On Sept. 11, 2001, just a few miles away from George Mason University, the pentagon was attacked by radical Islamists. In New York City, the World Trade Center fell after planes hijacked by the same al Qaeda terrorists struck the twin towers.
Anyone who attended Mason, or lived in and around Washington, D.C. and New York City at the time was especially affected by this tragic event. Now, a debate is raging on whether to allow a mosque to be built near ground zero.
The liberals argue this project is about religious freedom. However, the debate is not about freedom of religion, but about the sensitivities to those who died in the attacks.
Let’s examine this issue by first taking a closer look at the ground zero mosque developers.
The Park51 project, formerly known as the Cordoba House, is being organized by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, a man described in the New York Post by his tenants as a “slumlord.”
Rauf, a self-described “moderate,” once claimed that “the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened” on Sept. 11.
He also refuses to denounce Sharia law, which condones the stoning of women and other equally disturbing practices.
Rauf also will not condemn the terrorist organization HAMAS. Coincidentally, HAMAS co-founder Mahmoud al-Zahar recently came out in support of the project.
Instead of at least denouncing that endorsement, Rauf said nothing. In 2006 he did say something of interest when he told Barbara Walters, “One man’s terrorist is another man’s hero.”
Sharif El-Gamal, the owner of the building site, owes hundreds of thousands in unpaid taxes and has at least six misdemeanors to his credit – ranging from drunk driving to disorderly conduct.
Even more disturbing is his willingness to accept money for the project from sources in Saudi Arabia, a country who has funded centers for radical Islam in the past. Strangely enough, the sources of his finances are largely unknown.
Even if you side with the argument for a mosque near ground zero, I would hope that we could at least agree that these sketchy developers should not be allowed to build anything near this hallowed ground.
It is true the Park51 developers have the constitutionally protected right to build their mosque, but should they? The Japanese could build a cultural center at Pearl Harbor, but would it be right?
Carmelite nuns once planned a convent at Auschwitz, the site of the infamous Nazi concentration camp, but were ordered to close it by Pope John Paul II out of respect for the dead.
At this point the mosque has been the subject of so much controversy that it is becoming a symbol to radical Islamists.
There is nothing to stop terrorists from looking at the mosque as a shrine to their perceived victory against “Infidel” Americans.
A Taliban spokesperson recently admitted as much to Newsweek, claiming the entire debate is helping to line up recruits and cash from radical Islamist sympathizers.
Recent polls show 62 percent of the country is against the building of the mosque as well.
The families of 9/11 victims have come out overwhelmingly against this mosque. This debate has ripped apart the old wounds for many of these families.
If that alone is not reason enough to prevent this project then I don’t know what could be more convincing.
It blows my mind that the leftists argue that we must be sensitive to the religious freedom of any group of people, yet they are blatantly insensitive to the families of 9/11 victims.
No one should tell the ground zero mosque developers that they do not have the right to build on their site if no legal precedent is obvious.
However, the mosque should be moved out of respect for the 2,973 lives lost in the 9/11 attacks.
This is not an argument against religious freedom; it is an argument for the respect of those who died in that terrible terrorist attack.
Move the site down a few blocks and the proclaimed mission by these developers can still be realized, the sacredness of ground zero will remain and potential propaganda for radical Islamists will never be seen in New York City.
Comments