September 11, 2001

On this day, I'll remember all the people who perished on that fateful day 9 years ago in the World Trade Center buildings, fire fighters and policemen and volunteers who tried to save as many people as possible, and the families who lost their loved ones.

It should never have been about:

Koran burning,

Islam vs Christianity,

Ground-Zero mosque,

all of which seem to have been quickly foisted upon us just in time so that we forget what the day was about. It all started to accelerate when President Obama suddenly decided to speak out in favor of the Ground-Zero mosque/community center, citing, of all things, the US Constitution. Wag the dog.

It was the day that America as we knew died. Much like September 2008 when the financial system - lifeblood of a free market and thus of a free society - died. In a way, September 2008 financial market collapse was long-time coming; it was inevitable after the country had "died" seven years prior. For both deaths, we still don't know how they happened; hastily enacted measures have most likely made things worse, be it the Patriot Act, or the doubling of the Federal Reserve balance sheet and market intervention.

Instead of burning Koran, why don't they burn the symbol of oppression in the United States - the Patriot Act which was pressed on us immediately after 9/11 and which keeps on taking away our rights?

(Who is this pastor who wanted to burn Koran, anyway?)

To a small faction of the Christian opponents of the Ground Zero mosque who are confusing the radical Islam with the far more moderate form of Islam as practiced in many parts of the world (Indonesia and Malaysia come to mind as an excellent example - and they are smart too, for using gold coins): Do you know that the Koran venerates Jesus Christ?

And as for this Sufi imam who picked that site as his mosque/community center precisely because it is only two blocks away from the Ground Zero, as alleged by this blogger at Forbes, is it OK for him to be overtly provocative and insensitive just because he is a Muslim? (Or just because the US is occupying the Muslim countries?) Does it bother anyone that he is a regular at Davos meetings (World Economic Forum) and that his trips to Middle East have been paid for by the US government? A total insider approved by PTB (power that be)?

Tweet

Libertarians in Cahoots with Obama Admin and Call Mosque Opponents "Bigots" and "Racists"

and "Warmongers" and "Demagogues".

I have to say I'm disappointed.

This mosque/Muslim community center was pretty much a non-issue for people outside New York, until President Obama for some reason decided to step in and throw his support behind the project, citing, of all things, the Constitution.

It's most cynical of this president to base his support on the Constitution, when just about everything he has done since he became the president has been to further restrict citizens' rights under the Constitution and further expand the power of the government which was already huge under Bush and Clinton.

Now, people whose views and opinions I have respected, people like Lew Rockwell, Eric Magolis at Lewrockwell.com, Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com are almost gleefully calling the mosque opponents "bigots" and "racists" and "warmongers". Raimondo goes to ask the same question that George W. Bush asked ("Are you with us or against us?") by starting the article "Liberty against the lynch mob: which side are you on?" Ron Paul basically states we have to accept the mosque even if that's insensitive and objectionable to some people because of the grave injuries the US has caused over the years in Muslim countries, and calls the opponents "demagogue". (Ron Paul, as the result, is suddenly popular with liberal bloggers.) The American Conservative magazine had the article in the similar vein as Ron Paul.

I rarely have a serious objection to the opinions expressed at Lewrockwell.com or Antiwar.com, but this is one of the rare cases.

Extremely rare for them, they are in agreement with President Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and tell us that if we oppose the Muslim center and mosque within two blocks from the Ground Zero, we are bigots and racists and warmongers and demagogues.

Haven't we heard these words somewhere else?

Yes we have, and many times in the past year and a half. Anyone who dare oppose the Obama government policies have been called "racists" by the administration and its Democratic leadership and supporters. If you oppose Obamacare, you are racist; if you oppose climate change bill, you are racist; if you oppose stimulus spending, you are racist; if you oppose financial regulation bill, you are racist and dirty capitalist on top of it. And if you mention the president's middle name (Hussein), you are "bigot". That's how they've been calling the majority of Americans who oppose anything that the current government does: "racist" and "bigots".

According to a Rasmussen Poll, these bigots and racists and warmongers and demagogues make up 77% of mainstream Americans, in contrast to 68% of the political class in favor of the mosque.

Just like 56% of American voters want Obamacare repealed, 75% of them want the Federal Reserve audited. Majority support Arizona's immigration law, 72% oppose increase in government spending. And they oppose this particular mosque.

I am not ready nor prepared to call the majority who oppose this mosque "racists", "bigots", "warmongers", "demagogues" and to shame them into accepting what clearly doesn't sit well with them, if not downright repulsive.

What's different this time around is that people who throw these words at Americans who oppose include libertarians. Suddenly, in their eyes, President Obama seems to have morphed into a paragon of Constitutional virtue.

Muslim Americans have constitutional right to worship wherever they want. Sure. That's not even an issue for most Americans who oppose this mosque. They are opposing this particular one within two blocks of the Ground Zero as "insensitive".

Americans who smoke have constitutional right to smoke wherever and whenever they want. But many businesses ask them not to, or ban them from exercising their right when there are others whose well-being would be injured by having the smokers nearby. Sensitive and sensible, many smokers do not smoke in the presence of small children, without being asked not to.

There's a city in Europe which still is my favorite city. But a certain section of the city I stopped going after the character and ambiance of the place had changed so much after the newly arrived Muslim immigrants exercised their right to live wherever they wanted and did so in such a great number that you wouldn't recognize it was the same place. You'd hardly see a white person, other than tourists accidentally wandering into the area, and you would hardly see a woman either. I remember a very uncomfortable stare I'd get passing through the section. There was a porn movie shop open during the day, right next to the game arcade; streets were strewn with trash.

People who want to build so-called "MacMansions" have every right to build whatever atrocity they want, as long as they follow the local regulations and laws. They almost always do build their "dream homes", thus totally destroying the neighborhood character that the long-term residents have appreciated for a long time. More and more neighborhood communities have a review board of some sort to somehow curb this architectural pollution that harms the well-being of other residents, but usually to little avail.

This particular mosque is no exception. Sure, they may have all the rights under the law to do whatever they want, but the question is, is it sensible thing for them to do, particularly when the supposed purpose of this mosque/center is "a platform for multi-faith dialogue"? Dialogue? It's not happening.

It is sad to see even the libertarians joining the autocratic Dems and GOP in telling the entire country what to think and feel over what should have been a non-issue other than for New Yorkers and 9/11 victim families.

Tweet

So-Called "Ground Zero" Mosque May Get Public Financing

Reuters reports:

"(Reuters) - The Muslim center planned near the site of the World Trade Center attack could qualify for tax-free financing, a spokesman for City Comptroller John Liu said on Friday, and Liu is willing to consider approving the public subsidy.

"The Democratic comptroller's spokesman, Scott Sieber, said Liu supported the project. The center has sparked an intense debate over U.S. religious freedoms and the sanctity of the Trade Center site, where nearly 3,000 perished in the September 11, 2001 attack.

""If it turns out to be financially feasible and if they can demonstrate an ability to pay off the bonds and comply with the laws concerning tax-exempt financing, we'd certainly consider it," Sieber told Reuters.

"Spokesmen for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Governor David Paterson and the Islamic center and were not immediately available." [The article continues.]

Tweet