Raging Controversy on 9/11 Mosque; A Brief on Cordoba House and Imam Rauf.

Last time when world trade center was in the international news, it was about planes hijacked by terrorists crashing in to twin towers and their collapse and killing about 2500 people. After 9 years it was again in the international news for the reason that some one wants to construct a 13 or 15 storied Islamic center with a mosque in it near the Ground zero. Actually proposed site of this Islamic center is about 600 feet (two blocks) away from the ground zero. The cost of this whole project is $100 million. Initially proposed name of this center (mosque) is Cordoba House but this was changed to park 51 to placate the ever increasing opposition from American nationals who have seen the truth and symbolism behind this project.

The religion of all the terrorists involved in 9/11 incident is Islam. So according to the brain behind this $100 million project, the aim of this Islamic center is to build the bridges, heal the wounds and increase the understanding between people of different faiths. Interesting and funny right! After all that brain knows very well that Islam does not recognize other faiths.

Lets know more about and understand the brain behind this project. His name is Feisal Abdul Rauf, Imam of Masjid al-Farah, a mosque in New York. He was also the founder of  American Society for Muslim Advancement and at present his wife, Daisy Khan who happens to be from Kashmir, runs this organization. Then he founded another organization with the name Cordoba initiative and it is this organization which is behind 9/11 Islamic center (Cordoba House).

He is also the author of three books and one of them is ‘What’s Right with Islam’. Later the title was changed to ‘What’s Right with Islam is What’s Right with America’. This same book was published in Malaysia under a different title ‘A Call to Prayer from the WTC Rubble: Islamic Da'wah from the Heart of America Post 911’. He released his book in Malaysia in a gathering of Islamic organization Hizb ut-Tahrir, which was banned in many countries like Germany and other Gulf (Middle Eastern) states for its extremist views. He is considered a moderate (I am always amazed and uncomfortable with this word) by many people including the US state department which is spending  tax payers money by sending him as part of its good will promotional tour to Islamic (Arab) countries and its objective is improving relations between US and the Islamic world.

What did he write in this book and what are his real views? Are they compatible with accepted norms of democratic republic? Well he reveals him self as staunch supporter of 7th century Islamic law, Sharia. Some of his arguments in the book are presented below: (Note: One has to scroll down to 24 th paragraph in the article in this link.)

1. He argues that American political structure and constitution are Sharia compliant. In fact, Rauf believes that America best represents Islam's true values. Any one with a knowledge of Sharia immediately recognizes his coy and deceit. By saying this he is attempting to keep away people (infidels) from having unfavorable opinion towards Islam and its laws; after all US is a free and a democratic country and never the less many Americans can recall their country being called a great Satan by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and Bin Laden. So we have Muslims expressing two diametrically opposite views on USA hence desired obfuscation. This whole book is dissemblance and Jihad under disguise as it is evident from the title of the book in Malaysia: ‘ call to the prayer from the rubble of ….’.

The truth is there is nothing common between American constitution and Sharia law (Islamic God’s law). Both are poles apart.

Note: Some differences between US Constitution and Sharia will be pointed out in the comments by the admin.

2. In the same book, one can clearly see his rancor when he mentions all those perceived injustices on the Islamic world by the west, both in the past and the present. One of them is British drawing the boundaries in South Asia. All this time I had a feeling that only Muslims in Indian Subcontinent had this feeing: British ending the Islamic rule and giving the land to Hindu Kafirs what is rightfully belonged to Muslims. His presentation of the Islamic rule, beginning in the 8th century, in Spain as an example of Islamic tolerance where in Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in harmony reveals his nostalgia of and yearning for past Islamic conquests, glory and finally an Islamic caliphate.

It is mentioned in earlier posts (in this blog) that when supposedly moderate Muslims speak, they say one thing to infidels and the media and completely a different thing to Muslim audience. They say one thing in English and completely a different thing in Arabic. Feisal Abdul Rauf is no different from this kind. More than any thing he is supporter of imposing Sharia law every where.

Mr. Rauf’s guile is limitless as he makes following observations in an article he wrote for New York Daily News:

"My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America's Muslim population into the mainstream society". ......

"Freedom of religion is something we hold dear. It is the core of what America is all about, and it is what people worldwide respect about our country. The Koran itself says compulsion in religion is wrong".......

"They know that many American values - freedom of religion, human dignity and opportunity for prosperity - are also Muslim values". ........

Islamic definitions for words and phrases like peace and freedom of religion, tolerance and innocence, justice and oppression are never in accord with universally accepted definitions. Otherwise, how does one harmonize Rauf’s, a proponent of Sharia law, Islamic definition of ‘freedom of religion’ with what we understand it to be?

When an organization, Former Muslims United, sent (full report on this) him an invitation to sign the declaration that says Muslims have the right to convert to other religion or leave Islam if they choose to, it received neither the support nor acknowledgement from Imam Rauf and his wife. This is the true color of Mr Rauf and his wife; completely green. (See the comments)

Before two months to writing that article for New York Daily News, (For the sources click here or here or here) it appears that he was quoted in an article under the title ‘The Most Prominent Imam in New York: I Do Not Believe in Religious Dialogue.’ in an Arabic website Rights4All (Website of Media Department of Cairo University). In this he writes:

"This phrase is inaccurate. Religious dialogue as customarily understood is a set of events with discussions in large hotels that result in nothing. Religions do not dialogue and dialogue is not present in the attitudes of the followers, regardless of being Muslim or Christian. The image of Muslims in the West is complex which needs to be remedied".

Similarly in another Islamic website, he makes it clear that he wishes to see that all Islamic countries rule themselves in accordance with Sharia law.  He observes that current Islamic governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.

From the above observations it is clear that his aim is imposition of Sharia law every where. All the articles he writes in the western infidel media are nothing but part of his overall ambition to see Sharia in US too. He knows that for achieving this goal, deception of presenting Islam and Islamic law as modern and progressive to American public and media is necessary. He also knows that this kind of deception is completely legal. Even regarding the issue of raising money of $100 million, he lies. First he says money will be raised only in USA from Muslim Americans and then, as usual in an Arabic Daily he says money will be raised from oil rich gulf states (here and here).

Feisal Abdul Rauf can not even condemn terrorist acts by Muslims out rightly (here and here). He will not call Hamas and Muslim Brother Hood as terrorist organizations.Yet, he wants the infidels to believe that he and his colleagues are anti-terrorists. He just equivocates. In the wake of 9/11 attacks, this is how he responds:

"I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened".

"Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA".

The two wars being fought currently by USA were not there at that time and in fact it just bombed Serbia for liberation of Kosovo. But this will not count in his views. Other important thing is Rauf alluding to US policies of training terrorists i.e. Afghan war deserves scorn. He overlooks all other facts like funding by Saudi Arabia and Gulf states and Pakistan's ISI training the would be terrorists and Islamic Governments allowing the recruiting of Muslims for Jihad. All these things do not count in shaping this erudite and vicious Islamic scholar's opinions.

He even shamelessly says “In the Islamic belief system, the next life is the primary life. The next life is more real, more intense, and more vivid”. But it is true. In Islamic theology those who die in the cause of Allah (fighting to make Sharia law supreme over other laws; this is called Jihad) will go to paradise of highest grade where beautiful virgins and young boys will be waiting to serve them. As Koran says this life is nothing compared to life in hereafter. This kind of philosophy serves as an inducement to Muslims seeking martyrdom. This is what makes Islam a cult of death.

The problems being faced by Islamic countries or policies of these countries are not because of Islam, their Governments and their own people but because of infidels, so called faces of moderate Islam claim . In their view Islam is never at fault. It is always infidels who are at fault and they are responsible. So, when Sunni and Shia are killing each other, it is infidels fault. A Pakistani minister says these terrorists are worse than infidels. The real issue is, presence of infidels is an affront to Islam and its adherents. Islam should maintain physical superiority over others and it should never co-exist with them. It is this frustration of not realizing this Islamic physical superiority is the root cause for many discords and present day quandary.

When Feisal Abdul Raif says Sharia law should be supreme, every other suggestion by him or his views or disguising as peace maker are just the means to impose Sharia slowly and incrementally (A law that utterly discriminates against Non Muslims and Women). Rhetoric of being a proponent of Sharia and Multiculturalism at the same time is oxymoron.

The significance of the name Cordoba:

When this project of Islamic center was announced, the proposed name was Cordoba House and later it was changed to Park51. Why? When one completes reading this, they will realize that this name ‘Cordoba’ is provocative and confrontational and insulting.

On 9/11/2001, the falling debris from crashing of planes in to twin towers and collapse of towers has fallen on and also damaged the roof of building of Burlington Coat Factory (It is in its place, Cordoba house is to be raised). Since then the building was vacant and it was bought by Feisal Abdul Rauf. In a sense, directly or indirectly, the terrorist acts committed by Muslim terrorists are responsible for its closure.

But why choose this particular place and also a name Cordoba? Cordoba is a name of a city (Half a million population) in southern Spain. It was also a seat of power of an Islamic caliphate and Islamic rule in Spain from 711 AD to 1490 AD. In essence it signifies the Islamic conquest and subsequent rule of a part of western civilization for about 8 centuries. Right after conquering southern Spain, Muslim rulers raised a mosque in the place of church of St. Vincent. This mosque is also called the grand mosque of Cordoba which was turned in to a church again after the recon quest of Spain by Christians.

Feisal Rauf calls this period of Islamic rule in Spain a golden age and an example of harmony where in all people lived freely and in peace. One can not be sure what harmony and peace means in his Islamic language, but acts of raising of Mosques in the places of churches, making Jews and Christians pay Jizya and taking their wives and children as sex slaves can not be termed peaceful. When one community suppresses other communities beyond their capabilities to revolt, one obviously has peace by physical superiority which Islam craves for over all infidels (The verses 9:33, 61.9 and 48:28).

And other thing through out the history is, whenever Islam conquered other places and people, it destroyed the places of worship of infidels. And in those places and from that rubble it raised mosques. Few of them are:
1. Al-Asqa mosque and dome of rock on temple mount.
2. Mosque over Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople.
3. Ummayyad Mosque in the place of Church of St.John.
4. And of course, raising mosques over the rubble of three of holiest Hindu temples in India.

Burlington Coat factory may not be a church, but never the less it is rubble resulting from an act of Jihad and it is also close to ground zero. Raising a mosque, with a name like Cordoba, on this rubble is in comport with Islamic practice of raising mosques signifying their victory after the bloody conquests. Combine this with Rauf’s desire to see Sharia implemented all over the world and one can only draw the conclusion that he is a full blooded Islamist. And finally his stated goal of building bridges is just an euphemism for his goal of Sharia and Islamic Supremacism. 

The potential consequence of building this center and mosque could be that many Jihadis see this as victory for Islam over infidels that Allah has guaranteed (verses 9:33, 48:28 and 61:09) and might attempt to inflict same kind of horror like 9/11 or more heinous in severity again. Then again what? Another mosque and center for peace and harmony! Besides for the purpose of praying, Islamic mosques were never and are not symbols of peace and harmony. There are symbols of Islamic superiority and power esp. constructed in this manner.

It may be that at the time Feisal Rauf has started his project, he might not have realized the extent of opposition it could gather; after all he knew very well about politically correct infidel media. But in the end he knows very well that it is a win win situation for Islam and its cause.

If it is decided not to go ahead with this project of Islamic center, then Rauf and his colleagues can again the play the card of victim hood and discrimination like their founder Mohammad did and succeed too. For Muslims, Islamists and their apologists, this will be another instance of western imperialism, arrogance, intolerance and prejudice against Islam. This will be a handy propaganda tool. But in the process, overwhelming truth like many mosques and Islamic dawa centers were constructed after 9/11 incident can be pushed aside. And during this time, of course the fact that Islamic countries expelled and are expelling Christian evangelists and ongoing persecution of religious minorities in Islamic countries can be conveniently overlooked. Like it is said previously Islam never extends any privilege to others but it vehemently seeks those privileges from others. It is a one way process. This practice will never appear to Muslims as unrighteous, bigotry, wicked and dishonest because they firmly believe in things like Islam is the sole truth, Islamic system is the best and other beliefs are fraud and corrupt. They believe that it is their right and duty to bring infidels under Sharia.

And finally, one has to congratulate the people who have lead the resistance to construction of this building of imperialism and intolerance. At one time it was more or less accepted that mosque will be constructed there, even by the people who are leading the resistance. But, today there is a small hope that it will not be.