Monday, August 16, 2010
Today, Hamas co-founder, Mahmoud al-Zahar, voiced his support of the too-close-to-Ground Zero-Mosque. (I use that expression to satisfy the people who want to argue that the mosque is not actually at Ground Zero but two blocks away. Of course, they make this argument in spite of the fact that the Burlington Coat Factory was damaged in the World Trade Center attack, which makes it as much a part of the 911 tragedy as anything else.) The terrorist organization is pleased to see this mosque erected there, as they are well aware that it is a provocation and would be an emblem of Islamic extremists' triumph on American soil. As I've stated numerous times, common decency dictates the mosque not be on such sacred ground. But if common decency weren't enough, surely common sense should be: when a terrorist organization committed to our demise is thrilled with the possibility, perhaps that should be an indication that one should think twice.
The New York Post reports:
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."
Hamas, he added, "is representing the vast majority of the Arabic and Islamic world -- especially the Islamic side."
Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind the proposed mosque, and two other leaders of the plan who previously had commented extensively, were silent yesterday.
They did not respond to The Post's phone calls or e-mails about the Hamas endorsement.
Hamas first came up in the mosque debate earlier this summer when Abdul Rauf refused to describe the group as a terrorist organization -- despite the State Department listing that identifies it as such.
Read more here.
Saturday, after President Obama voiced his "unshakable" support of the mosque--before he flip-flopped the very next day--Governor Palin tweeted about an article written by two Muslims who want the public to know that the location of the mosque is no act of innocence or sheer desire to worship. Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah share:
Last week, a journalist who writes for the North Country Times, a small newspaper in Southern California, sent us an e-mail titled "Help." He couldn't understand why an Islamic Centre in an area where Adam Gadahn, Osama bin Laden's American spokesman came from, and that was home to three of the 911 terrorists, was looking to expand.
The man has a very valid point, which leads to the ongoing debate about building a Mosque at Ground Zero in New York. When we try to understand the reasoning behind building a mosque at the epicentre of the worst-ever attack on the U.S., we wonder why its proponents don't build a monument to those who died in the attack?
New York currently boasts at least 30 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.
The Koran commands Muslims to, "Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book" -- i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of "fitna"
So what gives Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the "Cordoba Initiative" and his cohorts the misplaced idea that they will increase tolerance for Muslims by brazenly displaying their own intolerance in this case?
Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?
Read their full story here.
Today, Senator Harry Reid managed to say something that made sense when he made known his opposition to the mosque. Via The Washington Post:
According to a spokesperson, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "respects" that the First Amendment protects freedom of religion, but thinks that the Ground Zero mosque "should be built someplace else."
Finally, a recent poll has shown that nothing has changed in terms of the perspective held by the majority of Americans:
While a majority of American voters think the Muslim group that wants to put a mosque near ground zero has the right to build it there, most think it would be wrong to do so.
A Fox News poll released Friday found that 61 percent of voters think the Muslim group has the right to build a mosque in lower Manhattan.
However, 64 percent think it would be wrong to put a mosque there.
Click here to see the actual poll.
While some people with heads buried deep in the sand want to paint those who oppose the mosque as racist, intolerant, defilers of the First Amendment, the reality is that people understand the right to build the mosque there but believe that building it there is simply not right. There is a difference. And it is an insult to New Yorkers, to Americans, and to the 911 victims' families to suggest that their motives are anything other than pure and their pain anything other than real.