Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Orrin Hatch's defense of Park51

Adam Serwer of the American Prospect is guest blogging on The Plum Line this week.

Alex Seitz-Wald flags this interview with Orrin Hatch, in which the Utah senator comes out strongly supportive of the right of the Cordoba Initiative's Park51 project:

HATCH: Let's be honest about it, in the First Amendment, religious freedom, religious expression, that really express matters to the Constitution. So, if the Muslims own that property, that private property, and they want to build a mosque there, they should have the right to do so. The only question is are they being insensitive to those who suffered the loss of loved ones? We know there are Muslims killed on 9/11 too and we know it's a great religion.... But as far as their right to build that mosque, they have that right.

I just think what's made this country great is we have religious freedom. That's not the only thing, but it's one of the most important things in the Constitution....

There's a question of whether it's too close to the 9/11 area, but it's a few blocks away, it isn't right there.... And there's a huge, I think, lack of support throughout the country for Islam to build that mosque there, but that should not make a difference if they decide to do it. I'd be the first to stand up for their rights.

This statement is all the more remarkable because it isn't grudging -- there are no hedges about the "wisdom" of where the project is being built, as though the group should have expected a nation-wide smear campaign designed to paint the developers as Islamic extremists for wanting to expand an existing prayer space into a community center.

Opponents of the Park51 project say they aren't contesting the group's right to build there, but they actually spent months trying to use the landmarking process to prevent the project from being built, to the point of suing the Landmark Commission after it approved the project. Both Republican gubernatorial candidates supported the effort to landmark the building, and both promised to use government methods -- the public safety commission, eminent domain -- to block the project. There were also calls forinvestigations of the group's finances from politicians in Congress, absent anything resembling reasonable suspicion.

If opponents of the project had been successful in their efforts, it's likely that they would have run afoul of a 2000 era law Hatch sponsored that prevents the government from using onerous zoning requirements from blocking construction of religious buildings. To be sure, not all the sponsors of that law have shown as much respect for the religious freedom of Muslims as Hatch. Joe Lieberman, one of the law's cosponsors, said: "I wish somebody in New York would just put the brakes on for a while and take a look at this."

Many commentators will point out that Hatch is a Mormon, and Mormons have their own history of religious persecution that likely informs his views on this matter. That's probably true, but Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Mormonism didn't stop him from coming out against the project in order to neutralize a potential cultural wedge issue that his opponent, Sharron Angle, could have taken advantage of. This being a land of immigrants, many Americans have some family history of being subject to religious persecution. But just as American is to forget what that feels like when the red-faced crowds aren't shaking their fists at you.

By Adam Serwer  |  August 31, 2010; 9:07 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The risk of the 'nutbaiting' strategy
Next: Majority of GOP thinks Obama wants to impose Islamic Law?

Comments

Anti-jihadists have consistently denounced Bloomberg's orchestrated demonization campaign.

When will Bloomberg (and his Quisling toadies in the media) publicly apologize to the secular Muslim NY Cabbie and his family for inciting the pro-jihad mosque vigilantee (Michael Enright) to moby violence?

It's now past time to take a little ownership for Bloomberg's orchestrated Islamo-supremacist advocacy campaign.

What gets lost in all Bloomberg's recent demogoguery is that the Muslim cabbie victim is himself a hateful hater, bigot, inauthentic, xenophobic, neanderthal-- at least, if you go by the criterion set out by Bloomberg (and his Quisling toadies in the media): Opposing the mosque is "Islamophobia"-- period. Right?

As an anti-jihadist, however, I’m inclined to observe that the Muslim cabbie’s pretty much consonant in his opinion of the Cordoba mosque with a super majority (70%) of his fellow Americans.

That Bloomberg's proteges (in the media and elsewhere) will be disappointed to discover the opinion of this Muslim cabbie apostate tells you all you need to know about the two "sides" of this debate.

Still waiting for that apology, Quislings for Islamo-supremacism.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Bully for Hatch. And bully for Serwer, who didn't complain that hatch kept referring to the community center as a mosque, as it's still a mischaracterization.

But he sounds imminently reasonably on the issue, generally, which is a good thing.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Serious kudos to Hatch on this one. It's a brave stand, given the times.

On this same topic (not Hatch but Islamophobia)...

Stanley Fish is one odd fish but his column today is pretty darned smart...

"In the first column I ever wrote for this newspaper (“How the Right Hijacked the Magic Words”), I analyzed the shift in the rhetoric surrounding the Oklahoma City bombing once it became clear that the perpetrator was Timothy McVeigh, who at one point acknowledged that the Christian identitarian tract “The Turner Diaries” was his bible.

In the brief period between the bombing and the emergence of McVeigh, speculation had centered on Arab terrorists and the culture of violence that was said to be woven into the fabric of the religion of Islam.

But when it turned out that a white guy (with the help of a few of his friends) had done it, talk of “culture” suddenly ceased and was replaced by the vocabulary and mantras of individualism: each of us is a single, free agent; blaming something called “culture” was just a way of off-loading responsibility for the deeds we commit; in America, individuals, not groups, act; and individuals, not groups, should be held accountable. McVeigh may have looked like a whole lot of other guys who dressed up in camouflage and carried guns and marched in the woods, but, we were told by the same people who had been mouthing off about Islam earlier, he was just a lone nut, a kook, and generalizations about some “militia” culture alive and flourishing in the heartland were entirely unwarranted.

This switch from “malign culture” talk to “individual choice” talk was instantaneous and no one felt obliged to explain it. Now, in 2010, it’s happening again around the intersection of what the right wing calls the “Ground Zero mosque” (a geographical exaggeration if there ever is one) and the attack last week on a Muslim cab driver by (it is alleged) 21-year-old knife-wielding Michael Enright...."
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/weve-seen-this-movie-before/?hp

Posted by: bernielatham | August 31, 2010 9:29 AM | Report abuse

This is so much more important than, say, the end of the Iraq War.

Can we please spend another week talking about the Not Mosque?

Maybe we can push the GOP generic ballot lead to 15%.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 31, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Well, Glenn Beck's Mormonism hasn't stopped his non-stop demagoguing of this either so maybe it's just that Orrin Hatch has a decent idea once and a while...still quite nutty other times but I'm glad to see he's resisting the red meat.

Posted by: JustTheFacts11 | August 31, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

I fully expect the "red-faced crowds" to descend upon this thread and start "shaking their fists" at Adam (via the same brainless cut and paste comments they post here every day, on every thread) any second now.

Oh, look, they've already proven me right.

Posted by: nisleib | August 31, 2010 9:34 AM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst

You're not opposed to the construction of this community center are you?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 31, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

@Kevin...certainly agree with your observations about Hatch. Am I mistaken or is Hatch not a Mormon? Perhaps that could explain his sensitivity to this issue as let's be honest...Mormons have also been discriminated against..witness all the hubbub about whether Mitt Romney has a "religion" problem in his attempt to secure the R presidential nomination.

Kevin...I wish to approach you on another subject you have repeatedly addressed,also related to this subject. You believe that the Park 51 controversy and the rest of the Islamophobia unleashed in our country while sad, wrong, (you can pick your own adjectives and adverbs here) does not actually affect terrorist recruitment. That by definition terrorists are wack and are going to be wack regardless of what we do.

Originally I agreed with your thesis...but I've had second thoughts. Certainly the type of nutbags that flew into the Twin Towers were going to do so no matter what.
We can argue if decades of imperialism by western powers planted the seeds for their discontent...but save that for another day.

My point of contention is that IMHO all this Muslim bashing is having an effect on our "War on Terrorism". And worse still it places troops on the ground in harms way. Again I'm not talking about losers who put bombs in their pants or shoes here...I'm talking about the 14 year old Afghan who picks up a rifle or places an IED to kill our troops. I'm not suggesting it's the main motivation...or the end all and be all..but it is a motivation.

Again I have walked on the soil of another country...fully armed...and aware that many of the natives didn't want me there.
We may not like the sound of it..but there is no other way to describe us other than as an "occupation" force in Afghanistan.
When bombs from drones kill people you know..maybe your relatives...when strange soldiers speaking a different language are loose in your land..and you have some of those soldiers trying to set up medical facilities, provide security from the Taliban, and they are trying to convince you that America is a good place...between the bombs...the deaths..and now the Taliban showing you reports of how Americans TRULY feel about Muslims...
Well IMHO all this Muslim bashing has made Petraeus COIN strategy just that much more difficult.

As Walt Kelly said in Pogo.."We have met the enemy and he is us."

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 31, 2010 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I'm with Ethan on this one. No mas mosque, por favor.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 31, 2010 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Yes, kuddos to Mr. Hatch for taking a stand. But may I point out that Hatch isn't up for re-election this fall, so he can get away with being a reasonable person. No one with a brain would be against the community center in Manhattan, its just the GOP/corporate conservatives scaring stupid white people (again) to gin up votes.

Posted by: switzerchris | August 31, 2010 9:46 AM | Report abuse

typo:
would NOT be for the community center

Posted by: switzerchris | August 31, 2010 9:48 AM | Report abuse

[Sewer stenched: "There were also calls forinvestigations of the group's finances from politicians:]

Why didn't Pelosi's McCarthyistic threat to "investigate" patriotic Americans cause a "red-face" in the national media? She is the most powerful woman in the world, afterall.

I've been waiting patiently all month for the ACLU to denounce the “chilling effect” on the 1st Amendment exerted by Pelosi's hamfisted attempt to intimidate the American citizenry and inhibit folks from freely expressing their dissent.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/114773-pelosi-new-yorkers-should-decide-in-ginned-up-mosque-controversy

But it’s still August, maybe they’re all still on vacation over at ACLU-HQ?

I’m sure they’ll all be chiming in on this any time now, you betcha.

*crickets chirp*

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

@bernie: "Christian identitarian tract “The Turner Diaries”

I'm pretty sure that The Turner Diaries is a white supremacist tract. It's essentially Neo-Nazi propaganda. Is he essentially saying there's no difference between Neo-Nazis and Christians?

In regards to speculation as to who had behind the bombing, Wikipedia "confirms" what I remember (and, yes, I trust Wikipedia more than my memory): "Initially, the FBI had three hypotheses regarding who might have been responsible for the bombing. The first was international terrorists, possibly the same group that had carried out the World Trade Center bombing two years earlier. The FBI also thought that a drug cartel might have been carrying out an act of vengeance against DEA agents, as the building held a DEA office. The last hypothesis was that the bombing was done by Christian fascists acting on conspiracy theories."

The thing I remember most was that Bill Clinton blamed right-wing radio.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 9:50 AM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst,

Who are you talking to? Jesus?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 31, 2010 9:51 AM | Report abuse

bernielatham - Awesome article, thank you very much.

Ethan, Wbgonne - I too would love for this story to go away. But if it does the GOP will just find another group of people that don't look like them or worship the same God to demonize. In an odd way keeping the GOP's attention on the non-Mosque is probably saving another group, religion, ethnicity from being attacked.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; this is all a part of the Republican Party's "Xenophobic Kitchen Sink" strategy. They keep throwing out hate and seeing what will stick. The New Black Panther Party, the 14th amendment, terrorist @nchor babies and now the non-Mosque...

What on earth makes you think that should the non-Mosque issue go away that the Republicans won't just find someone else to demonize?

Posted by: nisleib | August 31, 2010 9:52 AM | Report abuse

I don't see that much difference between what Hatch said and what Obama said. Obama clarified that when he defended to right for Park51 to be built, he wasn't necessarily saying that is was a good idea to do so. This strikes me as a perfactly reasonable position. I defend people's right to smoke cigarettes in their homes - that doesn't mean I think smoking is a good idea.

Hatch also points out that a lot of people are opposed to it and that "there's a question" of whether it should be built there. It takes a lot of parsing to find a big difference between that and what Obama said.

Posted by: Virginia7 | August 31, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Ethan2010

Can you tell us specifically what the democrats want to do to get the economy moving again - should they win this year's elections???


Do they have any specific proposals ???


Of course, the stimulus has been a complete failure - so what is your solution ??

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

[Sewer spat: "many Americans have some family history of being subject to religious persecution."]

Indeed! So, when will Bloomberg (and his Quisling toadies in the media) publicly apologize to the secular Muslim NY Cabbie and his family for inciting the pro-jihad mosque vigilantee (Michael Enright) to his throat-slashing incitement stunt?

It's now past time to take a little ownership for Bloomberg's orchestrated Islamo-supremacist advocacy campaign.

What gets lost in all Bloomberg's recent demogoguery is that the Muslim cabbie victim is himself a hateful hater, bigot, inauthentic, xenophobic, neanderthal-- at least, if you go by the criterion set out by Bloomberg (and his Quisling toadies in the media): Opposing the mosque is "Islamophobia"-- period. Right?

As an anti-jihadist, however, I’m inclined to observe that the Muslim cabbie’s pretty much consonant in his opinion of the Cordoba mosque with a super majority (70%) of his fellow Americans.

That Bloomberg's proteges (in the media and elsewhere) will be disappointed to discover the opinion of this Muslim cabbie apostate tells you all you need to know about the two "sides" of this debate.

Still waiting for that apology, Quislings for Islamo-supremacism.

I accept the repeated "no mas" plea from the Quisling toady chorus, as a whine of surrender.

/shame, shame, shame

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

If anyone needs to have an investigation opened into them, it’s Pelosi.

After the GOP takes over in November, they need to appoint a special investigator to look into such things as;

* her apparently fraudulent claims against the CIA and their harsh interrogation techniques;

* her misappropriation of government property by using military assets as personal taxis for her misbegotten family;

* potential fraud (she probably lied in any paperwork, pertaining to the use of those assets);

* and now her public attempt to harass those who oppose Islamo-supremacists erecting a 13-story 9/11 snuff porn emporium and jihad recruiting station at Ground Zero.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 10:02 AM | Report abuse

@CalD, Ethan, and wbgonne..

I certainly understand your desire for this story to go away...I too am getting bored however there is one thing this story has accomplished...this is not really about 9/11 or the Park51 project...we can now see from all the numerous examples across our country that Park51 represents a much larger problem.

The Islamophobia in our nation is not just on the part of right wing nut jobs. The anti-Muslim incidents span our entire nation...it's not just rednecks in Tennessee..or Militia's in Michigan and our northern states...or the elites in NYC or the people just south of L.A....this has spread across our nation...it is virulent...and it is a sad for our nation.
It not only defies the letter of our law as elucidated in the Constitution...IMHO it completely violates the "spirit" of the law and the vision of our Founding Fathers.

In other words it is in a very literal sense...UNPATRIOTIC!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 31, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

@ruk: "does not actually affect terrorist recruitment. That by definition terrorists are wack and are going to be wack regardless of what we do"

This is true. However, it may have some effect on terrorist recruitment. It may help get them more money. My argument, and perhaps it's picking nits, is that that doesn't matter. Either something is good idea or a bad idea or somewhere in between, irrespective of what foreign bullies think about it. Let's say Osama Bin Laden supports Healthcare Reform (I think he didn't point to our lack of universal coverage is more evidence that America sucks at some point). Should we then abandon HCR, because Bin Laden likes it? Or let's say he doesn't like it--does that make it better or worse?

The mosque opposition is wrong in and of itself, and I refer you again to John Stewart: "I got an idea. How about nobody gives a f*** what the jihadis think?"

"We can argue if decades of imperialism by western powers planted the seeds for their discontent..."

I'm sure it did. However, terrorists are, by definition, not rational actors. Take away Western imperialism, there would still be a reason--some motivating factor--for terrorism, and it would be directed at infidels or heretics or apostates, all the same. And apologizing for things done by Winston Churchill and Warren G. Harding and Thomas Jefferson are not going to change their minds, now. Nor could we realistically go back and reassemble the Ottoman empire, or stay out of Afghanistan in the 1980s. I mean, we could have, but we can't go re-do that. We could have avoided installing the Shah, too, but we didn't. And I use "we" loosely, because most of the group of International imperialists that did those things are dead.

"My point of contention is that IMHO all this Muslim bashing is having an effect on our 'War on Terrorism'. "

But if it didn't, then Muslim bashing would be a-okay? I've got to be honest, I'm not sure what we're arguing about here. I'm opposed to Muslim bashing.

"When bombs from drones kill people you know..maybe your relatives..."

That is essentially the Obama strategy, which I fully support. I personally think we should have just enough intelligence on the ground to figure out who the drones should be dropping the bombs on, and get the other troops out. I'd love for Afghanistan and Iraq to be thriving free-market democracies, but I don't believe we can make that happen. We can kill Al Qaeda operatives and leaders and disrupt their network--as Obama has been proving quite regularly. So, I think that's were our focus should be. Not transforming the middle east, but killing the people who move and shake the Al Qaeda networks, freezing their money, and so on.

"Well IMHO all this Muslim bashing has made Petraeus COIN strategy just that much more difficult."

Making the impossible more difficult is always a bad thing. ;) That being said, in general, I don't think we should be doing things that make things harder on the troops.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 10:06 AM | Report abuse

[rukidding7 "...it's not just rednecks in Tennessee."]

CLUEBAT: "Muslim community member charged in Marietta mosque fire"
http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/muslim-community-member-charged-566659.html

This was more likely a "false-flag" operation by pro-mosque provocateurs-- as a pretext to justify Pelosi's calls to investigate the legitimate dissent of patriotic Americans.

Don't be so transparently naive, Quislings.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 10:07 AM | Report abuse

@Mike

"KaddafiDelendaEst,

Who are you talking to? Jesus?"

He is talking to himself. Sadly...not to pick on the less fortunate..K has some serious issues...with himself.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 31, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Hey Kevin, this Kaddafi guy is on your team.

Maybe you can figure out what he wants so he'll stop shouting at clouds.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | August 31, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

The caselaw says that the mosque can be stopped if there is a "compelling interest."


1) The RISK that the mosque will be used as a recruiting tool is a "compelling interest."


2) The POTENTIAL of the mosque as a PROPAGANDA TOOL is great - and propaganda is an important element in war - therefor this mosque IMPACTS the effectiveness of the war making power. This is sufficient "compelling interest" to stop this mosque - especially in wartime.

Please remember that our enemies just tried to put a bomb in Times Square last April - a clear indication the war is not over, New York City is a battlezone - and that bombing could have killed another 3,000 people.


3) The RISK of violence is a "compelling interest" New Yorkers do not want the mosque - and its presence incited violence. Already, incidents have happened around New York. Preventing the inciting of violence is a "compelling interest"

The people in this country who are for the mosque are not being HONEST about their motives.


Somehow, these people are either - attempting to defend the rights of other minorities who are not at risk - or do not believe we should fight the war on terror.


There is a horrible idea out there - that America's foreign policies justified the attacks - that is wrong. This idea extends to a conclusion that American should not fight terrorists - that somehow if we are only nicer to the terrorists, they will stop trying to kill innocent Americans. Again, that attitude is wrong.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Ethan2010


Obama looked like a fool in his interview with Brian Williams over the weekend - insisting that he did not walk-back his comments on the mosque.


Obama WANTS the mosque - there is no other way around it.


The democratic party is now the Party of the Ground Zero Mosque - the Party of Giving Lawyers to Terrorists.


Obama's war policy is to be nice to the terrorists - and maybe they won't bomb us anymore.

At WHAT point does Obama understand that his job is to REPRESENT what Americans want ?


Obama thinks that his job is to jam his left-wing policies on people - and be silent when his allies call millions of people racist for not agreeing.


Every POLICY difference MUST be racism, right ? It can't be anything else.


Except the same people had the SAME positions when Clinton was President, and those positions were not based on racism.

So, Obama's charge of racism are false - AND are based on Obama's own racism against whites. There is NO OTHER WAY to interprete the present situation.


Anyone who says "Glen Beck's crowd was predominantly white" - is making a racist statement - that is questioning the motives of the 500,000 people.


As much as the democrats would like it to have been, Glen Beck's rally was NOT a KKK rally, No one was lynched.


But THAT is all the democrats saw - the racism of the democrats brought them to see nothing but racists at the Mall, which was clearly not the case.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

bernielatham - Thanks so much for the article. I've tried and failed to articulate these thoughts, and it's good to see someone do it so well!

nisleib - I agree with you that this is part of the Republican strategy. I have no doubt they'll find someone or something else to demonize; in fact, they probably have several items just waiting in the wings.

Ethan, Wbgonne - I guess yapping about the non-mosque on a blog doesn't do much good, but I do think the underlying motives of many politicians--and their willingness to cherry-pick parts of the constitution--is important to note.

Posted by: carolanne528 | August 31, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

@SaveTheRainforest: Leftists support this Islamo-fascist desecration of Ground Zero because they hate America and have formed an Unholy Alliance with Islamo-supremacists.
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

In contrast, authentic (traditional) liberals fight against sharia law advocates. For that reason, The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which is representing a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, said the vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy. The ACLJ has filed an Article 78 petition in state court to challenge the city's actions.
http://www.aclj.org/TrialNotebook/Read.aspx?ID=991

Sharia law advocacy is un-Constitutional, and Americans understand that. No wonder Leftist-fascists support it.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 10:21 AM | Report abuse

@mikefromArlington:

"Hey Kevin, this Kaddafi guy is on your team."

Everybody is on my team, Mike. I'm part of . . . the human race. :)

"Maybe you can figure out what he wants so he'll stop shouting at clouds."

He wants you all to admit that you're apologists for Islamofascism, confess that you're Quislings, and go protest a Mosque somewhere. Get on that, and I think he'll still find himself peculiarly unfulfilled. But you would have at least done what you could to help him out.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 10:22 AM | Report abuse

I commend Sen. Hatch for recognizing the identical attitudes Mormons have had to contend with when they have wanted to build new temples in various places around the country (most particularly including Belmont, MA). Mormon temples are often conspicuously noticeable, and as a result they generate complaints about eyesores & such.

Congratulations to the senator for realizing that the Muslims who want to build the Cordoba house are dealing with the very same ugly American reluctance to accomodate "them".

Posted by: akaoddjob | August 31, 2010 10:25 AM | Report abuse

(Of course, it would have been even more commendable if Sen. Hatch had done this while running for reelection. :) )

Posted by: akaoddjob | August 31, 2010 10:26 AM | Report abuse

@EDthan2010: "Maybe we can push the GOP generic ballot lead to 15%."

Sshhhhh. Don't tell them! ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 10:27 AM | Report abuse

nisleib at 9:52


I dispute your idea that the Republicans are trying to demonize anyone.


It is the democrats who regard rednecks as subhuman - unworthy of Freedom of Speech -


And if rednecks say something with which a democrat does not agree - democrats believe they should be called racist.

Geesh - democrats have been engaged in a year-long campaign to SMEAR and demonize the Tea Party.


So, your statement is basically delusional.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:29 AM | Report abuse

"At WHAT point does Obama understand that his job is to REPRESENT what Americans want ?"


At what point do YOU understand that if what Americans want is illegal it is the president's job to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States"?

It doesn't matter what Americans want if what they want is illegal.

Posted by: akaoddjob | August 31, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Bloomberg might have retained some respectability if he had simply said that his business commitments in the Middle East made for a conflict of interest, and recused himself from the debate over the Ground Zero mega-mosque. But his substantial Abu Dabai investments trump his commitment to Americans.

"Bloomberg’s Ground Zero Mosque Dividend"
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38764&page=1&viewID=1547651

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Kevin....."But if it didn't, then Muslim bashing would be a-okay? I've got to be honest, I'm not sure what we're arguing about here. I'm opposed to Muslim bashing."

I'm aware that you are against Muslim bashing, I included that in my post as well..and to return a nit pick :-) I don't believe we are arguing but as always with you simply discussing. What a concept ehh?

I agree that we shouldn't make important decisions based on what OBL or other Al Qaeda leaders might think. They are like Kaddafi and rainforest on this blog...blind ideologues who do not respond to intellectual discussion and remain largely detached from reality.

However..my point is simply that all this Muslim bashing DOES make it harder for Petraeus and his troops especially since they've adopted this COIN strategy which cannot possibly succeed without the support of the locals. Again however I am in complete agreement that they are trying the impossible anyway...but for the time they are trying...we can at least help.

Not sure we disagree on the issue of what is the worst part of all of this...that it is simply wrong...constitutionally, morally whatever..I believe we agree on those issues...but if it caused even one 14 year old to pick up a rifle and blow away one of our guys over there...that is also yet another reason to be disgusted with the Gingrich and Palin who may literally be costing us American casualties. I've not been to Afghanistan...I've not polled the natives..and so I have to go on what is reported by folks who have been in country.

@MikefromArlington....I'm sure you were just having a little snarky fun but I must point out that asking Kevin to defend the wackjobs on our blog is similar to conflating the 9/11 terrorists with all of Islam. Kevin is rational, respectful player...and though I disgree with Q.B., Scott, SBJ, TrollMcwingnut and others I do not tar them with the ludicrous statements that are posted by specialK,rainforest.Jaked and the other obvious wackos on this blog.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 31, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Kadaffi is clearly an agent of Al-Qaeda. That can be the only reason why he keeps working so hard to try and start a Holy War.

He just might be that Adam Quisling, who joined Al-Qaeda, and is typing his hate comments from his hideout in Pakistan.

Kadaffi is the Quisling who is working for Bin Laden

Posted by: Liam-still | August 31, 2010 10:33 AM | Report abuse

RUK, all,

It's not that I don't think this is an issue.

But A) we've already discussed it to death and B) THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT ARE MORE IMPORTANT TO THE COUNTRY.

I'm starting to think that Leftie bloggers don't have an original thought in their heads. I only hang out at PL because I don't like most of the other mainstream leftie websites.

We are constantly led around like a bunch of Fing IDIOTS and I'm Fing SICK of it.

We, as a party and as a concerned community have GREAT policy stances and GREAT intentions, but we SUCK at everything else. Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel were both ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. The professional left is an EMBARASSMENT.

If we cannot talk about the most important issues of the day and, instead, we focus on the right's bait, WE DESERVE TO LOSE. Simple as that. Fing pathetic.

The IRAQ WAR ends TONIGHT. Remember that? It's ya know, one of the main reasons we got the Dem majority elected in the first place. 4,400 American soldiers ARE FING *DEAD* tens of thousands more severely wounded. Wake the F up progressives, wake the *F* UP.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 31, 2010 10:34 AM | Report abuse

Ethan2010


Everyone is waiting for you to say what your specific proposals are to improve the economy.


Clearly, the stimulus is a complete failure - and Obama diverted much of the money to democratic interest groups and pet projects which do NOT help the economy and do little to produce jobs.

So, from your SILENCE, it is clear that the democratic party does NOT have an economic plan to get the economy moving again.

Obama has NO IDEA what he is doing on economic matters - beyond his thoughts on black liberation theology - which is an economic theory.

So what is the democratic party's plan to get the economy moving again - besides raising taxes and a health care plan which puts a DRAG on hiring ???


.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:37 AM | Report abuse

[Liam drooled (again): "Kadaffi is clearly an agent of Al-Qaeda. That can be the only reason why he keeps working so hard to try and start a Holy War."]

In fact, Qaedists issued a death sentence fatwa on the apostate cross-dresser Kaddafi-- who (naturally) reciprocated by buying a fabulous new wardrobe.

Kaddafi's jihad (holy war) on Eurabia differs tactically from Qaedists in its shift from bombings to demographic conquest-- but differs little in its Islamo-supremacist aspirations.

Both tactics are later stages of the stealth jihad employed by Cordoba House Islamo-supremacists.

Those interested in a more scholarly discussion of the subject may read, "Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs" @
http://www.amazon.com/Stealth-Jihad-Radical-Subverting-America/dp/1596985569

Don't be hopelessly naive about Islamo-supremacism your whole lives, Quislings.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Akaoddjob at 10:30


I answered your question with my comment at 10:09.

The caselaw clearly states that if there is a "compelling interest," the mosque can be stopped.


At 10:09, I listed 3 "compelling interests"

Please reconsider your position -

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

He doth protest too much, therefore he clearly is an agent of Al-Qaeda.

Kadaffi is clearly an agent of Al-Qaeda. That can be the only reason why he keeps working so hard to try and start a Holy War.

He just might be that Adam Quisling, who joined Al-Qaeda, and is typing his hate comments from his hideout in Pakistan.

Kadaffi is the Quisling who is working for Bin Laden

Posted by: Liam-still | August 31, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Kudos to Hatch, sincerely. A tad late, IMO, but better that then never.

That said, see you all on the next thread. If you really want the "professional left" (whoever that is) to get off this topic, then rewarding them with page hit after page hit is only incentivizing them in the opposite direction. I'm inclined to stop doing that ....right now. :o)

Posted by: suekzoo1 | August 31, 2010 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Ethan...agreed that there are plenty of other issues...and also agree that the media has done a horrible job of bringing them forth. I too am sick of Park51 but I'm hoping the actual overarching story of Islamophobia throughout our country stays up front. Hatred,fear and discrimination are not supposed to be the American Way.

At least Ethan perhaps like me you were pleased to see that Glen baby effed up in his selection of the anniversary of the MLK speech. Of course he was hoping the controversy surrounding his choice would simply bring more media...what he neglected to realize is that he also picked the weekend of the 5th anniversary of Katrina and that his story got bigfooted by an ACTUAL important news story. I'm with you though brother..it's too bad the MSM doesn't do this more often.

Posted by: rukidding7 | August 31, 2010 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Ethan2010 says, "We, as a party and as a concerned community have GREAT policy stances and GREAT intentions, but we SUCK at everything else. Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel were both ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. The professional left is an EMBARASSMENT."

Preach it brother! But this is nothing new; the Democratic Party has never had the organization of the Republican Party. We value individual thought way too much to walk lock step like the GOP. Will Rogers, in 1935, said, "I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat." You have to take the good with the bad.

"If we cannot talk about the most important issues of the day and, instead, we focus on the right's bait, WE DESERVE TO LOSE. "

I know where you are coming from, but the media only cares about stories with some spice. Anti Muslim (or any other group) hate speech sells, so the media covers it. We can't do away with the GOP's xenophobia by ignoring it. And while the wing nuts love to claim that the media is liberal, nothing could be further from the truth. WE can't change the media narrative by saying nothing.

So how do we fight back? How do we defend the part of America that isn't old and white and bigoted? By pointing out exactly what it is the GOP is doing. Every time the GOP starts preaching hatred we need to point out what they are doing. If we can keep calling the GOP on their xenophobia eventually people may start to realize what it is the wing nuts are doing and it may start hurting them, not helping them.

Posted by: nisleib | August 31, 2010 10:53 AM | Report abuse

rukidding7 at 10:33


OK - maybe there is some muslim-bashing - however I believe the vast majority of Americans are not bashing muslims by saying they don't want the mosque at Ground Zero


Yea - Americans want a measure of respect from the muslims - and they feel that this mosque at this location is disrespectful.


Some people say there is a mosque 4 blocks away - but it is a small prayer center.


THAT is different from building a MASSIVE building which can be viewed as a victory monument.


The democrats would be wise to avoid appearing to be hypocrits on sensitivity issues. It sort of crashes everything down for them.


For the past 20 years, all the nation has heard from the democrats is sensitivity this and sensitivity that - and when there is ONE issue on which Americans want sensitivity, the democrats do not respond.


THAT makes "sensitivity" a political tool, not something that is the "right thing to do" - Democrats have diminished the legitimacy of ALL their "sensitivity" issues.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 10:55 AM | Report abuse

People who can be scared out of their wits by a proposed building renovation, can be scared by anything. They are just a bunch of bedwetting cowards.

Posted by: Liam-still | August 31, 2010 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Video of interviews with some of the people who attended the Beck/Palin rally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht8PmEjxUfg&feature=player_embedded

Posted by: Liam-still | August 31, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

If you want to read a really interesting blog post by a conservative who just can't stomach what passes for American "conservatism" these days and has made the necessary journey leftward, please, please read this:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/08/30/why-i-am-not-a-conservative/#more-47193

For those who read Balloon Juice on a daily basis, you'll know this guy and his status at the blog. If you're new to BJ, just enjoy his arguments.

Great stuff.

Posted by: BGinCHI | August 31, 2010 11:02 AM | Report abuse

@ruk: "but if it caused even one 14 year old to pick up a rifle and blow away one of our guys over there...that is also yet another reason to be disgusted with the Gingrich and Palin who may literally be costing us American casualties"

Certainly, but the same argument was made about anti-war protestors giving "succor" or "aid and comfort" to the enemy; i.e., our own anti-war opposition was being used to justify a jihad against the west. I don't know that that was true, but I think it's hard to know for sure, and, in the end, we have to hold the people who pull the trigger or set off the bomb responsible, and not folks demagoguing a Muslim community center or protesting a war or eating ice cream. Because I keep seeing a swarthy terrorist type saying: "And you Americans, with your eating ice cream! Frozen dairy treats are the tool of the infidel! My recruits are up 100% this week alone, with all the recent footage of your shameless eating of ice cream!"

It's also arguable that the folks saying that the Mosque protesters are helping them to recruit are hoping to sew further dissension here at home (another reason from the protesters to take a look at the constitution and decide to fight this fight somewhere else).

But, terrorists are whackjobs.

The protest against the community center simultaneously ignores the constitution and conflates Islam with Al Qaeda: both positions are wrong and unhelpful, in my opinion. That is sufficient reason to stand up for the rights of the Park 51 folks (and, in a larger sense, the constitution, and the principle of religious freedom).

Additionally, the safest thing for our military men and women to do now is to come home. That way, it won't matter what terrorists are motivated by. I would imagine they are more motivated by our daily presence in their country than a protest over a community center near Ground Zero (which, to be fair, even many moderate Muslims have said may not have been the best idea).

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | August 31, 2010 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Good call Sue. I'm out.

Sorry Adam, no offense, you're a great writer.

WaPo Editors:

PLEASE cover MORE TOPICS!!!!!!

In no particular order:

The economy
Jobs
Taxes
The environment
Energy
Oil / Gulf Coast disaster
KATRINA
Transportation
Health care
Technology
Net neutrality
Housing / Fannie/Freddie
Education
Iraq
Afghanistan
War on Terror / Somalia/Yemen
Drones
Pakistan
Al qaeda

On and on. Shoot even just yesterday they apprehended two possible terrorists. Not a peep.

The wapo editors need to get with it on calling for a diverse set of topics. This blog needs more substance. It has been SO stale these last few weeks.

Later.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 31, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Good call Sue. I'm out.

Sorry Adam, no offense, you're a great writer.

WaPo Editors:

PLEASE cover MORE TOPICS!!!!!!

In no particular order:

The economy
Jobs
Taxes
The environment
Energy
Oil / Gulf Coast disaster
KATRINA
Transportation
Health care
Technology
Net neutrality
Housing / Fannie/Freddie
Education
Iraq
Afghanistan
War on Terror / Somalia/Yemen
Drones
Pakistan
Al qaeda

On and on. Shoot even just yesterday they apprehended two possible terrorists. Not a peep.

The wapo editors need to get with it on calling for a diverse set of topics. This blog needs more substance. It has been SO stale these last few weeks.

Later.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | August 31, 2010 11:04 AM | Report abuse

BGinCHI - Baloon Juice is really good.

There are a number of decent former righties out there blogging these days: Andrew Sullivan, David Frum, Charles Johnson...

I'm not a huge fan of any of them, but they are all very readable (at times.)

If anyone should be upset about today's Republican Party, or the change in what "conservative" means, it is former true believers.

Posted by: nisleib | August 31, 2010 11:07 AM | Report abuse

rukidding7:

I think you are absolutely correct assessing the Not-A-Mosque situation. However, it seems to me that the country loses when we spend our time arguing about symbolism. First, the Know-Nothing GOP revels in such demagogic-friendly matter (think flies on sh*). Second, the Know Nothings are best exposed when made to tackle actual real-life problems. The GOP has no solutions for anything because it is engaged in a War on Reality. Good to point that out.

Posted by: wbgonne | August 31, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"Please reconsider your position -"

All you wrote amounts to, "OOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!! SCARY, SCARY BOGEY MEN!!!!!!!!!!!"


Your crippling terror is not a compelling interest.

Posted by: akaoddjob | August 31, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

When with the nation REALIZE that Obama's health care plan IS OBAMA'S ECONOMIC POLICY.


Obama's health care plan is a DRAG ON HIRING - and that is Obama's economic policy.


Obama wants to raise taxes - and enact transfers of wealth in American society -

Obama has stated that the recession should not stand in the way of his efforts to "transform" American society.


THAT is Obama's economic policy.


Thank you democratic party for hurting the American Economy with these policies.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

[Kevin: "The protest against the community center... ignores the constitution"]

Pernicious nonsense. There is nothing "unconstitutional" in objecting to zoning board processes.

Leftists support this Islamo-supremacist desecration of Ground Zero because they hate America and have formed an Unholy Alliance with Islamo-supremacists.
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

In contrast, authentic (traditional) liberals fight against sharia law advocates. For that reason, The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which is representing a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, said the vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy. The ACLJ filed an Article 78 petition in state court to challenge the city's actions. The ACLJ alleges that there's been an abuse of discretion in the Commission's decision.
http://www.aclj.org/TrialNotebook/Read.aspx?ID=991

Sharia law is un-Constitutional and a super-majority (70%) of Americans understand that. No wonder Leftist-supremacists support it.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

Kevin lied: "The protest against the community center... conflates Islam with Al Qaeda"]

Kevin has apparently been in a coma (both before and after 9/11) since he appears to think 9/11 was the only incident of Muslims attacking non-Muslims. If he wasn’t in a coma, there’s no excuse for such gross stupidity.

Muslims must take some responsibility for their global jihad when thousands of their co-religionists over the past two decades kill thousands of innocents of every religion around the world; and when they deprive non-Muslims of their human rights in 57 of 57 Muslim governed countries.

Look. American Muslims may be the very soul of moderation. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable for folks to ask for more from (allegedly) “peaceful” Muslims than disingenuous whitewashing of uncomfortable elements of Islamic sharia tradition, as practiced in Iran, Gaza, Kashmir, Malaysia, the Paris banlieue... and (pointedly) Cordoba House in NYC.

A genuine tiny minority of anti-jihadist Muslims may be found @ SecularIslam.org.

Americans remain breathless in anticipation of the vast majority of (allegedly) “peaceful” American Muslims supporting this genuinely tiny minority of their co-religionists... but don’t hold your breath.

+15K deadly Islamo-supremacist attacks since 9/11 don’t lie. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Don't parrot the propaganda lies of Cordoba House Islamo-supremacists your whole life, Quislings.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 11:39 AM | Report abuse

nisleib writes at 10:53:

So how do we fight back? How do we defend the part of America that isn't old and white and bigoted? By pointing out exactly what it is the GOP is doing. Every time the GOP starts preaching hatred we need to point out what they are doing


__________________________________

REALLY ? Isn't this statement a sterotype - and a preaching of HATRED?


And it is militant - "we must fight the rednecks - they are haters"


WOW - this is the new Democratic Party - they are AT WAR WITH AMERICA.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 11:43 AM | Report abuse

[nisleib whined: "So how do we fight back?"]

By repeating propaganda lies (like Bloomberg) and pulling hoaxes (like Michael Enright), that's how.

And that's another reason why Quislings are losing their fight with the super-majority (70%) of Americans who oppose Islamo-supremacism at Ground Zero.

/losers

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | August 31, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

"I'm starting to think that Leftie bloggers don't have an original thought in their heads. I only hang out at PL because I don't like most of the other mainstream leftie websites.

We are constantly led around like a bunch of Fing IDIOTS and I'm Fing SICK of it.

"We, as a party and as a concerned community have GREAT policy stances and GREAT intentions, but we SUCK at everything else. Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel were both ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. The professional left is an EMBARASSMENT.

If we cannot talk about the most important issues of the day and, instead, we focus on the right's bait, WE DESERVE TO LOSE. Simple as that. Fing pathetic."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ethan, not sure how people reporting here and elsewhere about the Park51 controversy is the fault of progressives or the professional left. Here's a brief highlight of today's posts from the effing retards.

Digby:
Kids and school bullying, in particular gay/lesbian harrassment.
Deficit commission and SS.
Dems need to pick a fight to generate enthusiasm rather than avoid controversy.

Roginson:
Iraq War

Herbert:
Afghanistan/budget

Rosenberg:
Hit back hard at swift boat tactics

Reich:
Unemployment benefits

Walsh:
Obama doesn't get it, it's the economy

Conason:
Beck mobilizing religious right

Greenwald:
ACLU lawsuit against exec power to kill citizens w/o due process

FDL:
Ackerman; End of Iraq War, sort of.
Walker; Alaska Senate Race
BlueTexan; Highlights from Maddow on GOP

Mother Jones:
Corn; Why the Iraq speech now?

Dkos:
McCarter; Alaska Senate Race
Meteorblades; Anti-poverty programs
Chris Bowers from Open Left; Filibuster petition

I see you're gone but please, pick a fight with someone else.

Posted by: lmsinca | August 31, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

akaooddjob - I wrote three "compelling interests"


1) The RISK that the mosque will be used as a recruiting tool is a "compelling interest."


2) The POTENTIAL of the mosque as a PROPAGANDA TOOL is great - and propaganda is an important element in war - therefor this mosque IMPACTS the effectiveness of the war making power. This is sufficient "compelling interest" to stop this mosque - especially in wartime.

Please remember that our enemies just tried to put a bomb in Times Square last April - a clear indication the war is not over, New York City is a battlezone - and that bombing could have killed another 3,000 people.


3) The RISK of violence is a "compelling interest" New Yorkers do not want the mosque - and its presence incited violence. Already, incidents have happened around New York. Preventing the inciting of violence is a "compelling interest"

Nothing wrong here.

I do not believe you get it : Last April there was a bomb in Times Square which could have killed 3,000 more people.


What is wrong with you ???


Do we need another terrorist incident on US soil for you and the democrats to take national security seriously ?


The democratic party is a failure


OH, just yesterday two more terrorists were arrested for testing the security procedures on an airliner.

I suppose you see nothing there either.

Obama's lax security policies are risking another attack - and American lives.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Obama is about to embarrass himself tonight with his Iraq speech


It is like a car wreck you see in motion - all you can do is watch - there is no stopping Obama from hurting the country

Obama is also destroying the democratic party - I guess that is a good thing.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | August 31, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

@37th&OStreet,

I see you are up to your old tricks of spamming and calling people racists. I thought that when you were blocked from posting at the Fix, you'd change your ways. Guess that's not possible, is it.

We don't miss you at the Fix. Just thought you might be curious.

Save.The.Rainforest--your cause?

Posted by: 12BarBlues | August 31, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

I have no problem with acknowledging that they "have the right to [build the mosque]. The only question is are they being insensitive to those who suffered the loss of loved ones? We know there are Muslims killed on 9/11 too and we know it's a great religion.... But as far as their right to build that mosque, they have that right."

Posted by: JakeD2 | August 31, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Finally somebody paying attention to RLUIPA, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, sponsored coincidentally, by Senator Orrin Hatch. Passed unanimously by the House and Senate in July 2000, RLUIPA provides:

"No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation that discriminates against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination."

With one exception -- Chicago Sun-Times Washington Bureau Chief Lynn Sweet's blog at:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/08/mosque_at_ground_zero_is_it_il.html -- the media (and even the politicians who voted for RLUIPA) have ignored this key decisive point: RLUIPA renders illegal denial of zoning approval for the proposed Muslim cultural center. A church or synagogue would be okay according to the opponents of the center. Their opposition is openly based on the religion involved -- and that is an obvious blatant violation of the law they support. Yet this law is at the very heart of whether or not this cultural center must be allowed.

I want to make it very clear that the decision to locate at this spot was incredibly callous, insensitive, and thoughtless despite the proposers claimed good intentions. But none of those factors is a legal basis for denying the zoning. And that's the point. We've got to comply with the law, the law that the Republicans (and some Democrats) who now oppose this Muslim cultural center wrote and unanimously passed ten years ago.

As so many elected officials who describe themselves as supporters of "law and order" have pointed out so often, you don't get to pick and choose which laws you obey.

RLUIPA was passed in large part to prevent public opinion from denying zoning approval to religious uses. Now Republicans like Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) tell CNN's "State of the Union" that the zoning approval should be denied because public opinion is against it.

How hypocritical can these Republican -- and Democratic -- Senators and Congressmen who voted for or supported RLUIPA get? Obviously those who would prohibit this Muslim cultural center from locating at its chosen site because it's a Muslim facility are ready to repeal RLUIPA because it's pretty darned clear they want New York City to break the law that they once supported so vigorously.

I blame the media, mainstream and otherwise, for taking so long to even reference RLUIPA which decides this issue. You'd rather report on the opinions of politicians and others than report on the actual law that New York and other cities must follow -- a law supported ten years ago by the opponents of these mosques! Their hypocrisy is blaming -- and you, the media, ignore it.

Posted by: dl49 | August 31, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Of course Orin Hatch would say that. Without religious freedom in this country cults like Mormonism and Scientology wouldn't be able to flourish.

Posted by: gce1356 | August 31, 2010 2:32 PM | Report abuse

dl49:

We've been discussing RLUIPA (and other legal grounds) over at http://volokh.com/ since this controversy began.

Posted by: JakeD2 | August 31, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Whoa - careful, Hatch. That was way too reasonable and tolerant to have been uttered by a Republican. Expect a visit from the Thought Police.

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | August 31, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

@KaddafiDelendaEst: Like Hitler blaming the Jews for inciting the SS.

Pathetic.

Posted by: Garak | August 31, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Since this whole mosque issue has been ginned up by the propaganda arm of the GOP, Fox News, you can be sure it will disappear after November 2 (kind of like the Tea Party, which will also fade from existence when there is a white president again).

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | August 31, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

The heatwave has passed, and the grownups are coming back from vacation.

Once again, the republic is saved.

Posted by: mattintx | August 31, 2010 3:10 PM | Report abuse

A small victory in the war for common sense.

Posted by: ozpunk | August 31, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Good on Hatch for defending the Constitution. Kind-of amazing that he represents what's left of sanity in the GOP.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | August 31, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

so his position is exactly the same as sarah palin's, and glen beck's, and harry reid's, and the president's.

sounds like a bipartisan consensus for religious freedom. what's the problem here again?

Posted by: dummypants | August 31, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Good for Hatch.

A day late and a dollar short. Now call out all of the other haters riding under the GOP umbrella on this issue.

Posted by: dcperspective | August 31, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

NO 9-11 Muslim Victory Mosque In NYC Or USA
Period! Stop The Pandering To The Muslims
Here and Now Flip Flop Outed RINO US Senator Orrin Hatch or are you turning into
the GOP Version of Democrat Muslim in Chief
Barack Hussein Obama! To Paraphrase the late President Ronald Reagan,"Government is
no the answer to these problems,Barack Obama and Orrin Hatch and NYC Mayor Micheal
Bloomberg Are The Problem along with the
Toxic Trio In Congress Harry Reid,Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer and Obama Camp Followers GOP Mitch McConnell and RINOS like Amnesty John McCain,Lindsey Graham,
Olympia Snow Job Snow and Wimpy Susan Collins! Throw all these bums out on Election Days 2010,2012 and 2014! NO Illegal Alien Amnesty! NO 9-11 Muslim Victory Mosque Ever And Anywhere in USA!
Deport All Illegal Aliens & All Muslims!

Posted by: sandy5274 | August 31, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

election day is almost here and you have only yourselves to blame when you get the stuffing beat out of you at the voting booth.

Smack the Average American citizen and you get smacked back.

See you at the voting booth!

Posted by: PennyWisetheClown | August 31, 2010 3:38 PM | Report abuse

IN THE NEWS TODAY.

THIS IS THE 3RD ANNIVERSARY.

3 YEARS AGO AUG 2007

REPUBLICAN SENATOR LARRY CRAIG OF IDUHO

WAS CAUGHT IN A PUBLICV RESTROOM

TRYING TO STICK HIS DICK IN A COPS BUTT.

YES STICK HIS DICK IN A COPS BUTT.

WELL THE PEOPLE OF IDUHO SAID STAY IN

OFFICE AS THEIR US SENATOR.

SO REPUBLICAN SENATOR LARRY CRAIG OF IDUHO

STAYED IN OFFICE AND TRIED TO GET A LAW

PASSED TO ALLOW PUBLIC CORN HOLEING.

I WAS TOLD THAT IT WAS A BILL ALONG WITH

THE ONE ABOUT ALLOWING BIGAMY IN ALL 50

STATES NOT JUST UTAH WHERE HATCH IS FROM.

WELL ANYWAY THIS IS GREAT NEWS.

Posted by: ausarep | August 31, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

HEY UTAH IS ONE OF THE MOST REPUBLICAN

STATES.

ALONG WITH IDUHO.

UTAH IS THE LEADER IN BIGAMY

IDUHO IS THE LEADER IN CORN HOLEING

YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK THEIR SENATORS

ABOUT WHY THIS IS SO.

HATCH OF UTAH

CRAIG OF IDUHO

BIGAMIST CORN HOLERS....

Posted by: ausarep | August 31, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

IT IS NOT NICE TO TELL A LIE.

I AGREE.

UTAH IS A BIGAMIST STATE

IDUHO IS A CORN HOLEING STATE

IT IS TRUE.

THEIR SENATORS HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THESE

SUBJECTS.

I AM SORRY FOR LYING.

I MISSPELLED IDAHO.

BUT I KIND OF LIKE THE WAY IT LOOKS

AS I D U H O.

MORE FITTING FOR THEIR PEOPLE

Posted by: ausarep | August 31, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter what Americans want if what they want is illegal.
Posted by: akaoddjob |
---------------------------------
This is true of course, but what has happened is that liberals have continually expanded the domain of "reach of the constitution" so that votes and public opinion count less and less. King George III has been replaced by 6 men and 3 women in Washington DC.

The judiciary is like a college president who says he will allow a department to be autonomous unless there are serious fiscal concerns involving the whole college. But as time passes, there are more and more "fiscal concerns" which take up more and more space and the department has less and less autonomy.

I am sure there were perfectly legal steps to stop this mosque and Bloomberg could have used them. He chose not to. But since he could have (otherwise why was approval needed at all) it follows that it is not merely a matter of constitutional right.

There are other matter like proposition 8 in California and the immigration law in Arizona being overturned by SINGLE judges.

When ONE judge has the power to go against the entire population of California, we are either "being ruled by the Law" or we are being ruled by "activist judges who are not responsive to the people." Personally I think it is the latter. And I would rather leave my fate to the American people (who are basically good hearted) than to a bunch of lawyers in black robes.

The law should intervene when there is a crime - but now we have come to see the world as a place full of crimes, and so the law has to intervene everywhere.

I do not know that there is a fact of the matter, but judicial over-reach is a dangerous thing. I think it is a large part of the reason why we have the Tea party. It would not have existed without judicial over-reach and the feeling on the part of the voters that they were being disenfranchized.

Posted by: rohit57 | August 31, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Hatch is surprising sometimes. Good to hear someone in the GOP express a tolerant viewpoint. We need to hear from more reasonable Republicans -- if there are any left.

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | August 31, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Thanks Orin. It's refreshing to see a Republican that actually thinks once in a while.

Posted by: abigsam | August 31, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Hatch is 100% right. He is acting morally and as an American who understands the Constitution and to power and beauty of our Rights under the law.

This is an example of how the GOP use to be kids. Once upon a time they were the party of reason and pragmatism not bigotry and hate.

Posted by: rcc_2000 | August 31, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

My Dear Senator Hatch:

May I humbly and with obvious political incorrectness suggest that our problem is not with Islamic extremist or Islamic terrorist? Our problem is with ISLAM itself.

The so called extremists or terrorist are nothing more than individuals and groups who have been so bold as to actually act based on what they are taught in their Mosques; so the root problem is Islam itself. It purports to be a religion of peace, but that peace will only be when there is only one religion in the world and that religion is Islam.

It has been said that in the Islamic world the insult of a defeat from a 1000 years ago still flames in the hearts of the true believers. Islam’s war with the West and with perceived Christendom has for them never ended. In the West those events are long ago history. In the Islamic world it’s as real today as it was 1000 years ago.

The sooner the West and the United States political elite realize this; the better will be their chances of not having to one day conform to Shari Law. From you and others of the political ruling class all I hear are the refrains of Neville Chamberlain's surrender message, "Peace In Our Time", only with you folks it's support for the Mosque. I expect it from the Left; but from you Sir, it is indeed a great disappointment.

Posted by: suenjim | August 31, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

This really is as simple as the fact that every American has the right to use his property and practice his religion freely in the United States.

Compared to this fundamental issue of rights, the supposedly offended sensibilities of New Yorkers doesn't even merit analysis. If it did, one might find that the attitudes of those who oppose the Park51 project are manifestly unjust attempts to implicate all of Islam for the crimes of 9/11, but that argument doesn't even need to come up.

The colonies that eventually became the United states hve been relligiously diverse since long before the US Constitution was written. The Founding Fathers had direct, first-hand experience of the consequences of introducing the inflexibility of religious dogma into the policy-making process, and they saw that the commingling of religion with politics invariably leads to mutual enragement. This is why the first words of the First Amendment definitively separate religion from the making of public policy.

This is the United States of America. We have no kings, nor any titles of nobility, so we have nothing to follow but the law.

One more time: This is the united States of America; here, we follow the law.

Posted by: lonquest | August 31, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Wait a second, everyone. No one disputes the *right* to build that mosque. But Hatch doesn't answer the important question he himself raises: is it insensitive? Nobody ever seems to take up that question. I understand how 9/11 families would be sensitive here, but if I were part of one such family, here's how I'd view it. The 9/11 terrorists do not remotely represent the ideals of Islam -- no more than the Klan represents Christianity. This Muslim community center claims to be devoted to education and understanding; its organizers have proven their good will; and even tragedies -- perhaps especially tragedies -- afford us opportunities to learn. If I had lost someone in 9/11, I'd want the mosque organizers to to invite me there to reassure me that their ideals are antithetical to the terrorists'. Then I'd get over it and be a better person for it. Have the organizers tried this? More broadly, does anyone have the imagination to necessary to heal here? Sometimes healing requires imagination.

Posted by: noahli | August 31, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Senator Hatch always has been a strong, thoughtful conservative Republican. Once again he is proving his mettle as such. There are many of us who often have disagreed with him in terms of his opposition to Democratic president's nominees to the Supreme Court. He frequently appears entirely too rigid in his views of the constitution and the apparent beliefs of the nominees. However, he also is quick to recognize legal worthiness and limits his opposition to his vote.
It is troubling to note the number of responders who, apparently, have no knowledge of American, much less, world history. Yes, Mormons have been the brunt of much opposition and insults, however, so, too have adherents to many other religions. Does anyone remember the scurrilous attacks on N.Y. Governor Al Smith, a Catholic, when he was the Democratic presidential nominee in 1928? And speaking of religious genocide, do they teach about the Crusades today in World or Ancient History courses? Human beings have been discriminated against because of their religious beliefs from time immemorial as even the Bible has noted. Jews, Christians, Muslims and, even today, Buddhist monks. And let's not even get into the contentious religious communities in Northern Ireland. The same thing throughout middle Europe. Muslim prayer services have been held at the PARK51 site for some time now without any problems. It would seem to me those worried about the sensibilities of the families of those lost in the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers should be more concerned about the adult entertainment bars and porn shops in that same immediate area. Talk about offensive!

Posted by: yzamaleno9410 | August 31, 2010 6:31 PM | Report abuse

How refreshing it is to learn that at least one Republican has the courage to stand up for the right to freedom of religious worship in America. Let's hope he starts a trend.

Meanwhile, we need patience with the persistent naysayers who turn every issue into an opportunity to trash others, almost to the point of incoherence. The drum beat of hatred is becoming tiresome.

Civility is far more convincing than vituperation. Insults will not win others to your cause, Kaddafidelendaest et al. Give it a rest. But then, your only cause may be to denigrate and destroy. Delenda est, indeed.

Posted by: castleb | August 31, 2010 6:38 PM | Report abuse

To KaddafiDelendaEst and other thoughtless people:

I'm a Jew. I was cursed out as a kid, called "dirty Jew," because certain people thought I was partly responsible for the death of Jesus, 2000 years ago on a different continent. That's not very reasonable, is it?

Now we come to the mosque. A mosque is for all Moslems who wish to pray, right? Sure, some of them might be radicals. They might also be relatives of the 70-plus Iraqi police recruits murdered the other day by an Al Qaeda suicide bomber. Or they might be friends of the Indonesian Judges and police who are chasing down murderous jihadis in their own country, the largest Moslem country in the world.

Are you going to apply the term, "dirty Moslems," to these friends and relatives of the above-mentioned Judges, police and suicide bomber victims? Do you really mean that?

Posted by: avi31547 | August 31, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

To KaddafiDelendaEst and other thoughtless people:

I'm a Jew. I was cursed out as a kid, called "dirty Jew," because certain people thought I was partly responsible for the death of Jesus, 2000 years ago on a different continent. That's not very reasonable, is it?

Now we come to the mosque. A mosque is for all Moslems who wish to pray, right? Sure, some of them might be radicals. They might also be relatives of the 70-plus Iraqi police recruits murdered the other day by an Al Qaeda suicide bomber. Or they might be friends of the Indonesian Judges and police who are chasing down murderous jihadis in their own country, the largest Moslem country in the world.

Are you going to apply the term, "dirty Moslems," to these friends and relatives of the above-mentioned Judges, police and suicide bomber victims? Do you really mean that?

Posted by: avi31547 | August 31, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

To KaddafiDelendaEst and other thoughtless people:

I'm a Jew. I was cursed out as a kid, called "dirty Jew," because certain people thought I was partly responsible for the death of Jesus, 2000 years ago, on a different continent. That's not very reasonable, is it?

Now we come to the mosque. A mosque is for all Moslems who wish to pray, right? Sure, some of them might be radicals. They might also be relatives of the 70-plus Iraqi police recruits murdered the other day by an Al Qaeda suicide bomber. Or they might be friends of the Indonesian Judges and police who are chasing down murderous jihadis in their own country, the largest Moslem country in the world.

Are you going to apply the term, "dirty Moslems," to these friends and relatives of the above-mentioned Judges, police and suicide bomber victims? Do you really mean that?

Posted by: avi31547 | August 31, 2010 6:43 PM

Posted by: avi31547 | August 31, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who seriously stands for religious freedom should be loudly opposing Islamic sharia law which is based on violent religious bigotry toward all non-Moslems. If you look closely, you will see that the supporters of the mosque are, in effect, supporters of Islamic religious bigotry; and the opponents of the mosque are for religious freedom and tolerance.

Sure, the Moslems have the legal right to build a mosque there. But, that is not the issue.

Posted by: Montedoro | August 31, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Oh they have a right to build that mega mosque but i demand an investigation into where a waiter comes up with 4.8 million and is also behind in 300,000 approximately in taxes. If they have a right to build this with questionable funds, I have a right to oppose it and demand to know where the money is coming from. And the waiter is one mean dude who has a really long rap sheet. Humm..
This group supports sharia law which is barbaric. Ask those two beautiful sisters shot to death in the back of a taxi by their creepy father because he did not like their friends in a perverted honor killing how tolerate is sharia law Ask that couple stoned two weeks ago. Ask that little girl no more than eleven on the internet last week that was kicked to death while these animals filmed with their cell phones. Her little helpless eyes will haunt me for the rest of my life. I will never get over it. These people are barbaric and we are letting them in? Are we crazy? The Cordoba Initiative is not an innocent interfaith. This is an intense building across this country to lure our young to this evil. Train your children well to resist its empty promises. They want us to be so tolerate but they will not let Christian churches in Saudi Arabia. Turkey will not let Christian schools operate that existed for centuries before the islamic government took power. Their actions do not match their words. Sound familiar?

Posted by: greatgran1 | August 31, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

ORIN HATCH IS A SELF SERVING WOMAN HATER AS ARE MANY PEOPLE OF HIS STILTED PONT OF VIEW. HE MAY BE AS MOST MUSLIM MEN WHO ARE WOMAN HATING MEN. THEY CAN NOT SEE ANYTHING BUT MALE DOMINANCE AND HATE. HITLER WAS JUST A HOLLOW AND CRIPPLED IN HIS TWISTED MIND. NO FEELINGS FOR AMERICANS WHO LOST AMERICAN CITIZENS TO THESE HIDEOUS MUSLIM MEN. MUSLIMS INTEND TO TAKE OVER AMERICA. THEY WILL NOT WIN.

Posted by: MaryThresher | August 31, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

The First Amendment was put there for the express purpose to create a barrier that would free American to "Free From Delusions."

Some Delusions aka religion, are more dangerous than others. Muslims are the most dangerous of all, in a sense that it is a "Terrorist Organization" created to control the masses. If you agree that it is O.K to "Stone to death a woman" rock on.
So as far as I am concerned this is nothing more than a fire in a crowded theater.
Amen

Posted by: Logic5 | August 31, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Bravo, a republican who stands-up for the true meaning of the Constitution!

I salute you Senator Hatch!

Posted by: Rubiconski | August 31, 2010 9:51 PM | Report abuse

There can be no doubt that the Muslims have a constitutional right to build their mosque exactly where they want to build it. Anyone who argue otherwise is arguing against the Constitution and therefore cannot be considered a patriotic American. Rather, as someone attempting to subvert the Constitution, these people should be considered traitors. It's amazing just how ignorant Americans are when it comes to the rights protected by the Constitution and the necessity of standing up in defense of the Constitution. Millions of American servicemen and women have given their lives to protect and defend the Constitution, while we have these people sitting at home dishonoring their sacrifice by refusing to do what is right. Shame on you, America.

Posted by: Caliguy55 | August 31, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

There can be no doubt that the Muslims have a constitutional right to build their mosque exactly where they want to build it. Anyone who argue otherwise is arguing against the Constitution and therefore cannot be considered a patriotic American. Rather, as someone attempting to subvert the Constitution, these people should be considered traitors. It's amazing just how ignorant Americans are when it comes to the rights protected by the Constitution and the necessity of standing up in defense of the Constitution. Millions of American servicemen and women have given their lives to protect and defend the Constitution, while we have these people sitting at home dishonoring their sacrifice by refusing to do what is right. Shame on you, America.

Posted by: Caliguy55 | August 31, 2010 9:54 PM | Report abuse

If you want to improve the economy, go back to what did work.

That is, TARIFFS.
This anti-American globalism, free trade crap pushed by the anti-American free-traitors has ruined this country.

As to the mosque, who really cares? It's a made up issue to keep people from thinking about the wealthy class destroying the working class

Posted by: santafe2 | September 1, 2010 12:40 AM | Report abuse

Orrin should keep his Hatch shut! First of all, The Constitution is Our Christian Nation's Founding Document, and it's religious clause was in reference to Christianity! In George Washington's Farewell Address, He said; "except for sight differences, We are All the Same Religion."
Christianity!

Posted by: sdavis4 | September 1, 2010 2:45 AM | Report abuse

All religious arguments aside, there is simply no morality in constructing a mosque in a place like the so-called Ground Zero. Islamists destroyed the Twin Towers, leaving more than 3000 people dead. America is choking over this matter because such a construction reinforces the sense that al-Qaeda is winning a second victory right in the place of their savage attacks. There is no defence; murder is murder and that mosque will serve to reinforce the bloodthirsty image kindled on 9/11. Are you Americans so hyper-logical that you cannot see a simple matter in simple light? The controversy is not about religious rights, the US constitution and all that. It is about an al-Qaeda victory over sanity and the sacredness of human life, and an evident attempt to seal it with another symbolic one.

Posted by: editor-in-chief | September 1, 2010 3:25 AM | Report abuse

[avi31547 whined: "Are you going to apply the term, "dirty Moslems,"... Do you really mean that?"]

I am sorry for your childhood trauma. But when did I EVER call anyone a "dirty" anything? In fact, it is the Islamo-supremacist sharia law advocates of Cordoba House who ritualistically refer to both you and I as "dirty kaffir".

Indeed, the Islamo-supremacist sharia law advocates go further by declaring Jews the sons of "apes and pigs."
http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/jew_apes.htm

So please, don't conflate my anti-jihadist condemnation of Islamo-supremacist hate-mongers with those hate-mongers themselves. That is absurdity on stilts.

Shame on you.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 1, 2010 7:34 AM | Report abuse

Caliguy55 sneered: "Anyone who argue otherwise is arguing against the Constitution and therefore cannot be considered a patriotic American.]

Pernicious nonsense. There is nothing "unconstitutional" in objecting to zoning commission processes.

Let's be frank. A vocal minority of loud-mouthed Leftists support this Islamo-supremacist desecration of Ground Zero because they hate America and have formed an Unholy Alliance with Islamo-supremacists.
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

In contrast, a super-majority (70%) of authentic (traditional) liberal Americans are fighting patriotically against these sharia law advocates. For that reason, The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which is representing a New York City firefighter who survived the 9-11 terrorist attacks, said the vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy. The ACLJ filed an Article 78 petition in state court to challenge the city's actions. The ACLJ alleges that there's been an abuse of discretion in the Commission's decision.
http://www.aclj.org/TrialNotebook/Read.aspx?ID=991

Sharia laws are un-Constitutional and a super-majority (70%) of Americans understand that. No wonder radical Leftists support Islam-supremacists.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 1, 2010 7:44 AM | Report abuse

I have heavy reservations about The Cordoba Project, but have respected Senator
Hatch for decades. His statement is big and
perhaps settling enough to help them move on.

Posted by: BluePelican | September 1, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Hatch finally grew a pair after all these decades.

Posted by: areyousaying | September 1, 2010 9:25 AM | Report abuse

The POTENTIAL of the mosque as a PROPAGANDA TOOL is great...

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest |

...as Fox News KKKarl Rove has clearly demonstrated/.

Posted by: areyousaying | September 1, 2010 9:28 AM | Report abuse

A voice in the Republican Wilderness speaks. Meanwhile anger grows (Islamaphobia) around the country. NY Teens Accused of Disrupting Mosque Service
Authorities have arrested a group of teenagers for yelling obscenities, honking car horns and firing a shotgun outside a mosque in western New York. One of many hate related events against US Muslims in recent weeks. http://www.newslook.com/videos/246267-ny-teens-accused-of-disrupting-mosque-service?autoplay=true

Posted by: dbmetzger | September 1, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst, You're off the mark here and your snarky responses aren't needed.

It is far from pernicious when someone uses the zoning commission as a defacto block to religious freedom. In fact, of the hundreds of buildings surrounding the 16 acrs plot where the world trade center was, only a handful have been given historic status and this particular Burlington Coat Factory sat idle for 8 years, with NO defenders until this religious controversy.

Let's be frank. None of these local muslims in this congregation have had anything to do with the 19 terrorists. In fact, they are exactly the moderate Muslims that Bin Laden hated and should be welcome in the US. You can view his quotes on other factions of Islam and see the errore.

As far as your "holy ground" it is 2.5 blocks from the northern edge of the 16 acre site and there is a strip club downthe block. There has been a mosque and congregation within 4 blocks of here, catering to the needs of New Yorkers, for 20+ years.

Your idea of Sharia law is sorely misguided and if you listen to the leader's explanation, you will see that is is certainly compatable with American laws as much as any religion is. Please refer to moderate, long standing, muslim congregations who obey both religious and civil laws in America without incident.

Of the 2 million muslims in the US, incidents with how many, a hundred?

Don't bother cherry picking quoes from ther Koran as we can all cherry pick violent quotes from the Bible.

While the ACLJ) said the vote by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission is deeply offensive to many of the victims and families of the 9-11 tragedy, many, many, other New Yorkers like myslef, including those who lost family, are supporting religious freedom. It is certainly not all one sided.

Plese make the distinction between patriotic, American muslims and the terroritss juust as I am sure you do not see David Koresh, the Christian militias in Affica, or the man who killed the guard at the holocuast museum as representative of Christianity.

Posted by: cadam72 | September 1, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

[cadam72: "None of these local muslims in this congregation have had anything to do with the 19 terrorists."]

That is a ridiculous criteria for threat analysis. If FDR evaluated every Shinto-fascist threat on the basis of whether they were (literally) involved in Pearl Harbor, then we'd all be speaking Japanese right now.

Anyone who's taken the time to look into the Cordoba House jihadists' associations will come to realize (contrary to Rauf's lying assertions), they are neither "peaceful" nor "moderate" in any conventional sense of the word.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/245004

cadam72 has apparently been in a coma (both before and after 9/11) since he appears to think 9/11 was the only incident of Muslims attacking non-Muslims. If he wasn’t in a coma, there’s no excuse for such gross stupidity.

Muslims must take some responsibility for their global jihad when thousands of their co-religionists over the past two decades kill thousands of innocents of every religion around the world; and when they deprive non-Muslims of their human rights in 57 of 57 Muslim governed countries.

Look. American Muslims may be the very soul of moderation. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable for folks to ask for more from (allegedly) “peaceful” Muslims than disingenuous whitewashing of uncomfortable elements of Islamic sharia tradition, as practiced in Iran, Gaza, Kashmir, Malaysia, the Paris banlieue... and (pointedly) Cordoba House in NYC.

A genuine tiny minority of anti-jihadist Muslims may be found @ SecularIslam.org.

Americans remain breathless in anticipation of the vast majority of (allegedly) “peaceful” American Muslims supporting this genuinely tiny minority of their co-religionists... but don’t hold your breath.

+15K deadly Islamo-supremacist attacks since 9/11 don’t lie. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Don't parrot the propaganda lies of Cordoba House Islamo-supremacists your whole life, cadam72.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 2, 2010 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I’d also like to point out how bigotted, ignorant and intolerant it is of cadam72 to endorse as "moderate" the spiritual commitment of Cordoba House fanatics who endorse “Vilayet-i-faquih” (mullahocracy).
http://www.slate.com/id/2264770

By what authority does cadam72 excommunicate (takfir) devout Secular Muslims when they oppose “Vilayet-i-faquih” and the multitude of oppressive sharia fatwas, endorsed by the Corboba House sharia law advocates?

Again, the prerogative to issue apostacy fatwas is granted only to Islam’s prophet, or authoritative representatives of the Ummah— which is cadam72 endorsing?

Does cadam72 know whether Cordoba House’s handlers in the Apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood approved of any anti-sharia fatwas?

Don’t take my word for it: Here is Rauf's editorial endorsing "Vilayet-i-faquih" (the special term promulgated by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to describe mullahocracy).
http://www.slate.com/id/2264770

Please explain your nasty bigotry toward secular American Muslims (like the cabbie-stabbing victim) who oppose the Cordoba House mosque, cadam72.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 2, 2010 10:03 AM | Report abuse

That may be, but Senator Hatch also qualified this support significantly, stating, that they should move Park51.

Here are the rest of his comments.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700062433/Mosque-controversy-will-define-us.html

At the same time, with every right comes responsibility. Having a right does not make every exercise of it the right thing to do. Which brings us to the mosque controversy in New York. The 9/11 terrorist attacks were unique in their impact on America and how Americans live and see the world. Most challenges we have faced as a nation pale in comparison. That fact shapes the way the free exercise of religion is implemented in this case, where emotions remain charged even after nine years.

Ground zero, after all, is not just another location, it is also a symbol. Some say that objective arguments about constitutional rights must be tempered by the impact of putting a mosque in this particular location on the families of 9/11 victims, the community, and the nation. I find it hard to believe that people of good will cannot work out a responsible solution that respects such concerns while preserving our fundamental freedom to practice religion.

Posted by: responsiblepublic | September 3, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company