Ground Zero cry from the heart: "It means something to be close to where my mother may be buried, it brings some peace"

"As if anticipating the left's insidious attempts to steal their fire — by turning their sacred precinct into an anti-American bully pulpit — the angry gods of Ground Zero blew up a sandstorm of warning on the one-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks," we wrote in our June 2005 post "The grave robbers of Ground Zero." A leftist "tolerance" museum was on the table then. Now it's a left-sanctioned "Islamic center" that sticks in the craw of a lot of our fellow Americans, who sense yet another insidious attempt by our "betters" to hijack what we now recognize as "the narrative." (Merlin-Net Photo)

"I have always been moved by the site; it means something to be close to where my mother may be buried, it brings some peace," writes Neda Blourchi, a Muslim who lost her mother to Jihadist terrorism on 9/11 in a WaPo op ed:

I was born in pre-revolutionary Iran. My family led a largely secular existence — I did not attend a religious school, I never wore a headscarf but for us, as for anyone there, Islam was part of our heritage, our culture, our entire lives. Though I have nothing but contempt for the fanaticism that propelled the terrorists to carry out their murderous attacks on Sept. 11, I still have great respect for the faith. Yet, I worry that the construction of the Cordoba House Islamic cultural center near the World Trade Center site would not promote tolerance or understanding; I fear it would become a symbol of victory for militant Muslims around the world.

 

"Looks like a surgical covering leaving only the part to be operated upon exposed: Eyes the windows to the soul," we twittered Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs this afternoon in response to our Sistah Grizzly's latest post "Cultural Jihad: Burka Couture Coming to a Department Store Near You."

Head cheerleader for the p.c. kumbaya narrative Mayor Michael Bloomberg is having none of it:

We would betray our values and play into our enemies' hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else.

Oh, what a slippery slope we trod when first we practice to defraud. Well, it rhymed, but of course it's not fraud so much as self-delusion, the stock-in-trade of our fellow Americans on the "unconstrained vision" side of the aisle. Evan Sayet got it just right in his Big Hollywood debut back in January of 2009, as we blogged in our post "The look of love":

The “culture war” that we hear so much about is, to borrow Thomas Sowell’s phrase, a “conflict of visions.” Visions, Sowell explains, go deeper than mere policy – in fact they are the font of where we stand on the issues – and they are founded on some of the most basic and fundamental beliefs the individual holds about the nature of man and, in turn, the role and purpose of government, family, religion and all other influential forces that society has evolved. Sowell called the conflicting visions the “Constrained” and the “Unconstrained” and offered Jean Jacques Rousseau and Adam Smith as primary examples of the visions in conflict [as we are forever blogging here] …

Sowell recognizes that, at its most basic level, this conflict of visions revolves around what one believes to be man’s innate nature. Is it, as the Neo-Liberal believes, that man is born good and then corrupted by the institutions of society or, do the Conservatives have it right and man is born with a dual and conflicting nature — capable of good and evil and everything in between — requiring cultural forces to help him tamp down the darker side and cultivate the good within?

In case you weren't sure what side of the narrative to come down upon, Time gives you a few linguistic nudges: Mayor Bloomberg "spoke passionately" in support of a proposed mosque near Ground Zero, while his predecessor Rudy Giuliani "claimed" the project would be a "desecration." Time goes on to call dissidence "Islamophobia." Journolisticoid proselytizer Mehdi Hasan at the UK's Guardian picks up the ball and runs with it:

Outraged rightwing protesters have spent several months trying to block the construction of what they call the Ground Zero mosque, claiming it is an "insult" to the victims and a "victory" for the terrorists.

Ignorance and bigotry abounds. Cordoba House is not a mosque but a cultural centre, which will include a prayer area, sports facilities, theatre and restaurant. The aim of the project is to promote "integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion … a place where individuals, regardless of their backgrounds, will find a centre of learning, art and culture". Nor is it being built at Ground Zero. The proposed site is two blocks to the north.

Why can't we all just get along?

Update: Michelle Malkin "Buzzworthy" link!

Update II: Trending on Memeorandum.

Crossposted at Riehl World View and Liberty Pundits.

Comments

[goomp]

Sad to say it just ain't human nature to get along. Wars between conflicting societies have been constant since the begining of time, and the best chance of change is in free societies such as the founding fathers advocated.

[Teresa]

What I love is when they try to say it's somehow not allowing Muslims to worship if this "Center" is not built.

Gee really? At what point is "we don't want it in this spot! The same as not allowing a religion to worship???

I'll give them this - they create their lies and then stay on message. If nothing else they are tenacious.

[Teresa]

Perhaps we should ask one of the Christian religions if they want to build a Cathedral like structure right next door... will the openness continue? Will they want to include say... a Catholic Cathedral or even a large Pentecostal Church as a neighbor?