islam is the predominant religion in the Middle East, North Africa, and large parts of Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Sizable communities are also found in China and Russia, and parts of the Balkans. About 13% of Muslims live in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country, 31% in the Indian Subcontinent, and 20% in Arab countries. Converts and immigrant communities are found in almost every part of the world. With approximately 1.5 billion Muslims (see Islam by country), Islam is the second-largest religion in the world and arguably the fastest growing religion in the world

Estimates of the total number of Muslims range from 0.7 to 1.2 billion worldwide and 1.1 to 7 million in the U.S. 3 About 21% of all people on Earth follow Islam. The religion is currently in a period of rapid growth.

Christianity is currently the largest religion in the world. It is followed by about 33% of all people -- a percentage that has remained stable for decades. If current trends continue, Islam will become the most popular world religion sometime in the mid-21st century.

 

Mainstream Islamic law does not distinguish between "matters of church" and "matters of state"; the ulema function as both jurists and theologians.

Islamic law covers all aspects of life, from matters of state, like governance and foreign relations, to issues of daily living. The Qur'an defines hudud as the punishments for five specific crimes: unlawful intercourse, false accusation of unlawful intercourse, consumption of alcohol, theft, and highway robbery. The Qur'an and Sunnah also contain laws of inheritance, marriage, and restitution for injuries and murder, as well as rules for fasting, charity, and prayer. However, these prescriptions and prohibitions may be broad, so their application in practice varies. Islamic scholars (known as ulema) have elaborated systems of law on the basis of these rules and their interpretations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • 1638210896
×
×
  • Create New...