3 Reasons the Ground Zero Mosque Debate Makes No Sense
I don't usually write about politics. It's important, but something I want no part of - kind of like a raw sewage treatment facility. But frankly, I haven't been this upset in a long time. And it's due to the logic-hating, herd-mentality rhetoric that some have been flinging in opposition to the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque." For the uninitiated, there are plans to construct an Islamic community center in lower Manhattan. And, of course, lower Manhattan is where the World Trade Center stood before terrorists destroyed it, thereby murdering 3,000 Americans. I was working in New York City at the time. As was my father. As was my pregnant wife. I remember the day well. And the days that followed. I think most of all, I remember standing on the Staten Island Ferry, coming home with 200 other silent, reverent New Yorkers of every age, race, and religion, as we watched our city still smoldering a full week later. And it is with this backdrop that I can say to every politician spouting off and opposing the construction of this Islamic community center: "Shut up. Go away. You hate America."
I'm talking about people like professional political tumor, Newt Gingrich, and future worst President ever, Sarah Palin, who have both slammed supporters of the Islamic community center with rhetoric so flawed, I'm afraid even linking to it might impair your computer's higher functioning circuits. But it's not just them. Due to the wave of misinformation being spread, apparently 68% of Americans also oppose the mosque.
How did this happen? Well, basically a complacent or a complicit media helped perpetuate three ideas that are either outright lies or intellectually dishonest arguments designed to bring out the very worst in all of us. And as you continue to hear them--and you will--take out this column which you will have already printed and laminated, and recite thusly:
1. It's Not at Ground Zero
The proposed structure is not on the hallowed ground of the former World Trade Center. It's at an abandoned and private building blocks away that used to be the Burlington Coat Factory. That means that if every one of the "g's" that Sarah Palin drops when she's talkin' folksy were 10 by10 feet large, you could still stack over 120 of them from Ground Zero to this community center. Easy.
That sort of makes all the difference, doesn't it? I know, when I first heard they were building a mosque at Ground Zero, I literally said, "What the fuck." Like out loud and everything. I didn't even pull a "WTF" despite years of writing for the Internet. That's because for the last nine years, we New Yorkers have listened to countless proposals and plans and ideas of how to best rebuild the area while honoring the memories of those who died. And suddenly it seemed we were being told, "Yep, it's all decided. Mosque. We want a mosque here. Just feels right."
So yeah, of course, no one was on board. That just made no sense. What happened to that proposed waterfall and wall of names? Nothing happened. Because no one was ever building a mosque on that site. It's just a lie that was told to you by people who wanted you to be afraid, upset, and hurt. People who wanted to manipulate your tender emotions to inspire contempt for the government. It's about as intellectually dishonest as manipulating debate footage to make it appear that "Drill, baby, drill" is Sarah Palin's stance on partial birth abortions. It's just wrong.
And to those who say that any location in lower Manhattan is too close for a Muslim structure, let me remind you that right now, in the shadow of what would be the former World Trade Center, there's a Halal Meat Hot Truck with a multi-denominational line that wraps around my building every day at lunch time. And I'm positive that's owned by a Muslim. And I've even suffered at his hands. (Spoiler alert: avoid the goat rhoti). Should he move a few more blocks away too? Of course, not. That would just be silly, right? Is it different? Why? Because mosques are religious and the 911 terrorists perverted Islam into something violent and hateful? Guess what? Those knights did the same thing to Christianity for the 300 years of the Crusades, and no one's saying that churches shouldn't be built anywhere in … Europe.
2. It's Not Strictly A Mosque
A mosque by definition is a purely religious structure. This is a large proposed community center, open to the public and set to house, among other things, a basketball court. Yes there will be a prayer space inside it as well, but you don't call St. Mary's Hospital a church because it happens to have a chapel inside it, do you? Well, maybe you do. You read about politics on the Internet from a guy who claims not to write about politics, so maybe you're functionally illiterate. But the point is, you shouldn't.
But "Islamic Community Center open to the public" doesn't have the same ability to scare people the way "mosque" does. I mean, you hear "mosque" you think mosquito, you think STING! You hear "mosque" you think "mask," you think DECEPTION! You hear "community center" you think "OK. One more place I'll never go." So, yeah, clearly the decision was made by those who hate you to call this the "Ground Zero Mosque" even though it's not at Ground Zero and not technically a mosque. Why are we still discussing this? Why haven't you already asked Sarah Palin if she's the devil on her Twitter account? Oh, that's right. Because the devil is supposed to be good at lying.
3. You Can't Simultaneously Acknowledge A Right And Insist That Your Government Suppress It
But the real reason I'm writing is not just because of people like Sarah Palin, but because of shameful, spineless panderers like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Here's a statement from each of them designed to give the appearance of being tolerant while adhering to good old-fashioned common sense values:
From Sarah Palin's Twitter Feed:
"We all know that they have the right to do it, but should they?"
And from Harry Reid's spokesperson:
Let me make something clear. In order to make these statements you must hate two things: logic and America. There is NO way to say that an individual has a protected right to do something and simultaneously criticize your government for not suppressing the execution of that right. There is no way for President Obama or any other president to put a stumbling block in the way of the free exercise of religion without violating the sanctity of that freedom. Should I say it more simply? OK.
You can't legally stop people from obeying the law.
The Burlington Coat factory is private property. Those who want to build on it are private citizens. They are violating no law in wanting to build a community center. Under what authority do you propose we stop them? There is no "unless you're a Muslim within X yards of a national tragedy exception" to the free exercise of religion. Do the Gingrichs and Palins and Reids want to start a precedent where you can compel people not to exercise the freedoms guaranteed under our Constitution provided enough people don't like you?
And what are we saying to Muslims? That if they were good Americans they would willingly give up their rights? I can't think of anything less American than that? This is America. We do what we want. And all you have to do to have that right is be a citizen here. And if you're a traitor, well then we will prosecute you for treason and penalize you for taking up arms against the greatest country in the world, but we will NOT start curtailing your freedoms based on mere speculation fueled by lies about what you're building and where you're building it.
In the days following 911 it was very popular to say that we couldn't do anything differently in America or "the terrorists would win." We can't stop driving gas guzzling cars. We can't stop supporting dictators in other parts of the world for financial or political gain. We can't vote for a Democrat. Most of that was rhetoric. Some of it was probably true. But one thing is definitely true: if we ask our leaders to start dishonoring the freedoms that make this country great, the terrorists surely will have won. And I don't want to see that. Because unlike those with power and influence who would lie to you, I love America.
Subscribe to Gladstone's Hate By Numbers site or free iTunes download. You can also follow him on Twitter and snatch up the few remaining friends places on Facebook now that he just lost about 50 Sarah Palin fans. Or become a fan on Facebook. Or you can check out the rare occasions he does get political, sorta.
it's ironic because under this article on my page was an Ann Coulter ad.
ReplyWell said. Thank you.
ReplyThis grouund is sancrosanct. It needs to be marked by a memorial that will remind people to never let it happen again. A mosque is a symbol of Islam, and, thus, would remind people that of the why, what, and how, and the consequences of allowing this military organiization to masquerade as a religion and go unchecked.
ReplyBut what was the REAL cause? To get to the absolute core, there's a better memorial for the spot with an even more acute sense of the why, what and how. A liquor store. Every customer buying a bottle would do so knowing his experience that night will make him absolutely aware to never elect another drunk as President..
Did you even read the article?
It's pro mosque. Did you even read my response. I'm on board with the mosque thing on the crash site since it would remind peope that the cause is not with some fringe wing of butt stuckees, but the fact tht anyone would want to stick their head in whatever butt the corpse of 7th century Arabia's cross between Jesse James, Adof Hitler, and that pedo who shows up naked with a bottle in one hand and a condom in the oter on that Pedator tv show still has.
But everyone already KNOWS that Muslims (meaning a Muslim, that Muslim, this Muslim, AL Muslims, or let's put it this way, anyone who subscribes to that sheethead) plan to destroy life as we know it on this planet.. What enables them to go about their happy little lives is that they DO NOT ELECT ANOTHER DRUNK TO LEAD THE FREE WORLD.
Made that mistake once which is why we're havin this discussion.
GO ALL THE WAY.
A liquor store.
Never again..
...
I agree with all of this except the last sentence here:
Reply"We can't stop driving gas guzzling cars. We can't stop supporting dictators in other parts of the world for financial or political gain. We can't vote for a Democrat. Most of that was rhetoric. Some of it was probably true."
Great article, just that last part made me a bit uncomfortable.
I don't like the idea of a mosque at ground zero, but it's constitutionally permissible. The argument dies there.
ReplyThe "It's not strictly a mosque" doesn't carry a lot of weight though. Many mosques are publically referred to "Islamic Cultural Centers".
Do most mosques have a basketball court? It's a community center.
Bring up sensitive issues, you can see a lot of idiots that has no idea that they are being brainwashed by their source, haters that should check up their own religion, and of course the third party.
ReplyY'know, nowhere does the article offer any explicit evidence of opponents of the mosque actually trying to use legal/legislative means to ban its construction. It is not a logical contradiction at all for Sarah Palin to acknowledge the right to build it, while questioning the appropriateness. I would not be at all surprised if there are examples of conservatives advocating legal action (beyond things like petitions), but I would like to see some concrete examples, because I've had a tough time finding any. I DO think it's distasteful to build something so explicit right next to ground zero. Yes they have the right to do so if they choose. I don't have to agree that they were exercising good judgement.
ReplyWhat's your definition of 'right next to'? It's two blocks away.
Americans just need to get over 9/11. You can't get over losing someone to it, but you can at least move past the event itself.
ReplyWe will never forget.
1) The proposed site is condemned because of damage sustained in the attack.
Reply2) Google ground zero rabat:
The Prophet imposed his rule on parts of Arabia through a series of ghazvas, or razzias (the origin of the English word "raid"). The ghazva was designed to terrorize the infidels, convince them that their civilization was doomed and force them to submit to Islamic rule. Those who participated in the ghazva were known as the ghazis, or raiders.
After each ghazva, the Prophet ordered the creation of a rabat -- or a point of contact at the heart of the infidel territory raided. The rabat consisted of an area for prayer, a section for the raiders to eat and rest and facilities to train and prepare for future razzias. Later Muslim rulers used the tactic of ghazva to conquer territory in the Persian and Byzantine empires. After each raid, they built a rabat to prepare for the next razzia.
3) I agree, but please know what you're talking about.
1.) It's still not "ground zero"; people need to get that through their heads,
2.) Don't really care; historical accuracy rarely comes into play with pleas of emotional BS,
3.) Agreed.
Yes, apologists rarely care about historical accuracy or reality.
Just because the constitution allows it doesn't mean it is acceptable. What I put a sign in my front yard saying Muhammad is a dick sucker?
ReplyThen you're exercising free speech?
3 reasons your points are wrong.
Reply Hide All See All 5 Replies1) It is at Ground Zero. The building in question was hit by the landing gear of one of the planes on 9-11, for crying out freaking loud! How much more do you need???
2) In the Middle East mosques are also more than just mosques. They are also often the schools, clinics, gymnasiums, and even marketplaces of the town. It's nothing new for a mosque to be more than a mosque...it's been going on for centuries.
3) There is no such thing as absolute freedom of religion. Suppose you want to revive the Aztec religion and start sacrificing virgins...well, let's just say even the ACLU won't help you out on that one. Back in the 70's, people tried calling their homes 'churches" or "monestaries" after being ordained by the mail order "Universal Life Church", and thus they wanted their homes to be tax exempt. The IRS was so impressed that it threw all those people into prison. Likewise, there was a husband and wife team who started a religion where the man's wife was a "priestess" who had sex with male followers for a "donation". They're in jail too, because the government calls it "prostitution". Just as Oliver Wendell Holmes decided there were limits to fee speech, they also decided there are limits to freedom of religion.
Furthermore, there are several Muslim groups smarter than the writers of Cracked, and realize the mosque is merely being built to be provocative. Many liberal Muslims have spoken out in opposition to the building of the Park 51 mosque. The former Miss USA, Rami Fakih, GOP activists David Ramadan, Sherine El-Abd, Randa Fahmy Hudome, George Salem, Suhail Khan, Samah A. Norquist, Akbar Ahmed, Professor of Islamic Studies at American University in Washington, Zuhdi Jasser, and President of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, are some Muslims opposed to the Ground Zero Mosque. In an official letter to Imam Rauf, the Muslim Canadian Congress stated, “Many Muslims suspect that the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation, to thumb our noses at the ‘infidel.’ We believe the proposal has been made in bad faith and, in Islamic parlance, is creating ‘fitna,’ meaning ‘mischief-making,’ an act clearly forbidden in the Qur’an.”
All you have to is ask yourself this question: Why can't they build it somewhere else?
Then, look at history for the answer: The Dome of The Rock was built on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Why did it have to be built there?
The Church of Saint Sophia in Istanbul...why was it turned into a mosque? Why? because there is a tradition in Islam of building a mosque on the sacred ground of a defeated enemy. Liberal Muslims see the GZM as such, so who are we to argue?
It is not Ground Zero. Ground Zero is the site of the Twin Towers, not wherever a plane part hit. Nobody looks at the site of landing gear damage and cries.
It doesn't matter if it is a mosque anyway. People have the right to worship wherever they goddamn want, regardless of whether a few extremists kill people in the name of their religion.
Absolute freedom of religion exists outside of actually breaking the law. Freedom of religion does not mean tax exempt status.
If a Muslim family worshiped and lived near Ground Zero, or a man prayed to Allah at work near there, would you ask them to move? No, of course not. As long as you don't believe that all Muslims were behind terrorism, the "mosque" shouldn't hurt you. If you DO think that all Muslims are terrorists, then you are an ignorant bigot.
You're a f*****g idiot.
1) Ground Zero, in the colloquial sense, is where the twin towers stood. Nobody even really gives a s**t about WT7 in the media; as far as the vast majority of the American populace knows, Ground Zero is the remains of the two major towers.
2) And... your point is? Thanks for pointing out that mosques serve many functions, the same way many churches do. There's this concept that a church can be anything, but a mosque is invariably a terrorist factory, full of prayer, kneeling, and goddamned towel-headed arab muslim marxist terrorists making pipe bombs and screaming war cries while firing AK-47s into the air. In reality, a mosque is a church where Islam is taught.
3) The Aztec religion is completely supported under freedom of religion, up and until it infringes on OTHER people's rights. You can worship a sun god and preach to sacrifice people (although then you get into hate speech and inciting violence), but unless and until you do it, you're 100% protected. Furthermore, the mosque is not being built to be provocative. They didn't pull advertisements and walk around handing out fliers that say "Hey we're building a mosque to show how we conquered you and killed thousands of citizens! Come on opening day! First 747 customers get a free airline blanket soaked in the blood of infidels!" That would be provocative.
I'll spell this out for you.
They're a private organization,
buying private property,
to do whatever they f**k they want with,
completely within the scope of the law,
and you need to f**k off.
In the case of #1, you may as well say all of lower Manhattan is part of ground zero...
It's a pointless argument you made, it really truly is.
As for "building it somewhere else," have you ever been to nyc? Trying to buy property seems like a difficult task since it is a pretty damn crowded city....
Let's put one myth to bed right now. (I'll ignore the nonsense about a supposed landing gear bounce, as if every place touched by debris or dust in Lower Manhattan counts as "Ground Zero.")
Islam does not have a tradition of "building a mosque on the sacred ground of a defeated enemy." The Dome of the Rock was built on the site where Muslims believe Muhammad ascended to Heaven. Hagia Sophia is an even sillier example. It wasn't built as a mosque. It's a mosque for the same reason a vast number of churches across Europe (e.g., St. Stephen's in Vienna) are Christian and not pagan: When the area was converted to a new religion, existing religious structures were simply appropriated. For your examples to work, you'd have to be arguing that the community is celebrating a victory over coats.
The list of supporters for the project among 9/11 families and prominent Christians far outweighs your list of detractors. As for "Why can't they build somewhere else?" have you ever tried to ... no, it's too ridiculous. Even I can't sink to that level.
What is really sad is the author even provided a neat little map outlining the where the premise of the of WTC were (and what constitutes GZ) and where the mosque is.
If building a mosque on top of (or just freaking near) ground zero isn't an attack by Muslims onto Christians, then why not build a Christian Church smack dab in the middle of Mecca right onto their "Holy Ground"? If this shouldn't be considered an advance against Christianity, then neither should that be considered an attack on Muslims. Point is, you people thinking studying books and having friends that are Muslim makes you tolerant actually makes you ignorant. Open your f*****g eyes and stop being afraid to stand for what's right. For Christ's sake, your Americans. Doesn't mean you have to be Christian. Just remember, if you're even the slightest patriotic, what this nation stands on. If you don't like that then you can move to an "Islamic" territory in the Middle-East and see how tolerant they are of you.
Reply Hide All See All 5 RepliesAmerican does not mean christian. The first amendment to the constitution guarantees that we can have religious freedom. On the other hand, I don't think Saudi Arabia has laws like that, and a ton more of Islam is based on Mecca than Christianity is based on the WTC. YOU need to be more tolerant, and actually understand what this country is based on. Meanwhile, understand that it's not Islam itself that made the attack, just extremists. Don't define a group by the people who distort it.
So because you're clearly prejudiced and misinformed means they don't deserve to have the same rights as the rest of us?
You know what's really un-american? telling people to leave America if they disagree with you. f**k off fascist.
they don't build churches in mecca for the same reason there aren't mosques in the vatican city. I just wouldn't make sense. And secondly, the muslims aren't all terrorists the same way christians aren't all WBC pedophiliac clansmen. And thirdly, just because many islamic countres aren't tolerant doesn't make it ok to do the same thing. If you really want to be patriotic uphold and defend the constitution and american ideals of religious freedom.
I frankly don't give two flying kung-fu fucks how tolerance works in the Mid-East; I'm American, live in America, and reside in a multicultural country. Anyone stomping on the religious freedoms of another minority in this country means it can happen to me, and I have a serious problem with that.
I guess you could've hid your opinion in a couple of layers of humor. I know, it can be hard but you gotta try. Don't worry, you'll get it next time...
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesYes, I know you had a joke or two but it wasn't enough. Whenever you write an article for Cracked you need to make the opposite side laugh too, not just the proverbial choir.
but people who oppose this center are ignorant, bigots or both. f**k making them laugh.
When the other side is composed of bigoted assholes, you don't need to make them laugh. You need to laugh at them for their ignorance.
Best username ever.
Gladstone, I totally agree with you. I do admit that, since 9/11, Muslims make me nervous, but that's MY hang-up. It's a bit racist and wrong and I know that, but I can't help it. But that is NO excuse to treat muslims badly or take away their rights. It's the same reason that putting up with the idiocy of the Klan or skin heads is necessary. If you start imposing your preferences onto others' rights/freedoms/actions, then others will eventually have a problem with yours and do the same thing. Good on ya, man!
ReplyActually, it isn't even a little bit racist because Muslim isn't a race.
Read the koran and you will see how its ok to lie (like being peaceful) to you enemies!
Reply Hide All See All 7 RepliesAre you SURE you read the Koran? The way I see it, you seem to be full of crap. Let me explain. I'm taking a religion of Islam class right now, and we actually just learned (and read both Surah and "sound" Hadith supporting this idea) that it's actually a HUGE sin if you lie at ALL if you're a Muslim. For Christ's sake, you can't even talk about someone when that person isn't in the room, and spreading gossip is pretty much one of the worst sins that you can do, ever. Lying is a sin, and it's not something a Muslim would do. On your 'being peaceful' part, I'm sure you (and other people reading this) are thinking about jihad, so I'll just explain what the word literally means and what contexts it is used in. The literal meaning of the word means "to struggle", and it is used to mean the "struggle" to control yourself and your desires so that you can become a better Muslim. Now, there are generally two types of jihad. One is the 'greater' jihad, which is a Muslim's personal struggle to become a better Muslim. The other is called a 'lesser' jihad, which is a Muslim's struggle to establish a place where they can worship freely. Now, considering that in most countries (especially in the US) in the world Muslims have the right to practice their religion without fear of prosecution, there is no need for the 'lesser' jihad. Since Muslims can practice their faith, there is literally ZERO REASON for them to be anything OTHER than peaceful! Also, just as a side note, we just read some of the verses that talk about jihad, and at no point is a Muslim allowed to kill women, children, or other Muslims, just to clear up another common misconception.
BTW, I'm an eighteen-year-old college White student and am not Muslim (in case someone out there in teh interwebs thinks that I'm biased or something).
Oh my god qwertyus do you need any more of a paragraph?
So that means that anyone who says they're a muslim means they shouldn't have the right to exercise freedom of religion...?
qwertyus- Ask your professor about taqiyya and kitman, and which one is flat out lying and which is lying by omission e.g. leaving out the part about Muslims only being forbidden to lie to Muslims, unless it's to "smooth over feelings" (polite white-lies).
Suggested reading, before accusing others of not reading:
Qur'an (16:106)(3:28)(9:3)(40:28)(2:225)(66:2)(3:54)
Bukhari (52:269)(49:857)(84:64-65)(50:369)
Hint: When Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills "it shall be as if he had killed all mankind") while leaving out the preface that clearly states that this is a threat to Jews, not a commandment to Muslims, it's kitman.
"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land."
Every time someone tells me to "read the Koran" I 1) ask if THEY have even read it, or just believe the bullshit of some talking head and 2)Have they even read THE BIBLE? Do you realize how much fucked up s**t is in that? According to the Bible I should stone you to death if you eat shellfish for f**k sake.
oh yeah, and the bible is full of peace...
Uh, Taqqyia is a well established concept under sharia law stating that a muslim can, in extreme circumstances, lie and even live like an infidel as part of some sort of greater good (saving some innocent person or fighting an enemy). Rickzan was being hyperbolic in his comment, but he is fundamentally correct. I rather doubt that there are too many muslims in America doing this.
Personally I think Muslims should go where they can practice sharia law, not bring it over here where we don't allow killing your family member for what ever reason. God Bless America!
Reply Hide All See All 8 RepliesAnd almost no Muslims actually want that practice in America
You have zero concept of how reality works. The vast majority of Muslims are not practitioners of Sharia Law. Of course, those are the ones that are quietly going about their business, building active, productive and peaceful lives so they don't make the news or give Glenn "I'm f*****g Insane" Beck something to cry about on television.
well Christianity should be kicked out as well.....don't tell me u forgot the verse leviticus 20:13 "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death".......at least in Islam we don't kill them, rather we try to help them.....i think native Americans would agree with me, oh wait, yeah u killed and massacred them, will i guess u should be kicked out as well.
And yet not every single Muslim in the world wants to follow sharia law.
Many Muslims that come here do it to ESCAPE sharia law, and want a better future for their kids... especially the girls. You can worship Islam and not support sharia law, same as you can be a Christian and not feel the country should be ruled by Christianity.
Actually, the Bible does support killing your family. In fact, it explicitly tells you that you SHOULD. It also tells you to sell them into slavery.
Read Leviticus.
Do you read the Daily Mail?
AhmadHabashneh- There was an addendum to the Bible, perhaps you've heard of it, The New Testament? It had a lot to do with the teachings of the guy they named Christianity after, and the changes that were made:
For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
1Timothy 4:4-5
i dont why people have a problem with a mosque(or community center)being built near a vacant spot that once held the twin towers. i mean serioulsy in 2001 there was an islamic school built right nxt to the building and the school, teachers, and students were killed on 9/11. there were also employees who worked in the world trade center.just because one horrible muslim did a evil thing mean we should all believe all muslims are all the same, its like me saying all atheist astralians are horrible people and like to fry jews just because hitler(who was also an atheist astralian)fried and tortured jewish people. we need to the past behind and live for tomorrow because life is short and let different religons do what makes them happy. how would you like it if they made catholics burn their church just because they feel like it and they say you have rights but just not this one
Reply Hide All See All 5 Repliesaustrian you dumbass, hitler was austrian ad not an atheist he was raised roman catholic
I'm not sure if I should give you a thumbs down for being a dumbass or a thumbs up for having the right basic idea.
Atheist Australian... I am satisfied, I can go to sleep.
Actually Hitler wasn't an atheist, but alright keep believing lies. Oh and he was Austrian, not Australian.. there IS a difference you know.
Hitler was agnostic, at most, Nietzschean, at least. He was raised Catholic, but make no mistake, Christianity was next on his list for destruction. Any tolerance of Christianity by Hitler was purely political or for propaganda. He preferred Norse religion and occultism. Even that was propaganda(remember the whole blonde hair blue eyes thing?)and practicality. ("I hope this spell really works")
Hitler couldn't stand a religion based on worshiping a Rabbi who put a new spin on Judaism. He had elaborate plans to rewrite the Bible, to incorporate Norse legends and claim that Jesus was Norse.
"You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion...The Mohammedan religion (Islam) too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" Adolf Hitler - August 28, 1942
p. 96Inside the Third Reich: memoirs By Albert Speer
Honestly, the extremists could buy ground zero, build a collaspible building, complete with figurines jumping from the buildings...
ReplyAnd though I would find it offensive,I believe freedom of expression truimphs feelings.I have the right to beoffended, not theright not to be offended...
I'm actually scared now to scroll down and look at the comments.
ReplyConsidering Sarah Palin is A. against individual liberty and freedom, and B. uneducated in American politics and history, it's no surprise she'd claim what she did.
Reply