Not In My Backyard

So, I was asked this morning when I was going to tackle the debate over the mosque in lower Manhattan, two block from the ruins of the Twin Towers. I have thought long and hard about tackling this topic and have hesitated for fear of the vitriol it might induce. I am not a fan of current Islam. Not because of any tenants of the religion, but because decent, moderate Muslims do not stand up and decry the radical elements of the religion which have hijacked it on the public stage, preaching death to America and blowing themselves, and others sky high, to promote their true cause of chaos and subjugation - something which Islam, in its basic doctrine, does not support.

Islam, like all other religions, has been manipulated by minorities which have sought to override the rational and genuinely balanced needs of the general masses, seeking comfort and guidance with a moral compass from belief in a divine being and a tablet of how to treat each other (We, Christians, have had plenty of our own lunatics should Muslims feel aggrieved at being singled out. That said, America is not singling out Islam for extermination, as we have largely welcomed Islam, as other religions, with some understandable adjustment pains). The uneducated and vocal minority which screams of the "Great Satan" dressed in tails and stripey pants with a top hat and beard should be taken for what it is, a rabble of miscreants (amusingly often pictured drinking a coke while wearing a polo shirt and nikes). They hate us because some bearded moron, with his own agenda, which strikes fear in their hearts and coin in his purse, speaks to them at a level we never will, with a knife and gun and the threat of death to their families and a perpetual trip to their vision of hell (as opposed to their promoted vision of heaven, achieved through a sacrifice in a vest of explosives and giving one a shot at 27 virgins in perpetual bliss).

As the Great Satan, our foreign policy missteps have not helped our cause, but they are often used as a cheap excuse on the global stage. We may not have entered Iraq with the most just of intentions, but, while the full end game is still to be determined, the situation seems to have played out in our favor as the last of our 56,000 combat battalions exited last Friday. Sure Shiites and Sunnis will likely still kill each other based on centuries old rivalries and conflict in doctrine, but the leaders of that country, including the supreme Shiite religious leader (Ali-Sistani) genuinely seem to want to create a calm and democratic environment. Iraq may not be the thorn between Islam and America many would like to make it. As a matter of fact, Iraq has been more of a secular and regime-related issue with an overlay of religion, and as a result somewhat easier top deal with.

Afghanistan is another story. The country has defeated Khan (he chose to treat it as an autonomous region within his empire rather than attempt to fully subjugate it), the British Empire, the Russians and now seems to be chewing us up. It is a country created by an imperialist rivalry which carved up tribal territories and sought to make a state where only an ideological and geological wasteland exists. Like much of the world (Africa and Asia as well), the West placed its map among tribes, peoples and religions where borders did not exist and do not belong. The USA has perpetuated much of this missmarking, especially during the period of superpower hegemony rising from WWII and the impact of ideology in the Cold War, but do we bear the sole blame? Let's not forget the role of the French, English and others here. But I digress...

Does anyone really care about Afghanistan? There is no oil or any other natural resource of any measure or matter. They have poppy crops which delightfully gives the world heroin (is it a problem when the only major cash crop you have is effectively a drug crop?). They have widespread and massive corruption and their current defacto leader (defacto as there is no one in that political hierarchy worth the salt and water they are composed of) is as big a crook as the rest of their long list of graft-driven criminals.  They have the Taliban, and there is not a lot to say about them that is encouraging. They harboured Al Qaeda. They beat women and do not allow their education. They destroyed cultural and historical icons in a bid to create a state of controlled chaos and complete intolerance. The world welcomed our decision to invade to free a people probably (now with hindsight) not worth freeing for their complete inability to lift themselves up by the bootstraps (One has to want a better life and has to contribute to get it). Now the world condemns our use of force and the resulting civilian casualties as our troops give their lives to try to give the Afghans a better life (No matter what you say about America and its motivations, the end result there, as we have envisioned it,  CANNOT be worse than what they have had).

We can throw our largely blind backing of the Israelis in their attempts to stave Middle Eastern extinction (though I think the constant friction they create by building in the West Bank is inexcusable provocation) as an excuse for Muslim ill-will. We can point to our desire to get rid of the lunatic in Tehran. We can be blamed for a lot, but what we cannot be blamed for is a growing belief that the Mmoderate Muslim populous, abstains from standing up and decrying the radicals within its ranks. Until they do, there is every reason to believe we are in the midst of crusade. The thing that is crazy about this crusade is the perception that is Christian against Muslim, when, in fact, it is really a conflict of good versus evil, citizen versus criminal, Samaritan versus terrorist.

This leads us back to NYC and "The Mosque".  The U. S. Constitution is founded on a few basic beliefs: one of which is the Freedom of Religion ["Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances"]. We all know that. Our forefathers were persecuted right out of England and founded a largely Christian/Protestant state which did seek to ensure that the civil liberties of its citizens would also include the liberty of freedom to practice "their" religion (they were also largely motivated by the prospect of eliminating taxation without representation - a topic for another day as I think those who do not pay tax, do not vote - the Declaration of Independence did not envision votes for all). This freedom has enabled us to welcome Catholics, Jews, Mormons, Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims (among others) into our borders in waves of immigration and liberation from regimes which repressed what we consider an absolute: the freedom to pray to any god you like. That said, the Constitution does mandate that this worship also respect the other basic tenants in its foundation: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America).

Domestic Tranquility. Does a Mosque in that location really promote tranquility? Two blocks was well within the cloud of poison which enveloped lower Manhattan courtesy of a handful of the deranged manipulators of Islam (the idiots on the plane were also clearly manipulated by their handlers, who notably were not on the plane but probably at home watching reruns of the Simpson's while eating a combo meal from McDonald's). Manhattan is 23 square miles. Is there no better real estate space within that acreage to site a mosque?  The Imam associated with the project actually has a very good track record of moderation and has been asked by a number of state agencies to speak and promote a rational face of Islam in America. The administration has promoted the cause on the basis of freedom of religion, but has yet to sort out the trials of the co-conspirators in the 9/11 bombings. As a matter of fact, remember this administration had proposed trying these criminals in NYC at the risk of further symbolic violence and civil strife and massive cost, so it's sensitivity to domestic tranquility is clearly in question, as is its judgement in these matters. On the other side of the argument, we have the likes of Sarah Palin moaning about a topic she knows as much about as the process of nuclear fision, and who only proves that Seward's Folly was a great buy for natural resources but not for intelligent women politicians. 

When we take out the complete bias of the lunatic left and right and the fully biased 3rd estate which no longer shows any impartiality in reporting news, as opposed to opinion, should we just be asking whether it is really necessary to rub salt in the wounds. Sure, the developers have the right to build their place of worship, but shouldn't they also have the decency to be sensitive to the memory of the nearly 3000 who perished within a stone's throw?