Missing the Symbolism of Cordoba

The battle continues to rage over the proposed Islamic Center a mere few hundred feet from the site of the worst attack by Muslim extremists ever perpetrated on U.S. soil., the destruction of the World Trade Center in New York. Nearly three thousand people perished that day at the hands of a dozen and a half radical Muslims, but the after effects propel the numbers of both perpetrators and victims into untold numbers.

The argument now is over the Constitutional right of Muslims to build where they want in America as compared to other religions, but those opposed to this building acknowledge readily, as true Americans would, that right. But as the after effects of that day linger, the extended families of the victims and the multitudes who were captured on film dancing in celebration as the towers burned and crumbled have only seen their gulf further divided. To the latter group, the day symbolized a huge victory.

To them, that was only stage one of the battle, unarguably a battle for which they could claim success. They blew one by us, and as a movie character once said, "Savor the flavor, kid, 'cause it ain't gonna happen again". Undeterred, some still try.

Imam Rauf, at the heart of this proposed building, insists that his is a mission of "bridge building", a gesture of good faith toward the non-Muslims of America and, by extension, the West. He claims an attempt to demonstrate that compassion can overcome contention, but when met with passionate opposition, turns to stone and cold defiance. Despite the fact that the opposed have done so peacefully, the Imam has dug in his heels and refuses to move.

After a huge outcry from the public and the blogosphere - which has been portrayed as a collection of imaginative juveniles by a nervously envious mainstream media as crazed - the group behind the "Ground Zero Mosque" has strategically changed its name of the project. When the comparison of the "Cordoba Initiative" to the Conquest of Cordoba in Spain in the eighth century was too much to bear, the project name was changed to Park51.

As I pointed out in Cordoba Sounds Nice a month ago, Cordoba was designed to sound more European and romantic to Americans than what its meaning actually held. It was a tactical error by the good Imam and his cohorts based on the assumption that we, Americans, were all fat, dumb and happy. Now that they are discovering the opposite, and as they realize their counter claims that we are merely crazy won't work, they have cleverly changed the name of the project. But they're really not as clever as the change might otherwise indicate to the few who are exactly as the Imam thought.

Steve Malzberg of WOR Radio 710 in New York brought this up a few days ago on his afternoon show, and while I'm not quite sure of who is responsible for the discovery, I still credit Steve with having the courage to speak about it. To my knowledge, no one else has. Hopefully Steve will clarify the intrepid party who dug this up and apply proper credit.

But the new name, Park51, is just as Cordoba was; built for subterfuge, which is a mainstay of Mohammed and Allah in the war against the "infidel". The Quran commands lying in order to attain victory, and many still listen.

What Malzberg brought to light was a reference in the Imam's own Holy Book to the significance of the kinder, gentler Park51 name, and its relation to the message of triumph just as Cordoba held. The address of the mosque building (I refer to it as "the mosque" for expediency, even though I know those critical will complain of the label) is not 51 Park Place, as many View watchers will assume with a relieved sigh. It is actually 45-51 Park Place.

*Malzberg's account is 45-47 Park Place, Wikipedia has it as 47-51 Park Place.

Americans read left to right, Asians right to left. Presumably, Muslims read right to left, I do not claim to know, but it might account for the Park51 being derived from the latter of the address numbers. But a perusal of Chapter 51 of the Quran, versus 45-47, reveals that the message of triumphant conquest is alive in this mosque endeavor. From the know Quran website:

51:45	So they were not able to rise up, nor could they defend themselves --
51:46	And the people of Nuh before, surely they were a transgressing people.
51:47	And the heaven, We raised it high with power, and most surely We are the makers of things ample.

Considering Imam Rauf's recent assertion that this property has more significance than that of just a "piece of real estate", it must be considered that he means something else. Perhaps the significance lies in the numerical address of that property. It is, after all, about symbolism. 

Sphere: Related Content

The Problems With Junior

As the sleek veneer begins to fade and tarnish, and as a reticent media feels the unrelenting tug of duty - or perhaps shame - the questions about Obama's past are finally gaining credibility and momentum. Furthermore, the notions of his incompetency and ineligibility are suddenly seeming more plausible to a larger portion of Americans, no longer cavalierly dismissed with a shrug and a wave of the hand.

I was among a sizeable crowd of bloggers and pundits who were sounding the alarm about Obama's past associations, from William Ayers to Reverend Wright. But the core of Obama's character was formed long before he would meet either of those men. It is derived from the dreams of his father and the call to prayer in Jakarta.

While the buzz lately is about the percentage of people who believe Obama to be a Muslim, the media elites are demanding to know how so many people could be so gullible, an irony I find immensely amusing. Equally as ironic is their intense desire to convince those "gullible" people that the President is a Christian, a group they are normally engaged in mocking.

But to believe that Obama is a Muslim is less of a stretch than vice versa. While he may not be a practicing or active Muslim, there is no question that he is a cultural Muslim. He was born to a Muslim father and an atheist mother. In the world of Islam, he is a Muslim. For him to claim otherwise makes him an Apostate, one more hated by Muslims than even infidels, but we'll get to that particular problem later.

His birth to Barack Sr. makes him a Muslim, that much is clear. What Junior chose to become later in life may have meaning to him or not, but to Muslims, he will always be a Muslim. That was clear throughout the campaign, when people like Mohamar Gadhafi were enthralled at the prospect of a Muslim becoming president of the United States. Louis Farrakhan, leader of The Nation of Islam, felt the same way. Remember these pertinent facts, they will come in handy.

Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, divorced Barack Sr. when the president was three years old, ostensibly because she discovered that the father of her child already had a wife and family back in Kenya. She subsequently married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian man working towards his masters degree at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was five years old, Soetoro was recalled to Indonesia by his government. A year later, Ann Dunham and her six-year-old followed. Soetoro eventually adopted Obama, who then became young Barry Soetoro.

So the young Soetoro was now an Indonesian citizen, and attended madrassa, taking reading lessons on the Qur'an. Obama has confided that he once got in trouble for making faces during Qur'an studies. He himself has stated recently that the sweetest sound he ever heard was the Muslim call to prayer at sunset. During an interview with George Stephanopoulos in the campaign season of 2008, Obama slipped, referring to "my Muslim" faith. (Stephanopoulos dutifully corrected the gaffe).



Since he's been president, Obama has spent more time reaching out to Muslims and slamming Israel, defending the Ground Zero mosque while decrying home building in Jerusalem. He's coddled Iran - the country he said he would never permit to have a nuclear weapon - and as a result, Achmedinejad has jammed his thumb in our eye. In a matter of hours, Iran and Russia will begin loading fuel rods into the newly finished nuclear reactors.

Obama spoke in Cairo, Egypt, where he offered apologies on our behalf for having been "arrogant", something I personally did not need representation on in such fashion. But the interesting part is the fact that he made it out of there alive. Here's why.

According to the Qur'an, an Apostate is a Muslim who has committed a worse crime than murder; conversion from Islam. Don't take my word for it, however, read from a "newspaper" that has, since the election, become the official propaganda machine of the Obama administration, The New York Times:

His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)

It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Iran’s Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities.

For example, in Iran in 1994 the intervention of Pope John Paul II and others won a Christian convert a last-minute reprieve, but the man was abducted and killed shortly after his release. Likewise, in 2006 in Afghanistan, a Christian convert had to be declared insane to prevent his execution, and he was still forced to flee to Italy.

Because no government is likely to allow the prosecution of a President Obama — not even those of Iran and Saudi Arabia, the only two countries where Islamic religious courts dominate over secular law — another provision of Muslim law is perhaps more relevant: it prohibits punishment for any Muslim who kills any apostate, and effectively prohibits interference with such a killing.

At the very least, that would complicate the security planning of state visits by President Obama to Muslim countries, because the very act of protecting him would be sinful for Islamic security guards.

Curious, the reception he received in a Muslim country, then. So when people like Joel Achenbach write OpEd's in the Washington Post titled, "Are Americans total numbskulls?", the question must be reversed upon them immediately. Is Obama a Muslim, or an Apostate? For someone who should be most reviled in a Muslim country, he certainly seemed cozy. Perhaps he didn't convert? Or he returned?

Claiming that he and his family would find a new church in the DC area by Easter, that hasn't happened. The excuse is that he doesn't want to be a disruption. Apparently that is only true of a Christian church as he and his family don't seem to mind fouling traffic on the streets and airports on New York, feel comfortable closing sections of prime beach areas in Spain, and cause security havoc at professional sporting events. Nope, we can't attend church because we'll "interfere".

Maybe Obama is a Christian Apostate. He's safe, there is no penalty for that in the true religion of peace beyond disappointment. "How can people believe that Obama is a Muslim?" How can they deny it?

Sphere: Related Content

Inmates Running The Asylum

With the Cordoba Initiative attempting to build a thirteen story Muslim learning and prayer center a mere two blocks from the scene of the heinous attacks - by Muslims - in 2001, concerned citizens have been trying to get Congress to investigate the source of Imam Rauf's funding. They have refused. Mayor Mike Bloomberg said such an investigation would "be un-American". And Nancy Pelosi claimed that it was a "zoning issue" that should be decided by New Yorkers.

How ironic ,then, that on Tuesday the House Speaker called for an investigation into the funding sources of...the people opposed to the mosque. Speaking to San Francisco's KCBS radio, here's what the Speaker had to say:

"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded. How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we've been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City."

So Madam Pelosi thinks a Congress that will haul professional baseball players - for example - up to Capitol Hill for questioning regarding steroid use thinks that it has no business finding out who is paying for a Muslim conquest edifice at Ground Zero. Then declares that it should find out where the people opposed to the mosque get their money.

Any questions as to why we have to vote them all out of our House?

Sphere: Related Content

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