Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Cordoba Sounds Nice

No, this is not a fluffy blog post about my preferred vacation destination, it is indicative of just how stupid radical Islamists believe Westerners to be. By designating the coalition to build a vast Islamic Center the "Cordoba Initiative", those who wish to dance on the graves of their victims have been seemingly quite successful in the subterfuge that will make it all possible. And an important tool of Allah's disciples is just that; subterfuge.

They have also learned other methods from the Progressives in America - currently at work dismantling everything that preceded us and made this nation great - that have abetted their efforts, a fact evident in the willingness of those in control of the World Trade Center area to favor the wishes of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf over the pained protests of a multitude of 9/11 surviving family members. That lesson has been if you can't fool your enemy, shame them.

The beauty of the shame campaign is that the perpetrators never have to engage in it. All they have to do is appear nice and reasonable and their primary targets once in control - and their current accomplices - will grab the "tolerance" baton and run with it. So eager are they to demonstrate their tolerance, they will offer their own throats to the wolf, and chastise those who refuse.

What the so-called mainstream media will never report upon is exactly what mainstream Americans need and deserve to know. The Cordoba Initiative, I maintain, was cleverly named with both subterfuge and a degree of defiance in mind. Most Americans would find it harmless because it sounded Spanish and exotic, not threatening at all. New Yorkers, a strange breed already, would welcome what they would automatically consider "diversity".

Diversity and tolerance have been the hallmark points employed by the founder of the Cordoba Initiative, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, and he has been rather proficient at sounding sincere in his desire to "build bridges" of multiculturalism and tolerance. But a simple examination of Islamic history and the significance of Cordoba, Spain proves chilling.

While outlets like the BBC take pains to point out the Muslim, Christian and Jewish "harmony" enjoyed in Cordoba after the Muslim conquest of Cordoba in the early 8th century, even they acknowledge that Muslims were in complete control while Christians and Jews were "tolerated". Harmony at a price is what it was, however, and the latter two religious groups were tolerated as long as they paid and behaved. Tolerance is not always a nice word. Sometimes it means that one group agrees not to kill another for a price.

Feisal Abdul Rauf has written a book, titled What’s Right with Islam Is What’s Right with America. Just the title is enough to give the average American liberal the warm fuzzies, and on its face seems quite harmless even to someone like me. Fortunately, I have long ago learned to accept nothing at face value, so I read.

Andy McCarthy investigated the good Imam's writings, and here is what he found, written for National Review Online:

But the book hasn’t always been called that. It was called quite something else for non-English-speaking audiences. In Malaysia, it was published as A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11.

Now it emerges that a “special, non-commercial edition” of this book was later produced, with Feisal’s cooperation, by two American tentacles of the Muslim Brotherhood: the Islamic Society of North America and the International Institute of Islamic Thought.
The question then arises, why would Imam Rauf feel the need to re-title his book for consumption here? Hell, even our current president has said that the Muslim call to prayer was "the sweetest sound I have ever heard". Why lie, Mr. Rauf?

The guilt trip is beginning to slip amongst the American people in spite of the weak-spined capitulations of elected officials all too eager to appear tolerant. While Newt Gingrich recently noted that the City of New York already has over 100 mosques, the point becomes clearer that the opposition to this particular edifice is not based on bias but, rather, a desire to prevent a Muslim declaration of conquest, such as the Great Cordoba Mosque (pictured at top) being built on the graves of Americans.

Somehow I doubt that still-grieving family members of the deceased from that horrible day would find the minarets of Cordoba House appealing or the Muslim call to prayer as beautiful as Obama did. That still does not make them hateful, nor intolerant.

Sphere: Related Content

4 comments:

Edisto Joe said...

Woody:
Nice post. This is nothing but an in your face project to 9/11 victims, there families, first respondents and all others who assisted and died on that terrible day. Hell they didn't even have the common courtesy to try and do this after the 9/11 memorial was completed, not that it would have made a difference. Every New York resident should be enraged. Maybe your post will change some minds.

This falls in line with the ACLU and CCR going to court for the right to represent Anwar al-Awlaki, the poster child for aspiring American Muslim terrorists. If they want to truly build bridges then they should first learn about sensitivity and realize the true emotions at play here. Somehow I believe that they have and by pressing forward, New York and the country has their answer.

connorsjen1976 said...

Hmmm….. I was going to be polite and start with a greeting. I could not bring myself to say, “Hi Woody”.

Male needs to compensate and E.D. aside….. Hi W :-)

Your wrong and at the same time your right.

The feelings of outrage are indeed honest and understandable. I have a friend that worked in those buildings, the torture of not knowing his fate for hours and watching that scene unfold was truly the worst period of time in my life.

I cannot imagine any American who doesn’t vividly remember that day. I believe we all have a responsibility to remember that day and do everything in our power to make sure it never happens again!

Where you go wrong is; The thoughts and beliefs of our founders were plainly written in our CONSTITUTION. That guide of OURS is mainly about not letting emotion rule us. Level heads with level thoughts should be making the decisions. The rule of law and how the majority “feels” about one segment of our society should never be based in emotions.

To allow or not allow a Mosque, can be twisted in the future to Church or Synagogue. Muslims in general cannot be blamed for 9/11, just as Japanese Americans should not have been blamed for Pearl Harbor. It doesn’t matter if the hearts of every Muslim in the world are against us, we have a moral and legal responsibility to give law abiding citizens equal rights.

Jennifer

connorsjen1976 said...

http://ellsmere.wordpress.com/

Woody said...

My apologies, folks, I recently changed the comments format to remove moderation, and now I do not receive notifications by email that a comment has been posted.

Thank you both for your responses.

Jennifer, here's where you go wrong. (Incidentally, I could retort that your fault may be a result of where you were in your cycle when you posted your comment, but that would be crass).

The American people are free to follow their emotions. It is the representatives who are bound by the Constitution to lead by reason and not emotion. See the difference?

That being said, virtually everyone recognizes the right of the Cordoba Initiative - conveniently changed recently to "Park 51" - to build a religious establishment. The efforts afoot are to persuade them to build it a less offensive locale. Haven't Americans become acutely attuned to issues of "sensitivity"?

Perhaps the good Imam should demonstrate his Americana by graciously agreeing to honor the wishes of the bereaved.