Posts
Is this a surprise to anyone? If Obama has a choice between supporting America's best interests or those of an entity opposed to America's freedoms and values, Obama chooses the latter every time.
And so it was yesterday, when at a White House dinner to commemorate the start of the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan, Obama pleased Muslim Brotherhood folks and the CAIR types by announcing his support for a Muslim victory mosque next to Ground Zero. And he did so in what is now easily identifiable as his own unique rhetorical pattern – create a straw man that misstates his opponents arguments, assume the moral high ground, and then announce that he has identified the greater good. Oh, and of course, prevaricate where necessary and ignore all inconvenient facts.
Obama starts off by calling 9-11 “a deeply traumatic event for our country.” Bull. It was not a “traumatic event.” It was an act of war against America by a subset of Muslims acting to advance the cause of political Islam. It is a war that is ongoing. Perhaps Obama chose his words so carefully in order to avoid having to acknowledge that the spearhead of the Cordoba Project, Imam Rauf, blamed America for bringing this war and the 9-11 attacks upon itself.
Equally outrageously, Obama fails to note the significance of the name Cordoba and its ties to 9-11. Cordoba was the capital city of Andalusia - a portion of Spain once conquered by an Islamic army and ruled as a caliphate for several centuries. Obama ignores that one of the reasons given by al Qaeda to justify jihad and the attack on 9-11 was the reconquista - the reconquering of Andalusia by Spanish Christians. Indeed, the “Tragedy of Andalusia” was the first thing mentioned by Osama bin Laden in the videotape released by al Qaeda one month after 9-11.
Obama ignores the fact obvious to very many Americans - that this Ground Zero mosque is a "victory mosque" for political Islamists of all shades. If you do not understand the concept of a victory mosque, Raymond Ibrahim, writing at PJM, helpfully explains:
. . . throughout Islam’s history, whenever a region was conquered, one of the first signs of consolidation was/is the erection of a mosque atop the sacred sites of the vanquished: the pagan Ka‘ba temple in Arabia was converted into Islam’s holiest site, the mosque of Mecca; the al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s third holiest site, was built atop Solomon’s Temple in Jerusalem; the Umayyad Mosque was built atop the Church of St. John the Baptist; and the Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque upon the conquest of Constantinople.
Any doubt that this is a "victory mosque" was dispelled when NY Gov. Patterson offered to find Imam Rauf suitable space elsewhere in New York City for his mosque, away from Ground Zero. Rauf refused.
Obama referred to Ground Zero as “hallowed ground,” then added a “but.” Setting himself apart from those concerned with protecting this “hallowed ground,” he assumed the moral high ground.
I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country.”
That is a straw man of mammoth proportions. No one is suggesting that freedom of religion be curtailed for Muslims. Rather it is Obama's way of sidestepping the valid argument, that building a mosque overlooking Ground Zero would be, in the words of Charles Krauthammer, “sacrilege.” Indeed, building this mosque will do nothing at all to advance the cause of freedom of religion in America. To the contrary, it is, in the words of two Islamic authors, a "deliberate provocation" that will poison it as Americans push back against this obscenity.
Obama also makes the case for allowing the Ground Zero mosque to go forward on the basis of property rights – that Imam Rauf has every right to build a mosque on “private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America.” This is the strongest argument for allowing the Mosque to be built - though we in fact limit the right of owners of private property to build what they want all the time. Regardless, no one expects Obama to do anything more than use the bully pulpit in regard to this issue. But for him to use that bully pulpit to support the Ground Zero mosque is itself an obscenity.
I have to note as an aside that for Obama to make a private property argument is cynical beyond belief. Are we to believe that Obama is now the great defender of property rights? I am sure the senior creditors of GM and Chrysler who were demonized by Obama and strong-armed into giving up their property rights so that Obama could make a massive gift to the UAW will be pleased with his change of heart. Likewise, I am sure that all of the dealerships who lost their livelihood at Obama's direction will take similar comfort.
Back to Obama's justifications. Obama eventually got around in his speech to giving us the most dangerous lie of all.
Al Qaeda’s cause is not Islam -– it’s a gross distortion of Islam.
That is a treasonous lie. The members of al Qaeda and its supporters are true believers in all of the toxic dogma of Wahhabi / Salafi Islam emanating out of Saudi Arabia. It is a toxin infecting virtually all other forms of Islam today as it speeds around the world on the back of Saudi petro-dollars. (See here)
While Obama pretends otherwise, America and the entire West remain under attack not merely from al Qaeda, but from all of political Islam. Al Qaeda is merely a splinter off of the Muslim Brotherhood and its many associated organizations. All want to attack the West, displace Western freedoms and put in place Sharia law. The only issue dividing the organizations is tactical, not strategic. Bin Laden wants to use the sword, the Muslim Brotherhood wants to use the freedoms of the West and taqqiyah – in which they are aided by the Western secular left with whom they have made common cause. Certainly this victory mosque will be a grand monument to both. And indeed, it is being built while we are still in the middle of what promises to be a war that will last many decades into the future.
If nothing else, Obama has now nationalized the issue of the Ground Zero mosque. And to anyone that is paying any attention, it has made absolutely clear that this President is dangerously out of touch with reality when it comes to Islamic supremecists and political Islamists.
Some final thoughts - one, Islam poses such a unique problem for America because, as practiced by many throughout the world, Islam is less a religion and far more a triumphalist political ideology that promotes violence to impose its will. The two most aggressive manifestations of this are the theocracy in Iran and the Wahhabi based monarchy in Saudi Arabia. To the extent that Islam is practiced as a religion and concerns itself only with improving the lives and saving the souls of its practitioners, then it clearly should be accorded the status of religion and given all the Constitutional protections associated therewith. But going beyond that, into the realm of the political, wherein lies everyone and everything from al Qaeda to the Muslim Brotherhood to CAIR and the MAB, should we extend the protections of the 1st Amendment to it? Moreover, given the nature of this issue, should our government begin funding true Muslim reformers to advance their cause? Our First Amendment requires that the answer to that be no, but we are clearly in a position that the drafters of our First Amendment never contemplated.
And finally, there is a way for New Yorkers to take care of Imam Rauf and this mosque come next election. Toss Bloomberg out on his ear and only elect a mayor who will promise to use the power of eminent domain to take the property of this planned mosque and set that property to a public purpose. Indeed, making that an issue today may well limit the ability of Rauf to get funding for his planned obscenity.
Update: John at Powerline picks up on a point in Obama's speech that I missed - Obama's sophomoric multiculturalism:
This was the climax of Obama's lecture:
For in the end, we remain "one nation, under God, indivisible." And we can only achieve "liberty and justice for all" if we live by that one rule at the heart of every religion, including Islam-that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.
This is revealing: the ultimate destination of multiculturalism is platitudinous stupidity. All religions, Obama tells us, are really the same, and can be summed up in the Golden Rule. Actually, there is no religion that can be reduced to the Golden Rule, least of all Islam. Islam does not enjoin believers to do unto infidels as you would have infidels do unto you. On the contrary! Islam tells its followers to subdue infidels; to kill them; to, at best, reduce them to dhimmitude. The Golden Rule is antithetical to Islam. Here is a thought experiment: compare HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] with the parable of the good Samaritan.
Multiculturalism, in short, reduces its adherents (like President Obama) to a low intellectual plane. If you really think that all religions are the same, and they all exemplify the Golden Rule, then you won't understand the point of Cordoba House.
Update: A day later, and our Prevaricator in Chief is already backtracking on his endorsement of the Ground Zero Mosque. Obama is now claiming that, in his speech the other night, he didn't express support for the “wisdom” of building a mosque blocks from the 9/11 site, rather only the right of Imam Rauf to build there. That is a nuance you will not find in his speech. Here is Obama's speech in full. See for yourself.
