Muslim

Ground Zero Mosque and the Questions Surrounding It

August 13, 2010 by Daniel

There are a lot of things being said about the Ground Zero Mosque. Should it stay, or should it go? Answering that question all depends on who you ask.

You see, there are many that say it should absolutely go. And their reason is based on an emotional one. With many people agreeing, yes, it is symbolically a slap in the face. But mainly because of who is leading the movement.

If it was a moderate, yet compassionate Muslim leading the effort, people would probably be okay with the idea of having this mosque only two blocks from ground zero. But, with this Imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, there are far too many questions surrounding him and his cause.

As parents always tell their children, “It’s not what’s on the outside, it’s what’s on the inside that counts.” And how true that is. It’s what is going to go on inside that will count. Which is one of the many questions that have people debating this mosque.

There are three main things that are on the minds of people:

Who is Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf?
Where will the money come from to build it?
What will be taught inside?

Ground Zero Mosque; Religious Toleration or Intoleration?

August 9, 2010 by Daniel

There is a great deal of attention being placed on the proposed Ground Zero Mosque, and if it should or shouldn’t be. However, debate on the foundation of religious toleration is where attention should be focused.

Playing on the emotions of Americans, is the idea of building the GZ Mosque. Still feeling and seeing the aftermath of the fall of the twin towers is where people are allowing confusions and emotions to play into the formulation of opinions. And, while that is not wrong, it isn’t right either.

Even the Founding Fathers debated heavily on this very subject, and in so much that the Statue of Libertycries, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” That’s it. At the end, there is no addition that says, “except Muslims.”

The Anti-Federalists proposed, during the Virginia Convention on June 27, 1788 when debating a proposed Bill of Rights:

That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only be reasopn and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefor all men have an equal, natural, and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and that no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established, by law, in preference to others.

However, toleration could lead to intoleration when supposed that the religious belief of one leads to the harm of another. Case in point, the ludicrous act of the events on 9-11. Waged in a ‘holy war’ on the West, Muslim followers – carried out on religious belief – were in cause of harm to another. At which point, when a nation of tolerant people became intolerant.

In echoing the sentiments of the Founding Fathers, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said recently in an address:

The simple fact is this building is private property, and the owners have a right to use the building as a house of worship.The government has no right whatsoever to deny that right – and if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question – should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion? That may happen in other countries, but we should never allow it to happen here. This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions, or favor one over another.

A nation founded on the idea of freedom of religion, America has been tolerant to those welcomed in her arms. And, America must continue to show mercy, compassion and tolerance to those of the Muslim faith. However, when the constraints of the Muslim faith place harm on others by claim of ‘religious laws’ in the form of Sharia Law, caution must still be a leading factor.

NASA’s Muslim Mission to Space

July 5, 2010 by Daniel

It seems that everywhere you turn, Muslims are turning up and making a stand. And, while that isn’t necessarily a bad idea, is it one that could lead to another crisis?

With the notion of playing on people’s fears and teetering on the idea of a conspiracy, people of the Muslim community have shown their face at every national crisis.

The crotch bomber: Muslim. The Ft. Hood shooter: Muslim. Do you see a repeating theme? In every instance, Muslims have been there.

So why would the administration want to endanger the International Space Station and even more lives? Who knows what they have in store anymore.

FoxNews | NASA Chief: Next Frontier Better Relations With Muslim World

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said in a recent interview that his “foremost” mission as the head of America’s space exploration agency is to improve relations with the Muslim world.

Though international diplomacy would seem well outside NASA’s orbit, Bolden said in an interview with Al Jazeera that strengthening those ties was among the top tasks President Obama assigned him. He said better interaction with the Muslim world would ultimately advance space travel.

“When I became the NASA administrator — or before I became the NASA administrator — he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science … and math and engineering,” Bolden said in the interview.

The Tragedy at Ft. Hood on More Than One Front

November 7, 2009 by Daniel

There is no denying that what happened the other day at Ft. Hood was a tragedy. However, it is the underlying issues that face this a tragedy on more than one front.

Ask anyone and they will tell you that their thoughts and prayers are with those who have lost a loved one and also with those who were injured by this act of terrorism. But most people, especially those in the media, will say that is where this ends. But it doesn’t.

As said before, this is a multi-faced tragedy. The media is trying to portray Nidal Malik Hasan as the enraged victim. The only way he is the victim is that he was shot in order to stop the assault. Now he is laying in intensive care, probably against his jihadist wishes, hooked to a life-saving ventilator.

You see, that is where the line gets fuzzy with many people. That being referring to Hasan as what he really is, a radical Muslim extremist. To deny that fact would be to deny that those 13 people didn’t die by gun shot.

Fox News – Witnesses to Fort Hood Shootings Tell Tales of Horror, Heroism

As a psychiatrist, Hasan, 39, had listened to soldiers’ tales of horror. Now, the American-born Muslim was facing imminent deployment to Afghanistan. In recent days, Hasan had been saying goodbye to friends. He had given away many of his possessions, including copies of the Holy Koran.

At 2:37 a.m. Thursday and again around 5, Hasan called neighbor Willie Bell. Bell could normally hear Hasan’s morning prayers through the thin apartment walls, but Hasan skipped the ritual Thursday.

Bell didn’t pick up either time, but Hasan left a message.

“Nice knowing you, old friend,” Hasan said. “I’m going to miss you.”

About an hour later, surveillance cameras at a 7-Eleven across from the base captured images of a smiling Hasan, dressed in a long white garment and white kufi prayer cap, buying his usual breakfast — coffee and a hash brown.

At the processing center on the southern edge of the 100,000-acre base, soldiers returning from overseas mingled with colleagues filling out forms and undergoing medical tests in preparation for deployment.

Around 1:30 p.m., witnesses say a man later identified as Hasan jumped up on a desk and shouted the words “Allahu Akbar!” — Arabic for “God is great!” He was armed with two pistols, one a semiautomatic capable of firing up to 20 rounds without reloading.

So how does one go about making the claim of calling Hasan a Muslim extremist? Simple. Take a look again at the facts. He had obviously planned this attack, all be it small or large. He planned an attack. He was giving away his possessions. He was passing out copies of the Koran. Phone calls to some of those whom he felt most closest to at abnormal times in the middle of the night. Only a radical idealist would do this.

He is a devout and heavily practicing Muslim. That in itself is not extreme. The beauty of being an American is that you can freely practice whatever religion you want to. Same with Hasan. He freely studied being Muslim. What is extreme is climbing on a desk, guns in hands, and shouting “Allahu Akbar!” Granted, God is great, but radical Muslim extremists shout out “Allahu Akbar” when they begin their assault. Same as Hasan. He is a radical Muslim extremist.

Another front of this tradgety is that this attack happened on U.S. soil, on a military installation (Ft. Hood), by a U.S. soldier. Now the threat has been introduced to within the ranks of the U.S. military.

The Hill – Top GOP recruit says Ft. Hood shooting shows ‘enemy is infiltrating our military’

A top Republican congressional recruit said on Friday that the shooting at Ft. Hood, Texas yesterday by a solider allegedly sympathetic to suicide bombers shows that the “enemy is infiltrating our military.”

Allen West (R-Fla.), a retired military colonel who served as a commander at the Texas base, said in a release that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s attack may indicate a broader effort by Islamic extremists to recruit downtrodden members of the military.

“This enemy preys on downtrodden soldiers and teaches them extremism will lift them up,” West said in a statement. “Our soldiers are being brainwashed.”

The release added that West claims “the horrible tragedy at Fort Hood is proof the enemy is infiltrating our military.”

In Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, he says: “All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. . . Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.”

How true those ancient words are still relevant today. When near, seem far way; when unprepared, appear unexpected. To echo Mr. Allen West, this “is proof the enemy is infultrating our military.” Reguardless if Hasan was being teased about being Muslim, it is his being Muslim that opened him to the extreme “teachings” and “brainwashing” of our enemies. This does not give anyone the right to go on a murderous spree killing 13 fellow soldiers and wounding 30 more.

Even if Hasan was not contacted to act in this manner, it does not cancel the idea that he was acting on behalf of the extremist ideology. He had been red-flagged by the military for over six months. Also, in that same period of time, he was making comments on blog posts in a manner that showed his support for terrorism and the ideology that followed.

Another front of this tradgety is people again painting him the victim saying that he was suffering from Post Tramatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD) because he had been the psychiatrist for many returning soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan. Only one problem with that arguement. He NEVER served a tour in Iraq or Afghanistan, or any place else for that matter. How does one suffer from PTSD without ever serving in combat? Yes, he had heard a lot. Yes, he had seen soldiers in pain. Had he suffered? It is different. He didn’t suffer from PTSD. That sounds like more of a copout than truely addressing the real issue. He is a radical Muslim extremist!

To sum all of this up, he is a radical Muslim extremist. The media is waging a multi-faced front on the issue. Too many people are too concerned about labeling him for what he is. Let the facts speek for themselves. Nidal Malik Hasan: Radical Muslim Extremist!

For more commentary: