As expected, President Barack Hussein Obama has spoken out in support of the Ground Zero mosque.
The President said, “We Muslims have the same right to practice our religion as anyone else in this country.”
Oh, wait — Sorry! I misquoted Mr. Obama. A fly landed on my computer screen and caused me to misread that last sentence. What the President actually said was: “Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”
What a difference a “We” makes.
And what difference do We the People make? Virtually none.
Here’s the report from MSNBC:
Obama Defends Ground Zero Mosque Plans
Ramadan dinner speech: ‘Muslims have the right to practice their religion as anyone else’
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Friday endorsed plans for a Muslim mosque two blocks from ground zero in New York City, declaring that “Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”
Speaking at a White House dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, Obama said all Americans have the right to worship as they choose.
“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances, Obama said. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.”
– – – – – – – – –
Obama emphasized the point as New York City is immersed in a deeply sensitive debate about whether a mosque should be built near the site of the World Trade Center’s twin towers.
His remarks drew agreement and vilification.
It was the president’s first public remarks about the mosque controversy. The White House previously called the matter solely a local one.
The dinner was attended by over 100 guests, including two Muslim-American congressmen and ambassadors and officials from numerous Muslim nations, including Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.
Obama: Ground Zero Victory Mosque? Absolutely, Sounds Awesome
You know who else my enemy is? My enemy is someone who think it’s a good idea to advertise the virtues of Islam next door to Islam’s Greatest Hit.
Ohhhh… And it’s Friday, too. So it can be lost over the weekend.
Well, as they say, Praise Allah (pbuh) it’s Friday.
Ah yes, those Friday “after the press has signed out for the weekend” Presidential bombs. Another Obama Special brought to us by The One We Didn’t Want and Sure Didn’t Vote For.”
Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
“OBAMA TO CITY: F@CK YOU!!”
I honestly did NOT expect this–note the White House ambivalent, wishy-washy response earlier in the week.
This is without a doubt the dumbest and biggest political mistake Prez Hussein has made, just 12 weeks before the elections… It’s as if Pres. Truman decided to peacefully hand over the 1st 2 nuclear bombs to the Japs as a “goodwill gesture.” Uhhhhh, what’s the rationale for this?! “THANKS, BARRY!”
There must be a GOP mole in the White House.
Here’s my answer to this:
Rebuild St. Nicholas CHURCH at Ground Zero, Not a Mosque
Anyone is welcome to copy that blog post and pass it along.
Christopher Caldwell in FT: A mosque that wrecks bridges:
Douglas Murray on the GZ-mosque:
“The story is repeated around the globe, the story of Muslim denial, self-pity, and demands for extraordinary sensitivity from others even whilst trampling on every sensitivity of absolutely everyone else.
If the people who are building the ground zero mosque cared about improving Islam’s image, they would have taken their mosque elsewhere. If they cared about cultural sensitivities, reciprocity or freedom of religion, then they wouldn’t be trying to provoke people by building a mega-mosque at ground zero.
The very idea is stupid and offensive. Needlessly provocative, needlessly offensive or, at the very best, entirely needlessly thoughtless.
For Muslims, the answer to radical Islam may well be some nice official version of Islam that hasn’t yet been discovered. But for free and open societies, the answer to radical Islam is not Islam”.
Zero has just sealed his fate as a one termer.
WHERE OH WHERE is the equivalent of the “FORD TO NY, DROP DEAD” Headline?
Thin that “OBAMA TO NY, SCREW YOU!
THIS IS REAL TAQIYYA ON OBAMA’S PART:
Imam Rauf has ties to Hizb ut Tahrir and Iran. See:
ALl with screen shots to prove he met with the Iranian Larijani –the photo was subsequently removed from the Cordoba Initiative website.
Many thanks to Anne Bayefsky and Madeline Brooks as we now know the absolute real truth about the lying duplicity of Imam “Taqiyya “Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan.
Jewish Odysseus: This is without a doubt the dumbest and biggest political mistake Prez Hussein has made, just 12 weeks before the elections.
I agree and can only add that this is a final demonstration of just how dedicated BHO is to the Islamic cause. It is yet one more act of anti-American hatred of the same ilk as his pastor Jeremiah Wright’s “God damn America” spewing.
All concerned Americans throughout the nation should carry the remembrance of this blatant treason to the voting booth.
REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER
magnus123: Per Douglas Murray: If the people who are building the ground zero mosque cared about improving Islam’s image, they would have taken their mosque elsewhere.
Make no mistake, the people who are building the Ground Zero mosque care very much about Islam’s image. THEY CARE ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT ISLAM IS SEEN AS DOMINATING ALL OTHER CULTURES AND BELIEFS.
The Ground Zero mosque has no other purpose or function save as a triumphant planting of Islam’s flag on the soil of dar al-harb.
There is still a way to stop this Islamic victory monument. Consolidated Edison owns half of the property required for the Ground Zero mosque site. Write to them and express your concern.
Once again here is information regarding how to contact ConEd about the Ground Zero mosque and their sale of half the Park Ave. property needed for this abomination.
Let them know that the 9-11 atrocity cost ConEd untold millions of dollars in damage to utilities infrastructure and that they are inviting renewed terrorist attacks upon New York City if they sell their half of the Park Avenue property to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf for the Cordoba Mosque building.
Flood them with calls AND emails.
P.O. Box 138
New York, NY 10276-0138
Hat tip: TexasStomp at Big Peace
Here is some text that you can cut and paste into an email:
Subject: Damaged Equipment
(Note: Using this text in the subject line will assure that the email gets opened by ConEd.)
Damage to Consolidated Edison equipment worth millions of dollars happened on September 11, 2001.
Your company’s potential sale of the Park Avenue property to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf would contribute to the possibility of more terrorist attacks upon New York City and the utility infrastructure of Consolidated Edison. The possibility of this is very real as the mosque is being funded by Saudi Arabia.
Please refuse to consider any such transfer of title for this important property until it can be shown that there is no chance of it being used for a mosque or any other Islamic institution.
Y’all must get tired of my repeated suggestion to create a link to material you want others to read.
Honest, it’s just internet reader behavior: no live link to click, then it’s “too much trouble” to scrape out URLs cuz everyone is bizzy reading comments. Cutting and pasting interrupts the flow…
The one proven exception to this is the promise of porn.
Which reminds me: a [now] deleted comment in favor of the Muslim point of view was taken down not for his opinion but because his link (good businessman that he was, it was indeed a clickable link, not a URL) led to an online shop for hash pipes and cigarette papers.
Sorry, sunshine, but that wasn’t ever gonna stay put. It wasn’t your opinion, it was your merchandise.
1389 has a link to her site which has some good info re the 9/11destruction [pulverization is more like it] of St.Nicholas Orthodox Church. There has been an ongoing wrangle between the church and the Port Authority.
I searched on the same author, same site, and found a newer report [warning: some readers have said they won’t click on a NYT link; this is one]
Still at Square One
Too bad the Port Authority isn’t going to pull this stuff on the Zero Mosque fifth column.
Now, for the rest of the URLs:
Christopher Caldwell:A mosque that wrecks bridges
Douglas Murray on Zero Mosque
Zero Mosque Ties to Hizbut
Iranian Connexion to Zero Mosque
Hope I got them all.
NOTE: I’m letting the profanity with the asterisks, etc., stand for the moment, but if this trend continues, I will begin deleting again.
It is sooo tedious. Profanity deflects the conversation here. Many other blogs permit it; they would be a good destination if you need to blow off steam.
I understand the anger but remind everyone, once again, that school children read this blog. Please show them that one can be indignant, disgusted, angry, etc., without turning the air blue.
Getting around the rules by the use of clever devices isn’t a good example to them, either.
Here’s a proposition: they can build a mosque on ground-zero, on condition that a gigantic American mall, painted red-white-and-blue, is erected near that fancy stone in Mecca.
Since Islam is an understanding, respectful religion of peaceful coexistence, I’m sure nobody would mind.
Islam has complete contempt for “religious freedom”, so allowing their intolerance to be tolerated is reckless insanity.
Even with the First Amendment’s vague and broad view of “freedom of religion” (without ever defining “religion”), the Constitution is still NOT a suicide pact.
Allowing Islam to “legally” replace the Bill of Rights with Sharia Law is not a sane First Amendment “interpretation”.
But is an outrageous and fatally naive capitulation to sanctified despotism and terror.
Erick, I found your comment an anti-American formulation.
Dyphna, thanks for the link to the Caldwell article in the FT.
I found these excerpts worth citing…
Including Islam within the fold of traditional western religious tolerance is not business-as-usual. It is an experiment. Our Lockean ideas of religious tolerance had their origins in the 16th century (the peace of Augsburg) and the 17th (the peace of Westphalia). Those understandings regulated relations between Christian sects and were steadily liberalised. Judaism later proved assimilable into this system in the US, but not, to put it mildly, everywhere in the west.
Islam – which is, like Christianity but unlike contemporary Judaism, an evangelising and expansionist religion – is a bigger challenge.
Osama bin Laden’s strategic calculus – that the US lacked either the resolve, the cohesion or the cultural self-confidence to stand up to a mighty blow – has in many ways been vindicated.
Sharia continues apace. And with our new Supreme Court justice, a real fan of Sharia law while she was at Harvard, there will be a speed-up of this process.
From a recent post:
“Constitution vs. Shariah = Conflict of two rule sets
Q: How can this be resolved without war? That is, following the rules of Sun Tzu, how could victory be achieved without war, when there is a clearly defined conflict space?
A: Create a system design goal that “there is no conflict,” and then redefine the situation variables to achieve that goal — to eliminate the conflict.
Q: Can you change the left side of the conflict — the Constitution?
A: No, the Constitution cannot be redefined — yet — to incorporate Shariah. That is being done in Muslim countries thanks to Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanhuri, Elena Kagan, Noah Feldman (adding Shariah clauses into secular constitutions).
But you can’t do that in the U.S.A. Not yet, anyway. People will notice.
Q: So what to do, what to do?
A: Change the right side of the conflict.
Redefine the variable that you can control: relax the constraints on Shariah.
Rauf and Auda can control what is called Shariah in western PR venues. They can temporarily redefine Shariah so it can incorporate the Constitution, so that the variable for Shariah is the same as that for the Constitution.
Or, more accurately, they are saying the values placed within the Shariah variable and the Constitution variable are the same — so if the values are the same, the variable must be the same. Bad logic, but quite slick from a design standpoint and a taqiyya perspective.
And that is how they introduce it into the UK and the USA. There is no conflict with being Shariah-compliant, because the US laws and institutions are all already Shariah compliant! We silly Westerners just didn’t realize it.
In fact, Rauf and Auda will tell the Europeans and the Americans that in the West we’re actually living a cooler, hipper, more virtuous, more democratic, more human-rights-oriented Shariah than those nasty brutish authoritarian countries in the Middle East.
There, that didn’t hurt, did it? In fact it felt good. We were complimented.
Your Shariah is so universally Western, so unbelievably egalitarian, so social justicy-juicy, so progressive!
And what we thought was a conflict turns out to have been resolved — gosh, what a relief after 1400 years of jihad!
Hey, that’s almost like conflict resolution isn’t it?
Or game theory, applied with precision?
But mostly it just feels nice and flattering and reduces the fear of Shariah and removes the pain of anxiety — but with an intellectual twist that will feel like an aperçu, when in fact it is a solipsism.
No more pain, no more fear. Like an axe to the spinal cord. [my emphasis, because this is a haunting metaphor]
The Muslim Brotherhood is six or eight moves ahead of us in the Islamization chess game.”
She’s right: they excel at chess while we’re content to play checkers and pretend…
I don’t mean Islam in general. This is the Muslim Brotherhood, who’ve been planning this since before most of us were born.
And I don’t mean “us” in general. This the feckless Political Class, giving away the seed corn.
Congratulations, you managed to find something that isn’t there. Would you like a cookie?
Now, I could explain it to you, but there’s no fun in that. Moving on.