The New York City Community Center – with its proposed site being just two blocks from Ground Zero – is moving forward.
The basis of that forward movement is political correctness and “tolerance.”
New York Mayor Bloomberg told us why our soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq:
“I think our young men and women overseas are fighting for exactly this,” Bloomberg said. “For the right of people to practice their religion and for government to not pick and choose which religions they support, which religions they don’t.”
It might be news to our soldiers that their real motivation for fighting overseas is so Muslims can build a giant mosque virtually on top of the site where Muslims murdered 3,000 Americans.
CAIR leader Nihad Awad has repeatedly said that Muslims didn’t have anything to do with 9/11. And, of course, anyone who suggests that Muslims had anything to do with 9/11 is a bigot.
But the religion whose culture would murder a Christian for giving a Muslim a Bible – let alone building a Christian church near one of their hallowed locations – turns out to be quite judgmental, indeed.
Sorry, Nihad, but here’s the real face of Islam:
This is the latest Time Magazine cover, featuring the face of a woman whose story makes me want to vomit, then cry:
The Taliban pounded on the door just before midnight, demanding that Aisha, 18, be punished for running away from her husband’s house. Her in-laws treated her like a slave, Aisha pleaded. They beat her. If she hadn’t run away, she would have died. Her judge, a local Taliban commander, was unmoved. Aisha’s brother-in-law held her down while her husband pulled out a knife. First he sliced off her ears. Then he started on her nose.
Nihad says that Islam had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 (the terrorists were like Barney the Dinosaur worshipers, rather than Muslims), and that all Muslims were appalled by the destruction. The thing is, I remember it very differently. I remember that the name “Osama bin Laden” was so popular after bin Laden murdered 3,000 Americans and brought the Twin Towers down that many embarrassed Muslim countries banned it. And I remember footage from all over the world such as in the Palestinian territory and in Barcelona of Muslims literally cheering in the streets in celebration of the 9/11 attack.
So please don’t insult me by trying to tell me something so profoundly stupid that Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11. I’m not that dumb.
9/11 was a religious act, committed in the name of Allah and Islam (which means submission, not “peace”).
And please don’t insult my intelligence with politically correct nonsense, suggesting that it is my “tolerance duty” to enable a Muslim shrine to be erected on top of an act of Muslim horror.
Let’s say – by way of analogy – that some Jewish group bombed the Dome of the Rock. Let’s say that, oh, ten years later, another Jewish group – saying that it had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the group that bombed the Dome of the Rock – wanted to build a temple there. You know, to advance the cause of understanding between Muslims and Jews. And let’s just say that the rabbi behind the project had made a number of incredibly controversial statements (more here), having been frequently caught saying one thing in Hebrew to Jewish audiences, and another thing in English for media consumption.
Do you think that would fly? Or do you think that the Muslim world would erupt in the greatest outrage the world had ever seen?
Would Nihad Awad or CAIR condemn as “bigoted” any Muslim who opposed that construction?
Anyone who says that Muslims would allow such construction is a liar, a fool, or, more likely, a lying fool.
Germany – which had experienced the bitter ultimate results of Nazism – banned the Nazis from their culture. They never wanted to experience that evil again. But our liberal progressives in the ACLU fought hard for the rights of Nazi groups to flourish here in America.
This isn’t about “tolerance.” It’s about political correctness.
Political correctness is not merely an attempt to be more inclusive or to make people feel better about themselves. It’s a large, coordinated effort to change Western culture as we know it by redefining it. Early Marxists implemented this tactic long ago and continue to execute it today — and now the American liberals who share the Marxist worldview are picking up the same tactic: to control the argument by controlling the “acceptable” language and hence the “acceptable” ideas and values. Those with radical agendas understand the game plan and are taking advantage of an oversensitive and frankly overly gullible public.
Radicals who want “fundamental transformation” push for anything that will destabilize the hated current system. They begin in revolutionary mode, inviting change, attacking the status quo. They are permissive, attacking established and transcendent authority, advocating total sexual freedom, and promoting radical artistic and cultural experimentation. But once they gain power, however, they are determined to defend the new status quo that they have created. The questioning of all authorities gives way to the supreme elevation of a new authority that must not be questioned. Permissiveness gives way to ruthless suppression. Subversion of order gives way to the imposition of a new order. And the previously “tolerant” revolution will systematically and ruthlessly suppress any “change” that “hopes” to overcome the big government totalitarian system they have imposed.
Both the Soviet communist (“Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics”) and the Nazis (“National SOCIALIST German Workers Party”) were socialist. Both came from the radical left. The only major difference between the two was that communism was an international socialist movement, whereas Nazism was a national socialist movement.
Socialism is a germ that can easily become viral and violent. It’s in the very DNA of socialism. And those that play with it play with fire (given that it is a political philosophy that has been responsible for the murders of more than 100 million people in peacetime alone). I say that in recognition of the fact that 55% of Americans now recognize that Barack Hussein Obama is a socialist (as were both his parents and all his mentors before him).
American liberals and progressives served as the useful idiots for communism – including Stalinism – just as they served as useful idiots for fascism – including Nazism. All one has to do is look at the 1920s and 30s, when Democrat progressives were cheering first Marxism and Joseph Stalin, then Italian fascism and Benito Mussolini, and, yes, Nazi fascism and Adolf Hitler. FDR‘s cabinet was filled with admiring bureaucrats who had gone to Germany and Russia and Italy to study the “marvelous developments” that were taking place in these planned societies.
And now they are useful idiots for Islamic radicalism as well. Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf has Muslim Brotherhood provenance, and is an adept practitioner of Islamic taqiyya — deceptive speech and action to advance the interests and supremacy of Islam.
And only useful idiots wouldn’t understand that.
What we are seeing is that it’s not “religion” that Democrat progressives hate per se; it’s orthodox Christianity, which has been the guiding force that shaped the American cultural history they now wish to “fundamentally transform.” And if these progressives can use Islam to undermine and supplant Christianity, they will do so. They will use Islam to attack the Christian hold on American culture. They will use anything at their disposal to burn Christianity out of American culture. So they can fill the vacuum with themselves and their poisonous ideology.
Christian conservatives [and Christians are conservative because our Messiah revealed Himself and His teachings two millennial ago, rather than a two-year election cycle ago] are “intolerant,” say Democrat progressives. “Just look at how they are treating these wonderful Muslims who merely want to build a mosque as close as possible to Ground Zero.” You don’t want intolerant – and therefore bigoted and evil – people like that leading America. Liberals then hold themselves up as morally superior to their “intolerant” conservative opponents, hoping that no one perceives enough to ask why liberals are so tolerant of Islamic fundamentalism but so profoundly intolerant of Christian conservatism.
That’s the real reason the ACLU fought for Nazism in the town of Skokie, where Nazi death camp survivors lived after fleeing the horror of Europe. And that’s why the ACLU is fighting for Islamic jihadism today. Because, as their founder said, “communism is the goal” – and anything that undermines the current Christian and free market system of America takes them closer to their cherished “goal.”
The problem with the ideological left trying to harness Islam to destroy the even more hated enemy Christianity is that the left don’t realize that they have a tiger by the tail. They have bought into their own rhetoric that they can satisfy Islamic jihadism by appeasing them (by serving them Israel on a platter, for example). But Islam is even more determined to have its way, and even more determined to employ whatever means are necessary – including catastrophic violence – to get it, than the socialist left.
In inviting Islamic fundamentalism to come into America and take root (as it is already doing in our “tolerant” prison system), it is as though the left are using a deadly plague to destroy their opponents, not realizing that they have no cure for the plague themselves.
As for the New York City Community Center, the Muslims certainly should be able to build their mosque (or community center, or whatever they want to call it). But they should build it elsewhere, rather than near the site of the worst Islamic terrorist attack in history. They should not be allowed to build a shrine commemorating their conquest of the Twin Towers.
If they are determined to build their “center” two blocks from Ground Zero, then they should be required to live up to their own disingenuous rhetoric: build a multicultural religious center that features a Jewish synagogue and a Christian church, such that men and women of all three monotheistic faiths may come and worship side-by-side together.
The fact of the matter is that they most certainly WON’T do the above. Which proves that their stated goals are lies, and that what this construction really is is a political act. If the “community center” is built, it will be a symbol of coming victory for radical Islam; it will be a demonstration that our enemies can violently bring our mightiest buildings down, and then erect mosques on top of their destruction. And we’re such weak, insipid, pathetic moral fools that we actually help them supplant us.
The Ground Zero mosque (I don’t care if the mainstream media won’t use the most accurate description anymore) is provocation. That is the entire idea: to suggest doing something despicable, and then point a finger at the American people over their “intolerant” reaction.
Meanwhile, the real insult to the American people is the giant hole where the World Trade Center used to be. Because there was a time when we were the sort of people who would have immediately built an even greater building there – and defied our enemies to knock that one down. Now we’re the sort of people who spend ten years twiddling our thumbs (both of which seem to be left thumbs) and listening to useful idiots lecture us.
Much the same way those ACLU attorneys lectured the Jewish Holocaust survivors living in Skokie, Illinois during the Jimmy Carter era.
