Thoughts on the subversive mosque project at the 9/11 Ground Zero and its treasonous supporters...
On 9/11 2001, 3000 Americans were butchered by Islamic jihadist. Nine years later, a Muslim Imam wants to build a 13-story Islamic Center, only two blocks away from the site of that carnage.
Many Americans and particularly New Yorkers and the families of the victims of that tragedy are outraged at the insensitivity bordering arrogance of Faisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind this project. Rauf says, it is not a mosque but an Islamic center. The name does not change anything. Whatever you call it, it is of extremely poor taste.
In 2004, Rauf published a book calling it "What is Right with Islam is What is Right with America." In that book, he argued:
The American political structure is Sharia compliant. For America to score even higher on the 'Islamic' or 'Sharia compliance' scale, America would need to do two things. Invite the voices of all religions in shaping the nations’ practical life, and allow religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves according to their own laws.
The truth is that the American constitution and the Sharia law are diametrically opposed to each other. It is interesting, however, how Rauf structures his statement. He is not saying that the Sharia is in compliance with the US constitution, but the other way round. By doing so, he wants to establish the superiority of the Sharia over the US constitution. This is his way to leave a door open to reject the parts of the constitution where it is not compliant with the Sharia.
However, the American Constitution and Sharia differ on main issues. For example, Sharia does not recognize:
- Freedom of speech,
- Freedom of conscience
- Equality of all people before the law
- Equality of women and men
What is the position of Imam Rauf vis-à-vis these variances between the Sharia and the US constitution? Of course, as an Imam, he can't reject Sharia. He rejects the constitution, because it is not in compliance with Sharia.
There is hardly anything in the constitution of USA that is in agreement with Sharia law. You can find few documents more diametrically opposed to each other.
Think about stoning adulterers, killing the apostates, hanging or beheading the homosexuals, chopping the hands of the thief, imposing a dress code of people and flogging people for consuming alcohol. These are all mandary laws in Shari. In what ways they resemble the US constitution? You can't serve two masters. Muslims will have to either submit to the Sharia or to the US constitution. If they submit to one, they will be in violation of the other.
However, the disturbing part in Rauf’s statement is the fact that he compares Islamic laws with the secular laws of America. This is proof that his goal is to supplant the latter with the former. Statements such as this make it clear that the ambition of Muslims in America is political.
As far as Muslims are concerned, the Sharia law is from God and it supersedes all constitutions, written by humans.
The implication is grave. It means that Muslims, who uphold Sharia, are a subversive group whose aim is to destroy our system of government. Muslim radicals like Imam Faisal present Islam as a religion, whereas their agenda is political and dangerously subversive.
When Rauf published his book in the Muslims world in 2007, he did not call it "What is Right with America is What is Right with Islam". He renamed it to "A Call to Prayer from the WTC Rubbles: Islamic Da’wa from the Heart of America Post 9/11".
This is the kind of talk that resonates in Muslim world. In America, Rauf wants to sent the message that Sharia is very similar to American constitution; hence they should not fear Islam. But in Islamic world, where he can be candid, his message is quite different. He tells Muslims over there that he is issuing the da’wa from the rubbles of 9/11.
What is Da’wa? Da’wa means invitations to submit to Islam. Jihad has two phases. The first phase is the invitation or Da'wa. Disbeliers are to be warned first and given a chance to submit. If they refuse to do so, the next stage is qital (fighting), which becomes mandatory. Da’wa and qital are integral parts of the jihad. When one fails or is impossible to implement, the other should be followed.
Theoretically, the Cordova House will be the ultimatum, a line drawn in the sand; after the da’wa is issued, Americans will have two choices: either submit to Islam or face more terrorism.
What is in the name?
The choice of the name for proposed Islamic Center is also significant. Cordova House may mean nothing to unsuspecting Americans, but for Muslims it is fraught with meanings.
Cordova is a city in South Spain. Muslims armies invaded Spain in 711 and conquered the country, massacring countless people. Then they converted the biggest church in Cordova into a mosque and made it Islam's illustrious center of power in West Europe.
Building mosques over churches, synagogues and temples of the conquered people was started by Muhammad, who converted the Ka'ba temple of the Arabs in Mecca into an Islamic mosque.
Muslims have been doing the same ever since. Numerous Hindu temples, churches, synagogues, Parthenon, and Zoroastrian temples were converted into mosques. The objective is twofold: To humiliate the defeated people and to establish the supremacy of Islam.
The mosque over the temple of Solomon in Jerusalem is one example. When Muslims conquered the Byzantine Empire they converted the biggest church in Christian empire into a mosque. In India, over 2,000 mosques stand on the site of destroyed Hindu temples.
A mosque built over the rubbles of s massacred thousands of Americans.
Why this place?
A) To thumb their nose at Americans and at the families of the victims and
B) To send a message to the Islamic world celebrating the victory of Islam over the “Great Satan.”
This mosque will have a huge symbolic significance for Muslims. It would encourage them to enlist in jihad and make the ultimate objective of Islam, namely world domination, come true.
Rauf is not a man of peace. He has made very inflammatory comments, such as “one man’s terrorist is another man's hero” in support of Islamic terrorist organizations.
In an article entitled, "Sharing The Essence Of Our Beliefs," published in the Al-Ghad Newspaper in Jordan, 5/9/2009, translated by Walid Shoebat, Rauf wrote:
If someone in the Middle East cries out, “where is the law”, he knows that the law exists. The only law that the Muslim needs exists already in the Koran and the Hadith.
People asked me right after the 9/11 attack as to why do movements with political agendas carry [Islamic] religious names? Why call it ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ or ‘Hezbollah (Party of Allah)’ or ‘Hamas’ or ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’? I answer them this—that the trend towards Islamic law and justice begins in religious movements, because secularism has failed to deliver what the Muslim wants, which is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Rauf is not talking about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all the people. In Islam, these are only the rights of Muslims. Non-Muslims must suffer defeat, ignominy and dhimmitude.
Follow the Money Trail
Why would Mayor Bloomberg and the majority of the council members of the New York City support such a controversial project? Didn't they think this is an insult to the family of victims and every patriotic American? The answer is, follow the money trail.
I am not accusing anyone, but my hunch tells me to be suspicious of anyone, who strongly defends Islamic interests over the interests of his own country.
The Saudis and the Iranian regime spend large sums of money buying the loyalty of politicians and academicians in the West. US congressman Mark D. Siljander comes to mind as an example. He began his career as a zealous evangelical Christian and then went on to write a book, A Deadly Misunderstanding, to "bridge the Muslim-Christian divide". He argued that Christian and Muslim religious texts are surprisingly compatible, when studied in their original languages. This is, of course, a blatant lie. The truth came out on July 7, 2010, when Siljander pleaded guilty to two counts of receiving money from Muslims and supporting Muslim terrorists. He was indicted in January 2008 on charges of money laundering, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.
Throughout history, Islamic forces have deceived their victims, making them think Islam and Muslims are peace-loving, only later to find the opposite. Another example of this deception/treason happened in A.D. 635 when Damascus fell to Muslims, because they deceived and bought its Bishop, who opened the city gates at night.
While not all politicians, who defend Islam's advance in the West in one guise or another, may be bought with money, New York Mayor Bloomberg and his cohort, who supported the Cordoba project in the name of being American, should also know that it is more American to defend the American Constitution against any creeping alien ideology, the adherents of which do not hide their intention to bring down America and "sabotage its miserable house". What is un-American is to open the gates of the country to its sworn enemies. Whatever is the Mayor's mativation behind his support for the Ground Zero Mosque project, support for subversive Islamists and their agenda against the interests of America constitutes treason.
