PARK 51 "GROUND ZERO 9/11 MOSQUE," A DEFIANT AND IN YOUR FACE AFFRONT?

The Middle East is suffocating under their jackboot. Africa is being steadily pummeled by their take no prisoner approach to forcible spread of their religion? Europe is hunched, bent over under the weight of their rabid ecumenism. Now their eyes is set on the biggest prize of their mission to Islamize the entire world, the United States of America; and where did they choose to go to make a resounding statement of all places but the World Trade Center; which to some pundits, was brought down in order to replace it with their mosque?

The religion or whatever it could be called, of Islam, is wrought with so many brutalities and forced adherence practices as well as cohesion. Those of us who have seen its dark side know that their frontal incursion in America is foreboding of something sinister; and every American should be wary of a forced change of their lifestyle in the future in the event these guys ever get a stronghold here. Of all existing religions, especially the four principal ones such as Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism, the Muslim religion has proved so far the most violent of them all; except of course Catholicism in its dark crusading days is factored in. Islam is one heck of a religion that tolerates of no dissension or any alternatives or other route to whatever is up there in heaven, paradise or whatever any believer believes comes after life. However the purpose of this article is not necessary to attack or invalidate Islam as a religion but to contribute to the ongoing debate over the Muslim Center and Mosque being proposed for the disused former Burlington Coat Factory in Midtown Manhattan, New York aka Park 51, which is just two blocks south of WTC.

The problem in America is that we all live in a bubble and are more comfortable being lied to by our politicians; hence any president that seriously wants to solve problems and not just kick the can down the road for the next incoming president is readily branded as "being out of touch with real Americans." Icheoku sometimes wonders who the 'fake' Americans are that really gets the gist of the problem-solving measures being taken by this president.

This is the sole reason President Barack Obama's nuanced position statement or comment on the proposed mosque and Islamic center is being misconstrued and given unfair amount of air for a flight to nowhere, just for political gains. The president rightly articulated the two issues seemingly at conflict here with the proposed location of the mosque and Islamic center at midtown Manhattan - the right of the Muslims to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan;" and two, the wisdom behind their exercising that right in the manner they have chosen. According to the president, whereas he agrees that the Muslims have the right under the constitution to so do, he however feels that the jury is still out on the wisdom behind their exercise of that right. Icheoku agrees with the position of the president that the First Amendment guarantees every American the right to freedom of religion and worship; which by necessary extension includes building and having a place of such worship. So, Icheoku queries, since the American constitution specifically enshrined this uninhibited right which it guarantees to every American, why then are those Conservative and Republicans alike, both supposed constitutionalists and custodians of our founding fathers ideals, strung out against the building of such center of religious worship in furtherance of this right?

One of the problems of American politics is that many Republicans and Conservatives are not well informed, articulated and probably not educated enough to most times understand that there are more than just two shades of colors. The word 'NUANCE' regrettably is not found in their dictionary or lexicon; hence their zealotry followership of the former President George Walker Bush for whom there is no middle ground. When GW following the 9/11 attack declared that either 'you are with us or you are with them', he never advised his mind to those would be mediators or brokers of peace who would rather mediate any dispute between "them and us?" To these brand of American humanity, things are either 'black or white', period; and the word 'grey' might for all they care be an Arabic word? Or could it be a case of too smart people being too good for politics and should not play politics since the polity are generally either ignorant, too gullible or just do not not pay enough attention to understand the gist of what is really going on. They would rather feed off from sound bites by talking heads, who are pushing their respective parochial agendas; hence the current trooping out with screams of "President Obama is now an "Imam;" simply because of his well-informed nuanced truism, distinguishing between a constitutional "right" to do something on one hand and the "wisdom of exercising that right" on the other. But they do not get it because it is beyond their comprehension.

Alternatively, could it be that the 'freedom' in and of America is not universally applicable to all; and that as it appertains to religion, it does not apply to Islam in particular? Is it possible that the freedom is restricted, that one is free as long as you remain within a confined space of a drawn circle of freedom and that venturing outside the ambit is 'un-freedom?' Is the envisaged Freedom of Religion of the First Amendment have a qualifier stating that you have "religious freedom as long as it is or provided it is a Christian religion;" and if so, what about Judaism, Buddhism and all such other religious affiliations in America? Could it be that the freedom envisaged every other and all religions but with the exception of Islam? Icheoku asks, is "freedom" in America really free or is it a conjectured misnomer meant to delude the populace into a false sense of being free and also used as a weapon of diplomacy abroad? However, Icheoku will concede that until the freedom of religion enshrined in the First Amendment of the constitution is amended, excluding certain religious practice such as Islam, the religion of over one billion people on the face of planet earth should also enjoy the same freedom savored by other religions in America under the constitution.

Now, implications of the Republicans and Conservatives of America rancid, virulent and acrimonious opposition to the Islamic center being proposed in midtown Manhattan is legion, principal among which is that it will now give further impetus to the al-Queida war mantra that America is fighting a war against Muslims; and not necessarily against Muslims who are terrorists. It might also fuel anti-American sentiments in the Muslim world, to who this will provide the needed confirmation that al-Queida was right that America is anti-Muslim and Islam. Why provide al-Queida operatives with an easy propaganda feeder-lot for recruiting more terrorist-faithfuls, ready to blow things up around the world. Icheoku says it is a bad politics to politicizes the Islamic center unnecessarily; and resisting the building of the center would only enable those terrorists who struck at freedom's heart and nerve center on 9/11. By our also attacking and suppressing freedom of religious worship by denying a rightful effort by a religious group to propagate their faith and build a center, the terrorist would have won the fight against freedom. Conversely, having them congregate at one place will make it easier for the security agencies to keep a tab on their activities and monitor them; just like a beehive instead of bees gone amok and buzzing around.

Further it is rather ridiculous that some of these Republicans and Conservatives of America who are fighting against the mosque location are the biggest beneficiaries of Saudi Arabia's Islamic oil dollars; and you ask yourself, why accept Islamic funds in America since those animals that blew the WTC are Muslims who practiced Islam? Why would the same principles of 'Islam is bad' not be made applicable to Islamic dollars which bought Plaza Hotel in New York City, some controlling shares in Citi Group that owns and operates Citi Bank, sizable shares in Fox News and Television parent company Newscorp, Empire State building and so many other choice properties and real estate holdings in New York as well as across the continental United States of America. So how far is far enough in the bid to lump together Islamic terrorists with Islam instead of segregating them rightfully? Should America extend the same lumping approach also to Islamic dollars and Islamic assets or is it a case of one good and the other bad; otherwise what is now allowable in America? The Bush Family is attached to the hip with the House of the Saud; Rudy Giuliani has some very lucrative security contracts in Saudi Arabia and Rupert Murdock, Fox Television honcho is spending Islamic money to prop up his propaganda outfit.; or are we going to demand that these people divest their companies of all Islamic money flowing throughout American economy in the form of investments by Saudi Arabia princes and other Muslims of this world; or in the token of Arizona anti-immigrant legislation enact another anti-religion legislation and deport all Muslims from America or better still outlaw their religion. Simply fix the problem once and for all, just get rid of the First Amendment just like some knuckle-heads Republicans are toying with the idea of getting rid of the Fourteenth Amendment to take care of their immigration plague; or better still throw away the constitution and start de-novo, incorporating right to own slavery and forced labor etc - JUST DO IT.

But how far should we go in this holier than thou approach as it appertains to the Islamic religion in America? Did America ban Christians from propagating their faith or building new churches and christian centers just because Oklahoma city bomber and domestic terrorist-in-chief Timothy McVeigh was a christian? What about Joe Stark, the other domestic terrorist who flew a plane into an office building in Texas who also was a Christian? Admitted that the authorities tried to explain his terrorist act away but hey whether you fly a Boeing 747 or a crop-sprayer plane into a building, both are meant to instill fear into the people; and a building is not the same as a runway, a hanger or the sky where a plane naturally belongs. Fellow Muslims are also at the cross-hairs of these Islamic terrorists murderous ways and when in doubt ask Iraqis, Pakistanis and Afghans who is blowing their Islamic countries and Muslim people up almost daily with thousands so far dead and several others wounded. When all is said and done, the question that needs to be affirmatively answered is, does the Muslims of New York have a right to worship and as a correlative, build a center of worship. Secondary, if the local zoning law and regulations permits, can they build at any place of their choosing? Lastly, were it any other religion's center like a church or synagogue that is to be built at Park 51 in midtown Manhattan, could they have built. If the answers are in the affirmative, then Icheoku agrees that the Muslims can build wherever they chooses, but with a proviso however that they should have considered the sentimental attachments and arguments that the very location at Park 51 has generated and possibly consider an alternative location.

But hey, if not at Park 51, where else is far enough in New York City; admitted Icheoku would have loved to see churches, synagogues and temples being allowed on reciprocity grounds to be built in Jeddah, Medina Saudi Arabia and other Islamic Republics of this world. That way we all could become each other's religious ambassadors to another's religions' main-stays; and together we can understand each other better and more easily. Amicably settle any arising disputes rather than the shooting wars and feisty words which our collective living on the edge because of our respective ignorance of each other's way and manner of worship has engendered over the centuries. So as a workable solution, let the Muslims of Manhattan make their statement, establish that their right to build is paramount; but in deference to the much generated sentiments, pivot to some other place further removed from the epicenter of 9/11. This is not only because people were killed on 9/11; no many nationalities and various religious adherents including Muslims worked at the WTC and they were not spared of the hellish death of 9/11; but for purely cool down the frenzied conservatives and republicans who are looking for any straw to clutch in an election year politics. Lastly, one question lingers, if one can and want to, why not; except that the $100 million price tag of the Islamic center is possibly another Saudi Arabia sponsored step at Islamizing the world and before too long the Islamic religion naive western world will wake up to the rude reality of what their complacent attempt at accommodating everyone with his brand of religion will unleash on our way of life; which will make the hollering about illegal immigration pale in comparison.