Geez, It's Almost As If 'The Right' Is Not Reflexively Anti-Muslim

Justin Elliot of Salon delivers a nearly perfect non-gotcha on the subject of the Ground Zero Mosque:

Why did no one object to the "Pentagon mosque"?

Muslims have been praying inside the Pentagon since Sept. 11 but right-wingers have been strangely silent

We are then advised of a Washington Times story that tells us that there is a mosque inside the Pentagon, and are assured by Mr. Elliot that conservatives are utter hypocrites for not denouncing this as well.

To which I say, "huh"?

Let's see why no one cares, or ought to:

1.  Was there a mosque inside the Pentagon prior to 9/11?  I'm sure there was.  Which means the Pentagon mosque looks nothing like a new mosque built at the site of a Muslim victory, an important bit of symbolism in some parts of the Muslim world.

2.  Was the Pentagon mosque funded by Islamic extremists?  Only if they have taken over the Defense Department budget (possible!).  In the case of the Ground Zero Mosque, of course, we have no idea who is funding it.

3.  Is the Pentagon Mosque led by an imam sympathetic to terror?  Hmm, I suppose that depends on whether one considers Muslim Navy chaplains to be terrorist sympathizers.  At the risk of alienating some of my friends on the left and triggering an outburst of emails about civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan, I will Boldly Assert that military chaplains are neither terrorists nor sympathetic to them.  As to the imam leading the Ground Zero mosque project, well, Questions Have Been Raised.

If Mr. Elliot were more of a chess player it might have occurred to him that right-wing silence on the Pentagon mosque is convincing evidence that righties don't hate all Muslims everywhere, and in fact are quite capable of tolerance.

The National Review editors did not object to all Muslims in opposing the Ground Zero mosque - they objected to the specific imam leading the project.  I expect they would agree that unanswered questions about the funding also weigh heavily against this project.

MORE:  American Power makes some overlapping points, and some different ones; I will highlight two:

A: When is a mosque not a mosgue?  Is there really a mosque at the Pentagon, or is there simply a space made available for prayer?

B:  At a different sire there were conservative squawks when the Defense Department built an "Islamic Prayer Center".  Intolerance lives!

Comments

[Bono U2]

United We Serve:

ONE Dream
ONE Nation
ONE People

ONE O

Redistribution meant foreign aid free money, not domestic.

[Tyson Bam]

Just because they are free to build the mosque there doesn't mean they should do it. this says it well.

Pork Plant Opens Next to Mosque Next to Ground Zero (great satire)
http://rancornews.com/nymosque.html

[Ann Mongrel]

Oh, for goodness sake TM, read this: The Ground Zero Mosque - First You Bomb and Then You Occupy

Tolerance my ass!!!

[narciso the harpoon]

There'a also this example, which kind of proves the point, in the LUN

[narciso the harpoon]

THis eexample as well as the Dome of the Rock

[daddy the wanna' be heretic]

Well answered TM,

And since 2 can play this "Where's the Mosque Outrage" game:

Mr Elliot of Salon,

Please link to your expressed outrage when the Chinese Government:

1) in 2008 destroyed a Chinese Mosque for ">http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSPEK18996820080623"> insufficient Beijing Olympic spirit

2) or when In Urumqi, the old mosque was demolished and rebuilt as part of a shopping mall, and ">http://www.forum18.org/Archive.php?article_id=829"> to make space for a Kentucky Fried Chicken Outlet, as Quentin Sommerville of the BBC World Service noted on 29 November 2005.

3) Or, as ">http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/Demolishing-Kashgars-History.html"> Smithsonian Mag March 2010 tells us:
"Now the Chinese government is doing to Kashgar’s Old City what a succession of conquerors failed to accomplish: leveling it. Early in 2009 the Chinese government announced a $500 million “Kashgar Dangerous House Reform” program: over the next several years, China plans to knock down mosques, markets and centuries-old houses—85 percent of the Old City. Residents will be compensated, then moved—some temporarily, others permanently—to new cookie-cutter, concrete-block buildings."

Should I hold my breath for your response Mister Elliot?

Hope JOMer's don't mind me reposting this from 2 days back, but it seemed to fit.

[bgates]

I will Boldly Assert that military chaplains are neither terrorists nor sympathetic to them.

Sure. All charges against James Yee were dropped, right? And Nidal Hasan was a military counselor, not a chaplain.

Was the Pentagon mosque funded by Islamic extremists? Only if they have taken over the Defense Department budget (possible!)

Nah. Hesham Islam's been out of Defense for more than two years. These days there's nobody in government with sympathy for Islamist extremists besides the administration and about half to two thirds of the majority party in Congress. (And of course the State Department.)

Intolerance lives!
Hypertolerance kills!

[daddy the wanna' be heretic]

OT,

Our State Republican Primary is 24 August.

Have been gone a while, but today caught a few hours of Talk Radio and was surprised by the amount and tone of the Political Campaign ads. Each challenging (non-incumbent) candidate's ad focused primarily on how "they were the real Conservative in the contest", possessing "Real Conservative Values", unlike their opponents, (Senator Lisa Murkowski, Governor Sean Parnell, etc) who were Conservatives in name only, and essentially enablers of Obama and Big Government.

Don't know if you guys in your Primaries are seeing a similar theme, but up here that's the message the challengers are trying to ride to election.

[daddy the wanna' be heretic]

bgates,

Don't forget this guy: U.S.">http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=11577">U.S. Army Muslim Chaplain Capt. Abd Al-Rasheed Muhammad questions duty

But on the bright side, at least ">http://www.usafa.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123187157"> The Pagan's, Wiccan's and Druids are on our side.

[Strawman Cometh]

Daddy,
Has AK an open primary? I'm guessing not.

[glasater]

Well down here in the state that's closest to you daddy we have a somewhat similar contest between Didier--endorsed by Sarah Palin--and Dino Rossi--the establishment R's choice--if that's any comfort.

[daddy the wanna' be heretic]

Strawman you ask a good question.

Wiki says Alaska has "A Jungle Primary", but SFGate says we have a 'wide-open' "Open Primary."

The Michigan Department of State website says we have "a Blanket Primary", but website E-How says we have a "Closed Primary."

The National Council of State Legislatures website says we have "a Party Choice Primary", but website Free Citizen says we have "an Open Primary with Party Registration."

Website Thinkmatter says we have "an ‘open primary’ for Democrats and a ‘closed primary’ for Republicans,"
while The Washington Policy Center says "In Alaska Primary's some parties have chosen to be listed on a joint ballot, while others require a separate ballot listing only their candidates." And website Caselaw just gave up trying to describe the damn thing and said we have " a self-selected closed, open or partially closed primary system."

Looking for clarity I clicked on ">http://www.elections.alaska.gov/doc/forms/H42.pdf"> Alaska’s Primary Election History which says we had:

"A Blanket Primary", replaced by
"A Single Ballot Open Primary", re-replaced by
"Another Blanket Primary", superseded by
"A Party-Rule Ballot Primary", undone by
"A Blanket Primary", booted the Hell out again by
"A Party Rule Ballot Primary", well and truly murdered by
"A Combined Party Ballot", which insanely morphed into a combined head of Medussa-like monstrosity comprised of "The Republican Candidate and Ballot Measures Ballot"; "The Alaska Democratic Party, the Alaska Libertarian Party and the Alaskan Independence Party (A-D-L) Candidate and Ballot Measures Ballot"; and "The Measures Only Ballot" available to all registered voters.

That last may be what the hell we have now but who the heck knows? I sure don't, and I don't think anybody in America does either. My head hurts:(

[Kevin B]

Daddy, I'm sure I saw Dame Margot Fontaine in 'A Measures Only' Ballet in Covent Garden. It was a few years ago now, and I reckon it was one of her poorer performances. Mind you, I never was one for this modern stuff.

Still, now the nights are closing in, it's probably nice to get back to your primary blanket.

[Pops]

If the Republicans were smart, they would be running ads right now saying elect us and we will treat the tax laws like the Liberals treat the immigration laws, WE WILL SIMPLY REFUSE TO ENFORCE THEM.

[Pops]

I've been shocked by even the commentators on Fox News regarding this issue and the Wikileaks issue regarding how POWERLESS our government is to do anything about it.

It is pretty amazing to see after we witnessed the automotive industry take over, the student loan tax over, the healthcare tax over, the imminent domain cases where government can have your property to give to another developer to make a shopping mall, the 20 Billion BP shakedown, that now the government is completely powerless.

How about since we have a 700.00 dollar tax for not buying healthcare insurance, we pass a 100,000 dollar tax for each classified government document you wish to release to the public?

By my count Wkileaks would owe the treasury about 700 Billion dollars right now.

How about we declare the property where the mosque is to be built as a extension of the
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Clinton took over 1.9 million acres that way - what's wrong with adding one more acre??

Then if they protest, we can't paint them as anti-environment!!

Or if Wikileaks protest the tax - we say they hate poor people.

Republicans have to get into the game here, the left is playing for keeps while the Republicans are gutless.

[Old Lurker]

Local paper has a nice picture of Kerry's sailboat tied up in the Nantucket Harbor.

[daddy the wanna' be heretic]

OL,

It's already in Nantucket? Why that must be a swift boat.

[Pagar]

How long before we have one next to the Space.

[Old Lurker]

I think he's preparing for Christmas in Cambodia, Daddy. I'm sure he lost track of the line between the waters of RI and MA.

And Pops, I had a hard time reading past your opening "If the Reps were smart..."

[narciso the harpoon]

That's the game their playing doen here, daddy
with the real conservative, a former HMo CEO, whose company had some issues, vs the "CINO," MacCollum, who in other times would be the cousin of Attila the Hun, that's for governor.For Senate we have the Orange Lindsey Graham, who seems to be ahead of the calm Latino, and the subprime millionaire, vs. the wannabe Rangel hack

I hear the open season for AGIA is underway,
or not, I can't really tell. Now I know why
the tete a tete between Momma Grizzleys was
more productive

[bunkerbuster]

Tom asks: Is the mosque funded by Islamic extremists?
There's no evidence that it is. None. Zero. But let's suppose that it is. Wouldn't that be a good thing? The mosque will only occupy one floor of the facility, which will include a swimming pool, library and SEPTEMBER 11 MEMORIAL. Now, if New York can sucker Islamic extremists into funding a SEPTEMBER 11 MEMORIAL, a swimming pool and a library, isn't that a pretty big win for New York? More important, every dollar they spend on pool filters and history books is a dollar they don't have to make IEDs to kill Americans in Afghanistan.
But the bigger point is, Tom is arguing that the funding is an issue for him. Who will wager me that Tom will be opposed to the mosque, even if it's funded by Pat Robertson.
Tom also wonders: ``Is the Pentagon Mosque led by an imam sympathetic to terror?'' No. Imam Rauf has a lifetime record of opposing terrorism and of preaching a brand of Islam that demands respect for all religions with malice toward none. Again, he's overseeing the construction of A MEMORIAL TO 9/11 on the site of the mosque itself. Somehow, I can't imagine how that could possibly be pleasing to the bin Ladens of the world. But maybe Tom knows...

[bunkerbuster]

Pops opines: ``the Republicans are gutless.'' Amen to that. No doubt about it.

[Melinda Romanoff]

Claudia Rosett has followed up on the travels of Imam Feisal.

[scott]

Imam Ralph declined to denounce Hamas. That's enough evidence right there. If Angle and similar candidates are elected in '10, I think the trend will continue and the next administration will seize the whole property as a terrorist asset. The pendulum is swinging and it's not in a progressive direction. Gird your loins man.

[Jim Ryan]

Daddy, you're on fire! Plus, I loved your limerick which ended in "Phuket"!

[Jim Ryan]

Er, I maybe I shouldn't have said "on fire." Is that almost as bad as saying "Hi, Jack!" to a pilot?

[hit and run]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_United_States_embassy_bombings>12 years ago today

[narciso the harpoon]

So Fareed ZAkaria, who made the argument that we should live with militant Islam, rejects
an award from the ADL, par for the course it seems

[MayBee]

It wasn't conservatives who wanted to pull out of Iraq in 2006 and let Muslims die horrible deaths in large numbers.

As tolerant as they like to portray themselves, a lot of liberals had a high tolerance for Muslim deaths by suicide bomber.

[MayBee]

More important, every dollar they spend on pool filters and history books is a dollar they don't have to make IEDs to kill Americans in Afghanistan.

Without addressing the rest of your post, I'd just like to point out the faulty reasoning here. Ever hear of marketing? You spend money on marketing to make money elsewhere.

Besides, I could be wrong, but I would guess there is a membership fee associated with using the pool.

[Captain Hate]

As tolerant as they like to portray themselves, a lot of liberals had a high tolerance for Muslim deaths by suicide bomber.

Ayers and his ilk have never been asked the tough questions on the killing fields and how they contributed to the torture and death of countless Asians. The truth to power fuckheads can never bring themselves to question Billy Bombthrower on that when he's patting himself on the back over having helped "end the war".

[Danube of Thought]

It wasn't conservatives who wanted to pull out of Iraq in 2006 and let Muslims die horrible deaths in large numbers.

Let us never forget that on January 30, 2007 Senator Barack Obama introduced legislation that, had it passed, would have required every last American soldier to leave Iraq by the end of March 31, 2008, thus ensuring a humiliating American defeat and a tragedy for the people of Iraq. And now he boasts of his success in Iraq.

[centralcal]

Way off topic - but CNN is saying there is going to be a "hush hush" birthday party for Big Zero on Sunday. Close family and friends. I guess that means Michelle Antoinette will have returned from Spain? Maybe not. Wonder how BIG this party will be?

[Danube of Thought]

Wonder if Charlie and Maxine are coming?

[centralcal]

Well, last story I saw was that Charlie was getting a lot of "regrets" to his big birthday bash (which, coincidentally was a fundraiser, too - funny that).

[Danube of Thought]

NY Post refreshes our recollection on what a petty, venal man now sits in the oval office:

At the time [of the surge], then-Sen. Barack Obama said of the surge: "20,000 troops is not going to make a difference."

A year later, he responded to Bush's State of the Union Address by declaring that "tonight we heard President Bush say that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that's just not true."

[centralcal]

This question is for the ladies - if any of them are around today - where the heck is Mark Steyn? I know summertime, vacations and all, but hasn't he been missing for quite a long time now?

[Janet]

Also OT - I got a big glossy magazine (?paid for by the PMA group?) from Rep. Jim Moran. He touts Pay-As-You-Go budgeting as a big Dem. accomplishment. Too bad they don't follow it.
How come the PMA guy gets indicted for giving illegal donations & expecting earmarks, but the Congressmen don't get indicted for taking the donations & selling earmarks?
I say "Free Paul Magliocchetti" or "Indict PMA Congressmen"!!!!

[Sue]

A "hush-hush" party being reported by CNN. Not sure why that strikes me as funny...

[Jane]

I heard yesterday that Ayers in retiring from whatever he does. I wonder if he will go to work for the WH.

[anduril]

Coverage of one of the two weddings of the century, so far:

The Jew and the shiksa

WASPs at last

[centralcal]

No kidding, Sue. It is not the fact of a party that seems to be hush hush, but rather the guest list? the entertainment? never mind what it all might cost.

Jane, I posted that last week - Ayers is retiring from UIC, and your guess is probably pretty good about working for the WH. Wonder if he attended the Chicago version of Barry's birthday.

[Janet]

Jane, have you gotten an APO address from Soylent? I've got a pkg. ready to go. I sent ya a message on FB but not sure if you got it.

[matt]

Good morning to you all.

It seems the NUT have become Michelle Antoinette's apologists, explaining to us that she and Bammers are really paying for most of the trip themselves and that only a few friends and their children are traveling with her and that it is just a matter of necessity that she has a large security detail and aren't those European papers so darn mean scrutinizing her every step.

Of course we now find that Laura Bush (insert sneer here)took separate camping trips with friends in national parks, but these did not generate the furor because these were not as politically sensitive. My only question is who the hell flies to Spain for a 4 day vacation on her husband's birthday?

In other news 10 medical missionaries were murdered for their Christian beliefs after by members of the religion of peace after spending 3 weeks providing treatment in remote villages in Nuristan Province in Afghanistan. The charity the missionaries were working for is the longest one active in the country.

Not word yet from Dear Leader.Message to Gen. Petraeus....flood the area on both sides of the border with assets. Find the scum.Capture those you can and kill the rest without mercy, and then take them to the national soccer stadium in Kabul for an old fashioned beheading honoring all municipal codes, public health regulations, and Afghan laws and statutes.

[matt]

well, that was a freudian slip...NYT

[man_in_tx]

Tom McGuire wrote: "I will Boldly Assert that military chaplains are neither terrorists nor sympathetic to them."

I am certain that you meant no harm by this statement, but on what do you base it? Good will? Perhaps, but I would submit: Certainly, not on a mature grasp of the essential nature of Islam.

Journalist Steven Schwartz, who researched the Islamic influence in the US wrote the following in 2004: "Every single Islamic chaplain in the U.S. military has been certified by Saudi-controlled groups which means that our military chaplains also hold to Wahhabi doctrines. Is it surprising, then, that we had the incident of the Muslim solider in Kuwait who attacked his fellow soldiers? Or the problems with military personnel at Guantanamo? Or the Muslim military man in Washington State who was trying to turn over useful information to Al-Qaeda?"
http://www.pettisgop.org/id30.html

Additionally, it is helpful to read this quote by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, current Prime Minister of Turkey (whose sprawling, increasingly militant Islamic country, UK PM David Cameron is feverishly working to have incorporated into the EU, but I digress):

"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and Muslims our soldiers."
http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/courts/122008-eric-holder-should-debate-recep-tayyip-erdogan.html

In short, if we are NOT concerned about there being a mosque operating in the bowels of the Pentagon (regardless of who funded it), I suggest that we are living in denial.

Whether we like it or not, it's on folks: Muhammad determined that some 1430 years ago.

We ignore reality to our own detriment.

[Ignatz]

--If the Republicans were smart, they would be running ads right now saying elect us and we will treat the tax laws like the Liberals treat the immigration laws, WE WILL SIMPLY REFUSE TO ENFORCE THEM.--

If Pops were running the Republican party, after six months, to survive politically, the Democrats would have to hire somebody who actually knows how to use a gun to assassinate him.

[Janet]

I would vote for Pops for President.

[centralcal]

Hey, matt - how about the gala tonight in Marbella - at Michelle Antoinette's hotel? Antonio Banderas! Aha! Michelle is gonna party, I betcha.

Tomorrow she lunches with Spanish royalty before flying home to D.C. - in time for another party? Sure bet she lets her hair down from that little knot she has been sporting all week.

[anduril]

We ignore reality to our own detriment.

Yup. Can't say it enough. And the same goes for the entire liberal/libertarian social agenda.

[Ignatz]

--This question is for the ladies - if any of them are around today - where the heck is Mark Steyn? I know summertime, vacations and all, but hasn't he been missing for quite a long time now?--

cc,
Says at his site he's taking a summer break and attending to 'some personal matters' whatever that might mean. Don't know if you or any of the other ladies here have noticed but these 'personal matters' have seemed to coincide with clarice's spotty posting lately. Wolverine indeed.

[Danube of Thought]

Robert Bork describes himself as a libertarian. He would be delighted to know that somewhere there is a sap who thinks that means roughly the same thing as "liberal."

[centralcal]

Biggest laugh of my day so far:

SARAH PALIN bit her lip as KATE GOSSELIN melted down on their camping trip after the Plus 8 mom was handed a bucket with a toilet seat on top.

Kate Gosselin's much-hyped Alaskan camping trip with Sarah Palin turned into a nightmare when the mega-mom suffered a diva-like meltdown - and stormed off despite Sarah's pleas.

Gotta love the National Enquirer!

[centralcal]

oh jeez, Iggy - there ya go, trying to start a mud fight between Jane and Clarice!

[centralcal]

By God, I think this is the best thing ACE has ever written!!!!

They lie. That is almost all they do anymore. They lie in their reportage and then they rub salt into those wounds by lying about the reasons for their reporting decisions.

They all lie, and all from the same script of the same lies.

They lie to your goddamn face and then warble about their "integrity" and "professionalism," and how all their "experience" and "schooling" has dictated that only they know which stories are important. (Curiously, a frightening high percentage of "important" stories directly advance the interests of the progressive movement.)

They lie, and they lie, and they lie, and then they demand your respect and appreciation for their lies.

[Ignatz]

Where's that chucklehead who was telling us what a great pal of the Boy Scouts Barry is the other day?
He ought to enjoy this video of the Scouts booing Barry's recorded message.

[Ignatz]

DoT,
Can't believe I'm saying these next four words, but in anduril's defense, I took him to only be describing the nexus between liberal and libertarian social agendas, something I have struggled with myself as a libertarian leaning social conservative.

[hit and run]

centralcal:
oh jeez, Iggy - there ya go, trying to start a mud fight between Jane and Clarice!

I've held my tongue,in the name of promoting peace and tolerance at JOM,for way too long.

Silence no longer.

Truth will out.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mHhSQWDLMfQ/TF2OY4rzipI/AAAAAAAAAVs/uxvN0VSqrtY/s400/hit+won.jpg>

[Pasadena Phil]

About that lack of funding for the WTC mosque, Fannie and Freddie announced yesterday that they will be re-introducing the "no down payment" mortgage. That $18 million should be more than enough to qualify for a $140 million mortgage. They can then default stick us bigoted, xenophobic taxpayers with the bill.

Welcome to the new world governed by "citizens of the world" where our enemies have more rights than we do in our own country.

[Steve]

Thank You for posting this! Very interesting reading!!

Steve
Common Cents
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com

[gsr]

Islam IS the problem. The spreading of Sharia Law is the symptom.

Stopping or at least lowering their immigration is the cure.

[Captain Hate]

I would vote for Pops for President

Pops vs Neut = Pops
Pops vs Yuckabee = Pops
Pops vs RON PAUL = Pops
Pops vs Mitt = Pops
Pops vs "My Friends" = Pops
Pops vs Ms Lindsey = Pops
Pops vs Rudy = Rudy
Pops vs Teh Sarah = Teh Sarah
Pops vs Chris Christie = Big Mon

Pops is polling pretty well

[Ranger]

Second try:

I think this will be huge it is turns out to be what it looks like:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/08/07/fannie-mae-whistleblower-incentives-ruined-hamp-mortgage-mod-program/>Fannie Mae whistleblower: Incentives ruined HAMP mortgage-mod program

Bottom line, Fannie Mae blocked the processing of long term modificaitons in order to reap bonuses for short term mods. People may have lost their homes because Fannie Mae was trying to maximise profits. And what was the Dem congress doing during all this? Ignoring the GSEs so they could pass "Financial Reform."

[Jim Ryan]

Wait. The Steve?

[Janet]

& YOU can be VP Captain. You have a Cheney air of not suffering fools gladly!

[Extraneus]

Did you ladies notices the triceps in this painting of Michelle Antoinette?

[Extraneus]

Did you ladies notice the triceps in this painting of Michelle Antoinette?

[Janet]

I don't think arms are a very important womanly feature (no matter what the MSM says). Most men have arms...they are interested in other features!

[centralcal]

Yeah, saw that earlier, Ext. I think that "Michelle Antoinette" moniker is gonna stick. I intend to use it constantly.

[Danube of Thought]

Iggy, I really have no idea what that fool is saying, and don't care.

[centralcal]

...they are interested in other features!

Such as: bloated waistlines? thunder thighs? big booties? Trying really hard to come up with what features Michelle Antoinette has that most men are interested in.

[darwin]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_Zero_mosque

" It is to be built two blocks (less than 600 feet, or 180 meters) from Ground Zero in New York City. "

Let me get this straight. One of the major world religions shouldn't ever be allowed to build a place of worship within some radius defined in blocks from Ground Zero?

All this time I've been hearing people complain about a Ground Zero Mosque and I thought it was, like... actually AT GROUND ZERO. I'm trying to understand why a mosque two blocks away from ground zero is considered by otherwise lucid rightish people to be AT GROUND ZERO.

How far away does the mosque have to be before we are no longer outraged by its mere presence? Twenty blocks? Two Hundred?

We live in America. People are allowed to put up places of worship wherever they want. Even two blocks away from Ground Zero.

=darwin

[Captain Hate]

Thanks Janet; after Bite-Me I doubt that I'd disappoint anybody....

[matt]

should I copyright it?

[LouP]

For all the people, like darwin, who have taken up the torch of religious freedom, I'll be much more impressed when you make a issue out of the fact that Christians, Jews, Taoists, Buddists, Animalists, Athesists, etc., etc. are not allowed to visit Mecca (or get within miles of the place), much less build a church, synagog, temple, etc. within miles of the place. Do that and I'll believe your sincerity.

[MayBee]

AT GROUND ZERO.

So are the WTC considered the only ground zero? As I understand it, this very site was damaged by the planes that struck the WTC.

[anduril]

Robert Bork describes himself as a libertarian. He would be delighted to know that somewhere there is a sap who thinks that means roughly the same thing as "liberal."

Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 07, 2010 at 12:13 PM

That's why I'm here--someone has to do the gruntwork of educating the ignorant and defending the innocent from misleading opinions (I give only a sample--there's more Bork at the link):

Robert H. Bork Critiques Libertarianism:

[The following (rather long) critique of Libertarianism is found on pages 150-152 of Robert Bork's popular book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah." Thanks to Joe Steve Swick III, who posted this to the net.]

Libertarians join forces with modern liberals in opposing censorship, though libertarians are far from being modern liberals in other respects. For one thing, libertarians do no like the coercion that necessarily accompanies radical egalitarianism. But because both libertarians and modern liberals are oblivious to social reality, both demand radical personal autonomy in expression. That is one reason libertarians are not to be confused, as they often are, with conservatives. They are quasi- or semiconservatives. Nor are they to be confused with classical liberals, who considered restraints on individual autonomy to be essential.

The nature of the liberal and libertarian errors is easily seen in discussions of pornography. The leader of the explosion of pornographic videos, described admiringly by a competitor as the Ted Turner of the business, offers the usual defenses of decadence: 'Adults have the right to see [pornography] if they want to. If it offends you, don't buy it.' Those statements neatly sum up both the errors and the (unintended) perniciousness of the alliance between libertarians and modern liberals with respect to popular culture.

Modern liberals employ the rhetoric of 'rights' incessantly, not only to delegitimate the idea of restraints on individuals by communities but to prevent discussion of the topic. Once something is announced, usually flatly or stridently, to be a right --whether pornography or abortion or what have you-- discussion becomes difficult to impossible. Rights inhere in the person, are claimed to be absolute, and cannot be deminished or taken away by reason; in fact, reason that suggests the non-existence of an asserted right is viewed as a moral evil by the claimant. If there is to be anything that can be called a community, rather than an agglomeration of hedonists, the case for previously unrecognized individual freedoms (as well as some that have been previously recognized) must be thought through and argued, and "rights" cannot win every time. Why there is a right for adults to enjoy pornography remains unexplained and unexplainable.

The second bit of advice --'If it offends you, don't buy it' -- is both lulling and destructive. Whether you buy it or not, you will be greatly affected by those who do. The aesthetic and moral environment in which you and your family live will be coarsened and degraded. Economists call the effects an activity has on others 'externalities'; why so many of them do not understand the externalities here is a mystery. They understand quite well that a person who decides not to run a smelter will nevertheless be seriously affected if someone else runs one nearby.

Hey, Ignatz, y'know this is just a really silly thing to say:

Can't believe I'm saying these next four words, but in anduril's defense, I took him to only be describing the nexus between liberal and libertarian social agendas, something I have struggled with myself as a libertarian leaning social conservative.

although your substantive point is well taken.

[hit and run]

I'm trying to understand why a mosque two blocks away from ground zero is considered by otherwise lucid rightish people to be AT GROUND ZERO.

How many lucid rightish people make up 61% of New Yorkers?

The Siena Research Institute released a poll on Thursday that found 61 percent of New Yorkers oppose the construction of a mosque and community center just blocks away from where the World Trade Center buildings once stood.

“Large majorities of all New Yorkers, every party, region, and age give a thumbs-down to the Cordoba House Mosque being built near the ground zero site,” according to Dr. Don Levy, SRI’s director.
..
Only 26 percent supported construction of the mosque.

For the record...2008 Election:

Manhattan 85% OBama
Brooklyn 79% Obama
Queens 74% Obama
Bronx 88% Obama

etc.

[anduril]

Speaking of reflexivity:

Donna Shalala Detained at Ben-Gurion

Former Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala was detained and interrogated for two hours at Ben-Gurion Airport last month, according to The Chronicle for Higher Education’s blog The Ticker.

Shalala is currently serving as president of the University of Miami; she was on her way back to the U.S. following a visit to Israel as part of a delegation of U.S. university presidents. An Israeli media report stated that she was subjected to a “humiliating” security debriefing and asked “invasive” personal questions because of her last name.

Shalala, 69 years old, is of Lebanese decent.

In a statement released today, Shalala took it in stride. “While I was inconvenienced, Israel’s security and the security of travelers is far more important. I have been going in and out of Israel for many years and expect to visit again,” she told the Chronicle.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/08/06/donna-shalala-detained-interrogated-at-israeli-airport/tab/print/

[glasater]

If anyone has any doubts regarding the agenda of military chaplains of the muslim faith, please watch this video of Brigitte Gabriel speaking before an audience of the Joint Forces Staff college.
A question from a muslim chaplain was so chilling it stopped the talkative Gabriel in her tracks.

[darwin]

"For all the people, like darwin, who have taken up the torch of religious freedom, I'll be much more impressed when you make a issue out [how Saudi Arabians are theocratic]. Do that and I'll believe your sincerity."

While I have no problem whatsoever condemning Saudi, or Chinese, or Afghani, or Iranian, or Indian or any other government restricting the open and free practice of religion, your response is a non-sequitur.

American religious freedom is not a relative thing. It's not suddenly ok for us to keep people from building a mosque on private property near a memorial site because other people in other countries are even more repressive.

I appreciate your belief in my sincere support of religious freedom as stated :

" Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof "

=darwin

[darwin]

"How many lucid rightish people make up 61% of New Yorkers?"

Yes, I know that many allegedly lucid leftish people are also opposed. This tells me nothing more than that people on both sides do not have a comprehension of the First Amendment. Are you actually questioning the idea that the right is taking the lead on opposition to this mosque?

Weird?

=darwin

[matt]

I would posit that any point in lower Manhattan which received at least a coating of ash, or of bone fragments, pieces of charred flesh, clothing remnants, glass shards, or other of the debris of death be considered within the radius of the WTC.

....and the horse you rode in on....

[Chubby]

Janet: ((& YOU can be VP Captain. You have a Cheney air of not suffering fools gladly!))

BUT he DOES suffer fledglings

win-win!!

[Extraneus]

Who said anything about Congress making a law prohibiting the free exercise of Islam in Manhattan?

[Danube of Thought]

How far away does the mosque have to be before we are no longer outraged by its mere presence?

How close does it have to be before you become outraged?

Is there the slightest doubt in your mind about the motive of this imam and his mystery financiers? In your view, is their motive irrelevant?

[narciso the harpoon]

This is why I cheered when the Guardian reporter got it, in the first half hour of the Bourne series, in the LUN

[Danube of Thought]

people on both sides do not have a comprehension of the First Amendment

Certainly anyone who thinks that the First Amendment restricts anyone other than government has no clue at all about it.

[Danube of Thought]

Are you actually questioning the idea that the right is taking the lead on opposition to this mosque?

If this means that we have finally taken over Manhattan, I'd be delighted.

[Ignatz]

--How far away does the mosque have to be before we are no longer outraged by its mere presence?--

Saudi Arabia.

[darwin]

"How close does it have to be before you become outraged?"

It certainly would be an unusual use of the prime commercial land the WTC stood on if they built a mosque there. However as it is private land, I'm not sure I would be outraged if one use of that land was as a place of worship for any religion.

It's a free country.

"Certainly anyone who thinks that the First Amendment restricts anyone other than government has no clue at all about it."

Yep, I'm not saying that people can't voice their private opposition. I'm saying that people who would use the power of government to prevent the development from occuring are over the line.

People can be outraged all they want. Again, it's a free country.

=darwin

[boris]

heh

[DrJ]

Ext, check your email.

[boris]

People use the power of the state to restrict certain private businesses from developing in an area all the time. Whatever line you think that's over is somewhere far from this republic.

[Pops]

What Darwin doesn't get, and people like him, is this has nothing to do with freedom to worship. In fact, every Muslim country practices brital suppression of freedom of religion.

But one thing Islamists do is built Mosques in placces that they have conquered.
That's was this project was called the Cordoba Initiative....which is a place in Spain that was conquered by the Muslims and a Mosque built on the site.

What is irrefutable is that living under Islam, the non-Muslim population was always mandated to submit to Islam, accept discriminatory laws, and make payment of a mandatory Quranic tax imposed upon every non-Muslim. For a period of about 800 years, most of Spain was ruled by Muslims and this area was known as ‘Al-Andalus.’ Islamic rule ended in 1492, when the city of Granada, the last Muslim kingdom in Western Europe, capitulated to the Spanish Catholics.

The Cordoba Initiative is an organization whose very name makes reference to what was, 1,000 years ago, one of the world’s most advanced cities, Cordoba, Al-Andalus (Spain). This was a city that was politically and religiously dominated by Islam, and a city that was conquered by jihad (holy war). Today, there are Islamic groups such as Al-Qaeda that have a dream of seeing a pan-Islamic world that would extend from old Al-Andalus (Spain).

[Janet]

Glasater, the Brigitte Gabriel video is great. She is so unapologetic...it is refreshing.
Thanks for the link.

[Captain Hate]

Pops, I think darwin and his ilk "get it" quite well; they just don't want us to get it in their "But but but...RELIGIOUS FREEDOM" obfuscation. Of course it's a provocation and has been every step of the way which idiots like the mayor of NYC willfully ignore. At least it hasn't resorted to the "eighty gazillion MODERATE MUSLIMS would consider this a slap in the face were it turned down" crock; a fellow quisling has already been dispatched to promulgate that.

[Danube of Thought]

"People can be outraged all they want. "

At the risk of being hectoredhny their moral superiors like the strange homunculus Bloomberg.

Neither I nor anyone I know is seeking to enlist the power of government to prevent the building of this mosque. No issue of religious freedom or property rights is presented. The substantive question at issue is whether the project is intended as a particularly malicious bit of insulting triumphalism. I believe it is. And I decline to be chastised by a politically correct doofus whose initial reaction upon learning of the failed attack on Times Square by a Muslim was to suggest that he might very well have been just a guy who was pissed off about the healthcare statute.

[Danube of Thought]

*hectored by*. (iPhone strikes again.)

[hit and run]

Yes, I know that many allegedly lucid leftish people are also opposed. This tells me nothing more than that people on both sides do not have a comprehension of the First Amendment.

You come on here whining about rightish people opposed to the mosque. Oh noes! You are shown that many leftish people oppose it too.

Yes,of course,you say,but what that REALLY means is that neither the lefitsh nor rightish who oppose the mosque understand the First Amendment!!!!1!!!11!!!

Wait. What?

Oh,yeah,here comes the walkback...

I'm not saying that people can't voice their private opposition. I'm saying that people who would use the power of government to prevent the development from occuring are over the line.

Yes. Someone is very very confused.

Stick with us,you might learn something.