Something to consider when stewing about the mosque* at** Ground Zero

by folkbum

Among the actual plans for actual construction at the actual real and true Ground Zero is ... a massive shopping mall. It's planned for below ground level, in the actual dirt and soil that mingled with the dust and ashes of 9/11.

Apparently, a religious community center two blocks away, out of the line of sight of Ground Zero, that includes a memorial to the victims of 9/11 as arranged by an advisor to the official 9/11 Memorial and Museum committee, is an affront to our national sensibilities. However, allowing Americans to honor the memory of 3,000 dead countrymen by trying on jeans and slurping an Orange Julius is just fine.

UPDATE:

A new Siena poll of New York state finds that registered voters here continue to oppose the construction of the Muslim community center near Ground Zero in New York City -- but at the same time, they overwhelmingly say that the Muslim group involved has the constitutional right to build it. [. . .]

A follow-up question asked: "Regardless of whether you personally support or oppose the proposal to build the Cordoba House, do you believe the developers of the Cordoba House have a Constitutional right to proceed with the construction of the mosque and Muslim cultural center or not?" Here the answer is 64% yes, to only 28% no. Indeed, the internals of the poll show that even a majority of people who didn't support the center in the previous question still affirm the right of the organizers to construct it, by a 51%-42% margin within that sub-group.

AND Ted Olson, who argued and won Bush v Gore continues to walk away from the nutball right.

* it's not a mosque
** it's not at Ground Zero

Are They Really for Religious Freedom?

by bert

Jeff Wagner on WTMJ-AM Monday joined the teeming mob of pundits opposing a proposed Islamic center called Cordoba House near the Manhattan site of the former World Trade Center towers. His argument used the standard talking points on this issue.

“This isn’t to me a question of religious freedom. Yes, they have a right to put up a mosque,” Wagner said. However, he opposes the building because of where Muslims want to put it, which is about two blocks from the site of one of the two Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. “It is the precise location that makes it controversial.”

Wagner might be sincere. However, I would be more convinced if Wagner, or even his station's fellow pundit Charlie Sykes, had taken a visible stand in a local case involving the construction plans for Muslims.

In other words, why did I not hear his station come to the defense of the Muslims in the Sheboygan area that want to build their mosque there? There the Christians opposing it were basically attacking Islam itself as inherently violent and hostile to the U.S., not opposing the project based on its location.

I know it would be too much to expect the station to actually interview one of the many thoughtful Muslims in this listening area to break down, rather than promote, a prevailing image of Muslims as crazed terrorists. But the Sheboygan issue is a local story that other news outlets not from here have covered. Why didn't Wagner mention it to show he means it when he says Muslims have a right to put up buildings once in a while?

Since I bring up the conservative campaign against Islam and its followers, I cannot resist also pointing out the gaffe Monday by the king of radio talkers, Rush Limbaugh. Rush confused Hindus with the Japanese on Monday while trying to make an anology between the World Trade Center site and Pearl Harbor in Hawaii.

Nobody’s perfect. The slip-up, though, tells us more than Rush wanted us to know about the right-wing's pursuit of a legitimate religion. It’s a sign of ignorance that was lampooned well by The Simpsons in a episode from long ago.

I recall that Chief Wiggum was addressing Krusty the Clown, Homer, and Apu. The chief said something close to “We have the world’s three main religions here, Christian, Jew, and, uh [gesturing toward Apu], miscellaneous.”