Ground Zero
The Burlington Coat Factory opened its doors in 1924, wholesaling ladies coats. The founders cannot have imagined that they would one day be the centre of a world wide controversy.
They built their factory in Park Place, New York, then the centre of the garment industry in SoHo.
Several decades later the building was surrounded by nail bars, an off-track betting office, fast food restaurants, and had become surplus to their requirements.
Although the building was a full two blocks away from the Twin Towers it had suffered damage during the obscene attack of 9/11.
A series of sales resulted in it being bought for redevelopment by the SoHo development company for $4.85 million. So far, so boring.
New York has many ‘community centres’ – the Jewish Community Centre alone has an operating budget of more than £20 million, and the 92nd Street ‘Y’, a Hebrew Association, makes over $50 million a year from membership and subscriptions. The SoHo development company had their eye on profits like these.
They planned to turn the old coat Factory into a gym, with a swimming pool, restaurants, a 9/11 memorial, and a room in which the clients could pray.
They own around 400,000 square feet of real estate in New York, and have been happily developing them for years without coming to public attention.
This time they came to world wide attention.
For you see, the owner of SoHo properties is a Muslim – Sharif El-Gamal, and the clients he had in mind for his centre, were, like him, also Muslim. Other faith groups in the area were already well catered for, and he saw a new market emerging – the local Muslim community. Many of whom had suffered themselves in 9/11.
Cue utter hysteria. The old Burlington Coat Factory suffered a geographical transformation in the media – it moved from ‘two blocks away’ from the Twin Towers, to ‘walking distance’ to ‘within spitting distance’ finally coming to rest at ‘Ground Zero’ itself.
In the process, the plans for the redevelopment of the entire building got lost, and Park51 had only one named intention – a Mosque. The now infamous ‘Ground Zero Mosque’.
It mattered not to the Facebook crowd who were being whipped up into apoplectic rage that it was not actually at Ground Zero, nor that it was an entire development, nor that the disaster of 9/11 had rained down on the heads of all who lived in the area, regardless of their manner of worship.
Robert Spencer – a Roman Catholic who runs the ‘Jihad Watch’ web site, described as a ‘rolling cauldron of stories illustrating the treachery and violence of Muslims’, and Pamela Geller who runs ‘Atlas Shrugged’, joined forces and formed the ‘Stop Islamisation of America’ which campaigned by showing pictures of planes flying into the Twin Towers on one side of a bus, and the proposed Community Centre on the other side.
The campaign gathered force; they were joined by the English Defence League, a controversial far right organisation. In no time at all, such is the power of social media, half the world was convinced that triumphal Muslims, probably put up to it by Bin Laden himself, were planning to build a mosque where they could glorify and worship the Jihadists who had killed some 3,000 Americans
Can anybody give me solid facts and figures concerning the racial origin and religious beliefs of all those killed on 9/11? I find it hard to believe that they all held US passports, and none practiced Islam. Life and Death is more random than that. Especially in a building calling itself the World Trade Centre.
I digress; after every Republican politician, including all those who harbour the belief that Obama himself may be a closet Muslim; a clutch of wealthy pop stars – those well known political pundits, and every religious leader from here to Shanghai had pontificated on the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’, it was time for the little people to get in on the act.
So it was that a retired hotel manager, the Rev Terry Jones, pastor to some 50 people in deepest Florida offered to light his barbeque with a single copy of the Koran to thwart this development.
The media were delighted – a full scale punch up loomed.
Such is the received wisdom of the pious world at large, courtesy of the media, that we are now told that this amounts to a stand off between the forces of Islam and Christianity.
Overnight the ‘stand off’ has stood down.
The Rev. Terry Jones triumphantly claims to have the agreement of Sharif El-Gamal that he won’t build a mosque at Ground Zero – an agreement that was not hard to extract, given that he never intended to do so.
By the week-end, I fully expect to find the papers full of pictures of a victorious retired hotel manager being carried shoulder high through jubilant crowds convinced that they have managed to force the demon Mosque a full two blocks away from their hallowed Ground Zero.
You see, six days ago, unheeded by the tabloids, New York’s Landmarks Preservation Commission voted by a decisive 9 to 0 against putting any more hurdles in front of SoHo development’s plans to build a 15 story community centre with a 500 seat auditorium, swimming pool, gym, and a room where its members can pray…..exactly where it always intended to build it.
I’ll get me Burlington Coat……
-
1
September 10, 2010 at 15:12 -
This is the only list of the dead I can find
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/lists/by-country/page12.html
Quite rightly their religion or lack of it is not considered important.
The rabid religious right have always been a cess pit in whatebver country they live in.
-
2
September 10, 2010 at 15:35 -
Interesting Sarbanes, as you say they don’t list religion, quite rightly, but you can look at some of those names and take a guess that Ground Zero has no reason to be an exclsuively Christian shrine. As I suspected.
-
-
4
September 10, 2010 at 15:38 -
Illuminating post.
As is the Islamist reaction to a symbolic book burning. A far worse over-reaction to something trivial, wouldn’t you agree ?
(I have no truck with ANY religion btw.)
-
5
September 10, 2010 at 15:51 -
Thank you for providing a good background to this story without all the histrionics of either side. It explains a lot and allows one to draw their own conclusion based on the truth and not lies from the far reaches of the right and left.
-
6
September 10, 2010 at 15:58 -
What is “two blocks away” as a unit of measurment.
I’m sure it means something to city dwelling folk, but it’s pretty meaningless to me.
-
7
September 10, 2010 at 16:03 -
Depends on how big the blocks are – but ‘a walk of several minutes, even changes of direction, are required’, I am reliably informed.
-
8
September 10, 2010 at 16:47 -
It’s very high resolution, but it shows how close the building it to where the WTC was. However it is not ground zero.
-
9
September 10, 2010 at 17:42 -
a quick look at yahoo maps reveals the following –
from the north edge of the WTC site, you walk about 150m north, take a right turn and #51 is a further 50 m. The undercarriage of one of the planes went through the roof of the building. This is close by anyones definiton – but yes – it’s not “at” GZz.
And what Richard B says a few posts down – pretty much…..
-
-
-
-
10
September 10, 2010 at 16:32 -
I find myself in agreement with this Samizdata post: The time taken to build on Ground Zero is the real issue
Would anyone care about this if a rebuilt Twin Towers were already stretching to the stars by now?
-
11
September 10, 2010 at 17:32 -
The religions of those killed on 9/11 are irrelevant. What was under attack on that day was not Christianity, or Americans, but the whole of Western values. In the minds of those carrying out the attacks, I would imagine, any Muslims in the WTC would have been infidels anyway, corrupted by the West by their very location and occupation. The attackers therefore scored a very palpable hit on a hugely significant symbol.
I’m very much in two minds about this proposal. I can see all you say about it being a cultural centre, not at all triumphalist, and not really very close to Ground Zero and all that. But then I wonder whether the centre’s proposers ever really thought about the implications of anything Islamic at such a sensitive location, and considered the likely reaction amongst ordinary Americans. And then decided, in humility, to just build it somewhere else. You know, for compassion’s sake.
-
14
September 10, 2010 at 17:57 -
“It mattered not to the Facebook crowd who were being whipped up into apoplectic rage that it was not actually at Ground Zero…
It’s close enough to have been hit by debris from the landing gear from one of the jets.
That’s close enough for me.
-
15
September 10, 2010 at 18:58 -
Indeed Julia, it was close, but the point of all the opposition was not that it was ‘close’ but that it was ‘at’ the Ground Zero site.
How far away did it have to be before it became acceptable – I suspect ‘not even in the US’ would have been the answer.-
16
September 10, 2010 at 20:39 -
Well, there are other mosques in Manhattan, and no-one’s burned them to the ground.
But if they don’t want a new one built on, close to, or within a day’s car ride to Ground Zero, then that’s their right.
Good grief, it’s only been nine years! imagine how we here in the UK would have felt if the Germans had demanded a bierkeller in the East End nine years after the Blitz, to ‘aid in reconciliation’?
And THAT was a war, not a terrorist atrocity! So you can double the fury felt, he’ll, triple it!
-
17
September 10, 2010 at 21:11 -
I distinctly remember riding on a train into Birmingham New Street, just a couple of years after the 1st Gulf War, and seeing an enormous building from the carriage window, with the words “The Saddam Hussein Centre of Islamic Learning” emblazoned its exterior.
Really.
-
18
September 10, 2010 at 22:31 -
Julia,
It isn’t a Mosque, no matter how many times people refer to it as such, any more than the Jewish community centre is a synagogue – although they pray there.
By ‘they’ I take it you mean that the Christian Americans don’t want it built there. What about the Muslim Americans?
Its the language of this discourse that gets to me – you use words like ‘demanded’ – the Muslims haven’t ‘demanded’ that it be built there – one developer decided that it might be a good – profitable – idea. Its not fair to lump the people who have jumped onto the bandwagon since that decision – the Immans, the Terry Jones’s, as though they were part of that initial decision and say that anyone ‘demanded’ that it be built – yes, some Muslims have suggested that it might aid reconciliation – that wasn’t part of the original decision to develope the site as such.
Are you saying that all Muslims should be vilified and punished for the actions of a few?-
19
September 11, 2010 at 06:27 -
“It isn’t a Mosque, no matter how many times people refer to it as such, any more than the Jewish community centre is a synagogue – although they pray there.”
It doesn’t matter how we view it, or what we call it.
How do the Muslims themselves view it?
“By ‘they’ I take it you mean that the Christian Americans don’t want it built there. What about the Muslim Americans?”
There’s part of the problem, right there. They should all be Americans. And if integration had been as successful as the US are always claiming, they would never have agreed with this building.
“Are you saying that all Muslims should be vilified and punished for the actions of a few?”
I’m saying that if they don’t restrain the wilder members of their faith (which is more than a faith, it’s a political movement too), we may have no choice…
-
-
20
September 12, 2010 at 12:26 -
Look, this isn’t some sort of popular outrage by the people of New York, it’s a storm entirely whipped up by Islamophobes, religious extremists, journalists and special interest groups. Yes, Sharif El-Gamal should really have seen this one coming from a long way off, but he didn’t and that was a mistake, but hardly a great one in the scheme of things.
I suspect a Bierkeller in the East End nine years after the blitz would have probably been ignored and closed through lack of patronage, unless the Daily Mail found out about it, of course. Then it would have been firebombed.
-
-
-
-
21
September 10, 2010 at 18:37 -
Anna, who coined the phrase ‘Ground Zero Mosque’?
This is very relevant. Because if it came not from the American Christian Right but from the proponents, it changes things quite dramatically I think.
-
22
September 10, 2010 at 18:59 -
That, Old Slaughter is a superb question – one which will find an answer one day – I don’t know.
-
23
September 12, 2010 at 21:41 -
Well not quite coining the phrase but still proof of my point I think.
“A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.” “We want to push back against the extremists,”
I lifted this quote from wiki btw. It shows clearly that there was deliberate thoughts about the significance of 9/11 in the selection or at least the promotion of the location.
This doesn’t tilt the argument either way but it does kind of silence the “its two blocks away” argument. No it is not the replacement of the twin towers with a mosque which some headlines have made it sound like, but nor is it simply the incidental placing of a mosque roughly in the same area of Manhattan as the WTC as others have tried to suggest.
It is for that reason alone something some could rightfully feel as provocative or inappropriate.
-
24
September 12, 2010 at 22:03
-
-
-
-
25
September 10, 2010 at 19:03 -
The original name was the Cordoba Centre, which sounds to many like a deliberately provocative title. (I’m told when Islam conquered Cordoba, a mosque was built over the ruins/remains of the cathedral, but this is quite likely an exaggeration.)
There may be no legal impediment to this “cultural centre”, but it does seem rather insensitive to proceed with it, considering the strong reactions against it.-
26
September 10, 2010 at 21:07 -
according to a report a few days ago here (I am in the US) – the owners were busy trying to re-brand the building as Park51….sadly the imam involved then went on prime time and again called it “The Cordoba House” (clearly he had not got the memo……
Oh – and why would a community centre have an imam, anyway?
I am sure Islam is a religion of peace, brotherly love and forgiveness – oh, wait – that’s the other religions – must keep that straight….
-
27
September 10, 2010 at 21:16 -
You’re getting confused … I know, it’s easily done, but Islam is not a religion of peace, in fact it is not even a religion, it is a geo-political cult, bent on world domination, achieved by extreme violence.
(I know you are not confused; you appear to be one of the few who are not.)
-
-
-
28
September 10, 2010 at 19:13 -
Right or wrong, my thoughts exactly.
-
29
September 11, 2010 at 08:56 -
I am so glad that we don’t do religion round these parts. I think it’s funny. A media fuck-fest based on silly season boredom. I live in Hudds and there’s loads of mosques – 250 ish in about 30 mins. And this Pastor lad only manages a crowd of 50 on a good day; that’s a pretty shite gig.
I am loving this story – it’s like a B movie. It’s a bit odd that the lefties are whinging yet they’ve got control of both houses and the presidency. American politics is weird – it’s all about 30 or so marginals yet is fucking massive. At least over here we’ve got 100 marginals at any one time. The AV+ vote thingy and the boundary changes to 70,000 electorate and bashing down MPs to 600 constituencies will change the maths but still…we don’t do religion in British politics.
A Baptist from a ricketey church and a Mossie wanting to take over a coat factory? Cool.
Silvio been up to owt daft?
-
-
30
September 10, 2010 at 19:17 -
I’m beginning to think that Pastor Terry Jones is either a media genius, or an idiot savant. His little Koran burning stunt has highlighted with laser precision the problem we in the West face – the potential burning of a book is greeted with violent protests and threats to Western interests in the Islamic world, whereas the building of an ‘insensitive’ Islamic centre close to the 9/11 location is greeted with lawful peaceful protest. In fact the former is condemned by the establishment in the west itself, whereas there has been no such condemnation from the Islamic world of the Cordoba centre.
It seems to me this little vignet of international relations in 2010 shows that the West is constantly being asked, and actively submitting, to requests for ‘respect & ‘understanding’ from Islam, but there is no reciprocation coming the other way.
At some point (maybe not on this issue I accept) we will have to draw the line in the sand, or accept Islamic domination of Western society.
-
31
September 10, 2010 at 20:40 -
I think that line in ‘the sand had better be drawn soon…
-
33
September 10, 2010 at 21:09 -
if lines in sand have to be drawn (and I think they do) then when do we choose to do it? It’s the death of a thousand cuts – each instance individually would allow us all to say – “no, wait, it’s just a little thing, but next time we ought to get serious”
So if not now – when?
-
-
34
September 10, 2010 at 20:26 -
While the worlds finest were beating their breasts over the possible burning of a book in Florida,17 human beings were being burned alive in
a southern Russia marketplace thanks to readers of the QuranNot a mention from the great and the good.As for the secular talking heads,
including the sad Obama and Clintion bombing and burning to death
over 100,000 muslims in Iraq and Afgahanistan is worthy of a few tears -
35
September 10, 2010 at 21:04 -
How many of the murderers were Christian?
I know you like to lump all “religions” together, but if you insult a Christian, he’ll probably pray for you; insult a muslim… well, go on then, I dare you.
-
36
September 10, 2010 at 21:56 -
but its ok to burn the Satanic Verses ?
-
37
September 10, 2010 at 22:05 -
Or British and US flags; or effigies of the US President or the British PM; or your own daughter, but only if she has dis-honourned your family by showing her hair in public, obviously.
PS It goes without saying that burning Jews, Christians and all the other infidels is what Mo would have wanted, surely?
-
-
38
September 10, 2010 at 22:53 -
Do I have to put my tin hat on to mention here the similarities between the Koran, the Torah and the old Testament?
-
39
September 10, 2010 at 23:03 -
40
September 10, 2010 at 23:37 -
Not at all – the three religions have the same root. The issue arises because the Muslim world is still at the ‘every word in the Koran is to be taken 100% literally’ stage, whereas the other two have moved on a bit. You can find plenty of blood thirsty exhortations in the Bible (mostly in the Old Testament tho) if you want to. Its just that the Christian church is now represented by the image of Father Ted Crilly standing outside a cinema showing a blasphemous film with a sign saying ‘Down with this sort of thing’, while the Muslim faith is represented by some hot head burning a copy of the Satanic Verses and calling for Salman Rushdie to be killed. A slight difference of approach I think.
-
41
September 10, 2010 at 23:42 -
As a Quaker, I find this ‘move on a bit’ business quite disconcerting. Surely if whatever book you adhere to is the word of God, you are not in a position to ‘move on’ ? I truly don’t understand. How do people decide to move on? ‘Thou shalt not kill’ – oh I think we can move on a bit from that old malarkey can’t we?
-
42
September 11, 2010 at 06:30 -
“As a Quaker, I find this ‘move on a bit’ business quite disconcerting. Surely if whatever book you adhere to is the word of God, you are not in a position to ‘move on’ ? I truly don’t understand.”
Me neither, but then I’m an atheist. It’s clear, however, that Islam isn’t just a religion, like Quakerism, Buddhism, Wicca, etc.
-
43
September 11, 2010 at 08:14 -
The god for Darwin, erm.
-
-
44
September 11, 2010 at 09:39 -
The Church in the Middle Ages was entirely capable of behaving pretty much like Islam does today, it just didn’t have the technology they have now. The Crusades were hardly very ‘Christian’, filled with all that killing and whatnot, but the Church organised them nonetheless. Equally the Bible you study only dates to King James’s time, and prior to the mass distribution of bibles, the broad mass of people had only the Church to tell them what was and wasn’t biblical, what they should or shouldn’t do.
Islam is still at the Medieval Church stage – a few educated religious leaders studying the sacred texts and decreeing to the uneducated masses what they should and shouldn’t be doing, according to their interpretation of the text, or their own personal prejudice.
The Nonconformist movement in England was a reaction to the Medieval Church’s attitudes, and lack of Biblical justification. The Muslim world needs a similar reformation. Unfortunately it took hundreds of years in England – even at speeded up modern rates of change you can’t hope for much improvement in our lifetimes.
-
-
45
September 11, 2010 at 06:29 -
” You can find plenty of blood thirsty exhortations in the Bible (mostly in the Old Testament tho) if you want to.”
Angry Exile has done just that. It’s a good read.
-
-
-
46
September 10, 2010 at 23:25 -
The Imam was asked if he would consider having a ‘multifaith’ centre rather than Islamic centre but he refused. He was offered a plot further from ground zero but refused. He is calling it Cordoba after the battle where Islam beat the Christians. There are dozens of mosques in New York and thousands in the USA. There are no churches or bibles or non muslim worship in Saudi ( the mosques funders).
It’s a giant piss take by muslims. A shrine to their greatest hit against the infidels.
If you ever lived in the middle east you would know that they hate us and everything the West stands for. -
47
September 10, 2010 at 23:29 -
Yes, “they” do hate “us” since a long time.
And don’t forget “we” hate “them” since a long time too.
Have you heard of the crusades? -
48
September 10, 2010 at 23:40 -
Thanks Anna. I will wear Nuclear Biological Warfare Suit before turning in. Good night
Oh .. before I forget. I happen to read quite a divers spread of international papers and magazines too. And recently read an interview with “the” imam. Cannot reproduce it here because it was in Dutch and have neither the time nor the wish to translate it now at this late hour, BUT .. like you mentioned it was primo his idea for a multi-cultural meeting place and secundo he sincerely regrets now he got the idea at all.
Have to add again that one of the Dutch politicians, Geert Wilders, of right wing fame, will be making a speech tomorrow at Ground Zero against the “mosque”, which is scaring shitless the Dutch politicians, as the “rest of the world” thinks he’s part of Dutch government, which he isn’t.
As we all want to go to sleep now, I won’t bother you with the details of the impossibility so far of forming a new government in NL since many moons …
-
49
September 11, 2010 at 06:33 -
“Have to add again that one of the Dutch politicians, Geert Wilders, of right wing fame, will be making a speech tomorrow at Ground Zero against the “mosque”, which is scaring shitless the Dutch politicians, as the “rest of the world” thinks he’s part of Dutch government, which he isn’t.”
And can’t you see, this terrified response, this pointing out of the crowd at the person supposedly calling down the wrath of the Muslim world on his head, the proclaiming ‘No, no, he doesn’t speak for us, here, have some more concessions!’ is fuelling the fire more surely than lighter fluid on a Koran?
-
-
50
September 11, 2010 at 00:23 -
Pastor Terry Jones a retired hotelier? No, you mean Pastor John Cleese who used to own Fawlty Towers. I bet TJ was as much fun as those delightful fundie b&b owners in Bolton who berated a guest wearing a hijab at breakfast.
As an atheist I get stick from the darkest corners of the faith community who believe that only an invisible magic friend keeping an eye on them and threatening their immotal souls prevents them commiting rape and murder. When I explain that I behave well and do good because I enjoy it their eyes glaze over in incomprehension. Lovely children those religious types, but don’t let them play with knives or matches. -
51
September 11, 2010 at 00:35 -
We shouldn’t give an inch to Islamism or we will lose such beauty as this type of song and person forever….
-
52
September 11, 2010 at 00:52 -
” like you mentioned it was primo his idea for a multi-cultural meeting place and secundo he sincerely regrets now he got the idea at all.”
Ha ha . The sad thing is that dhimmis like you two will be the first to be buried up to your chests then pelted with small stones until dead. Just for being ‘different’.
-
53
September 11, 2010 at 01:56 -
” Geert Wilders, of right wing fame,”
You mean someone who actually puts his head above the parapet ?
When he’s finally killed by the religion of peace for daring to stand up to Islamism will you feel safer ? -
54
September 11, 2010 at 10:50 -
I’m glad someone’s finally blogged about NY having a rich tradition of faith-based community centres such as both Ys (Christian and Jewish). We didn’t/don’t conflate Catholicism and the IRA in this way, either. What is the difference?
Btw, I recall reading about one Muslim guy in particular dying – he was a cadet or first responder, or somesuch. I saw an interview with his mother in which she said he was first a posthumous suspect (bomb setting?) but was eventually exonerated and actually cited by name as a hero in the Patriot Act. You could probably find him with a Google.
-
55
September 11, 2010 at 12:37 -
“We didn’t/don’t conflate Catholicism and the IRA in this way, either.”
The Troubles always seemed (to me, anyway) to be less of an overtly-religious war, than a political/landbased power-struggle.
Oh, I don’t doubt a great many did see it in terms of religion, but not sure that was entirely true for all.
And anyway, they both shared the same ‘book’, at heart…
-
56
September 11, 2010 at 12:41 -
This is by far the best response to the Park 51 proposal that I have seen – a gay bar next door:
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/08/10/Gay_Bar_Proposed_Next_to_Ground_Zero_Mosque/
We can respond to other people’s uses of their freedom by our own use of freedom, rather than by blocking the proposal to build. I gather that some people associated with Park 51 are none too happy with the idea of a gay bar next door. The response has to be: you want freedom for your lifestyle, you can live with other people’s freedom for their lifestyles.
-
57
September 11, 2010 at 13:48 -
Great article. This illustrates why you should always take what you receive from the mainstream media with a pinch of salt. At the rist of being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist; are you not ignoring the Izraeli/Jewish element in all this?
Muslims are actually wiser than all you materialists. They know that through their strict social values they will massively outnumber the remnants of Western society one day.
As for people thinking all religions are the same. You will struggle to find any Christians quoting the old testement to justify any wars. If people could think straight concerning the true faith they would know that.
-
58
September 11, 2010 at 16:43 -
Chris M
“Muslims are actually wiser than all you materialists.”What a load of crap. Muslims living in the UK are just as materialistic, greedy and vain as the rest of us. To pretend that they have superior moral values is complete crap for all of the Muslims I know. Most of them are just normal British people who feel compelled/intimidated into practicing Islam. They are all as likely to lie and cheat as anybody else I know and at the same time are as likely to commit acts of kindness and charity as much as anybody else I know.
Ultimately we all know that Islam is not a religion of peace. What really winds me up though is that so many people in politics and the media want to be seen to apologise for the behaviour of the fundamentalists and seem terrified of expressing the opinions of a substantial section of the UK public.
-
60
September 11, 2010 at 23:20 -
Madge
“Most of them are just normal British people who feel compelled/intimidated into practicing Islam.”
So who is doing the compelling/intimidating? Its Muslims who keep their faith and that of their co-religionists. What I mean by wisdom is that they know that through demographics they grow stronger while the west grows weaker. If we cannot stand up to them now then when? Despite superior technology and organisation we do not have the confidence to burn a bit of processed wood and ink. We are morally bankrupt. -
61
September 12, 2010 at 12:59 -
@Chris: No its precisely because we are not morally bankrupt that we have a problem. If we had no morals, our superior technology would solve our problem in a trice. A few neutron bombs on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia etc and the issue would be done and dusted. All the people dead, and the oil intact.
We however regard our ‘opponents’ as people still, and worthy of humane treatment, something they manifestly do not do to us. A Muslim regards the non-muslim as an untermensch and thus can be treated with contempt. If we took the same attitude we could (and would) wipe them off the face of the planet in minutes.
-
62
September 12, 2010 at 15:52 -
Jim
We need the moral courage to have a culture worth maintaining. Unless we do we will not survive.
{ 62 comments… read them below or add one }