Leaders of astroturf groups opposing the Not-At-Ground-Zero-Muslim-Center can't seem to decide on an argument. They have thrown everything and the kitchen sink at us in the way of fabricated reasons.
First, they tried the "legal" route. When it became apparent that American Muslims had a constitutionally guaranteed right to religious, cultural, and communal services in lower Manhattan just like everyone else, they invoked the "sensitivity to the 9/11 families" line.
When it was argued that there is nothing insensitive about Muslims with no connection to 9/11 establishing a center two blocks away (unless you assume collective guilt), and that Muslims died in the Twin Towers, too, they tried to smear the center's imam as a radical.
When it was revealed that imam Feisal's 37-year track record was so consistently antithetical to radicalism that it earned him the "moderate model imam" accolade from this administration, the Bush administration, the FBI, and the New York interfaith community, they tried the "sacred ground" argument.
When it was revealed that the center was not actually "at" Ground Zero and that there were offices, delis, dollar stores, bars, and a strip club in the same vicinity that no one was taking issue with for being on sacred ground, they tried the foreign funding route.
When it was revealed that the imam has no intention of receiving funding from foreign governments or groups, or even individuals with a less-than-stellar reputation, they tried the sensitivity route again.
It seems that they just can't decide on the public strategy to keep Park51 from taking its rightful place among Manhattan's blossoming diversity.
Privately, however, there seems to be little such confusion. The reasons there are given clearly, and it turns out it is precisely what many of us have argued all along: opposition organizers are motivated by an ideological belief that "Islam is evil and must be stopped; America is Judeo-Christian."
That's it.
That is the undisguised rallying cry on the private email listservs, the blogs, and the viral youtube videos administered by the right-wing oppositional leadership. On the prime time networks, they openly lie to the American people about harboring an anti-Muslim agenda, perhaps wishing to avoid being exposed for their religious intolerance.
Not for long.
Check out the uber-creepy Tea Party email below, released by no less than teaparty.org.
In it, the Tea Party folks argue that America is exclusively "Judeo-Christian" and that Islam should be "expelled from our shores."
And that's just for starters.
The rest of the email displays a fundemental disdain for a pluralistic America and reveals chilling levels of Islamophobia and hatemongering.
It poses the freakish question: "Will 'blanket tolerance' be the downfall of the Judaic/Christian basis of the American society?"
It quotes select passages from of the Quran out of context, a game that can just as easily be played with the Torah or the Bible.
It then suggests to its members that Muslims at large -- not terrorists, mind you, but Muslims at large -- plan for the "complete annihilation of the west," for "our demise," for "our destruction," and that they are "working dilligently" to "celebrate the day America will be no more." It warns that "the United States Judaic/Christian roots are being 'God Shocked,'" and wonders if "the courts should hand down a litmus test" for religions before they are "expelled from our shores."
So let me ask you again? Do you still think that the sudden rise in anti-mosque hysteria is really about sacred ground? Sensitivities to 9/11 victims? Funding sources?
Or is it about the rise of an ideological anti-Islam movement and the desire to curb, if not outlaw, religious freedoms for Muslims?
What would it take to wake the media up, if not this blatant piece of evidence? Will the media now pay attention? Is it remotely interested in the facts that are practically smacking it in the face? Where is the FOX News coverage of everything "Mosque at Ground Zero," the same FOX News that desperately scrutinizes Imam Feisal's every utterance in the hope of unearthing a controversial statement? Laura Ingraham, are you listening?
Re: Tea Party - Truth Behind 911 Mosque
From: teaparty@teaparty.orgOn: Friday, August 20, 2010 8:46 PM
The American people find articulating their concern over the proposed Mosque near the sight of the 911 attacks problematic. On one hand, many view the First Amendment a shield of protection for religious freedom, on the other hand, some view the First Amendment as providing a haven for religions with a hostile political agenda wrapped in cleric's robes.
Is it any wonder that there is so much confusion on this matter? Most Citizens of the United States have never experienced the driving and all consuming force of a Theocratic government with its crushing Theo-political tenet.
The American religious experience is the usual Sunday morning 'hymn singing'; passing the offering plate, an off tempo choir and the occasional neighborhood revival. The 'Church supper and bake sale mentality' gives way to a much colder and more formidable view of religious practices, which are not only unfamiliar, but also antithetical to the 'Sunday Go To Meeting' crowd.
The United States Judaic/Christian roots are being 'God Shocked' by the concept that a religion can and does demand world domination by any means, including violence if necessary.
The Koran states: Sura 61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and His Messenger Muhammad) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur'an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996)
Allah's Messenger said: "By Him (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is, surely the son of Mary [Isa (Jesus)] will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims), and will judge mankind justly by the Law of the Quran (as a just ruler) and will break the Cross and kill pigs and abolish the Jizyah [a tax] ...." (Bukhari 3:2222) .
The growing confusion among Ministers and their Congregations over the nature of legitimate Islamic worship and the practice of Taqiyya[1] is causing serious questions regarding the constitutionally protected practice of religion, if that religion is detrimental to the welfare and domestic tranquility of the very nation whose constitution protects it.
The emerging question is: Should the first amendment protect the practice of a religion which has a hostile political agenda wrapped in cleric's robes? Should the U.S. Constitution protect a religion whose focus is converting the United States from a Democratic Republic into a Theocracy lead by religious cleric's who are antithetical to what made this nation great and what keeps it great? Is this the change America should have or needs?
How can the Citizenry demarcate a concept which holds the well established fact that millions of the Islamic faith have called for a Holy Jihad and thereby demand the complete annihilation of the west? Yet, this same Citizenry is expected to open their arms to that very same religion, welcoming them as friends, protecting them with the same Constitutional protection Synagogues and Churches have enjoyed for over 234 years.
To make matters worse, this same Citizenry is expected to grant permission to build a Mosque on American hallowed ground, thereby, offering sanctuary and worship for the same religion which was instrumental in the 911 attacks.
Will it become necessary for the courts to hand down a litmus test for religion? If a religion passes the litmus test, then and only then that religion is welcome and protected?
However, if the religion in question fails the litmus test... will that be reason enough to expel the failed theological expression from our shores?
Should 'We The People" give haven to religions whose main purpose it to install a system of Theo-political colonization? Shall the American people welcome with open arms a religion having untold millions of members demanding the beheading of western infidels? Shall the People of America grant safe haven to those who cheerfully work for the day Israel, the United States and all other non-Islamic states are finally eradicated off the face of the earth?
These bothersome questions are not ones of religious rights, but rather of the will of the people. Will the people tolerate everything?
Will 'blanket tolerance' be the downfall of the Judaic/Christian basis of the American society?
Is there nothing which will compel We The People to stand up and say: "It stops here and no further," shall this be America's crucifixion?
Or, shall the American people create a feathered bed for all those who plan our demise, who work diligently for our destruction and for those who will celebrate the day America will be no more.
Stephen Eichler J.D.
America's Legal Analyst
[1] The practice of precautionary dissimulation whereby believers may conceal their faith when under threat, persecution or compulsion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taqiyya