Andrew Sullivan’s Moral Cowardice


Pages: 1 2

Consider that Feisal Abdul Rauf - the Imam behind the Ground Zero mosque, now touring the Middle East as an “ambassador” to Islamic nations at U.S. taxpayer expense – was quoted earlier this year in an article in Arabic for the website Rights4All thusly:

I do not believe in religious dialogue.  This phrase is inaccurate…Religions do not dialogue and dialogue is not present in the attitudes of the followers, regardless of being Muslim or Christian.

Only two months later, in May of this year Abdul Rauf said this during an interview which appeared on the Islamic website Hadiyul-Islam (hat tip to Walid Shoebat):

Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.  New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad…so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Sharia.

Rauf has refused to acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization, and he has notoriously stated that “The United States policies were an accessory [to the 9-11 attacks]…In the most direct sense, Osama Bin Laden is made in the USA.”  Is this a voice of tolerance or reconciliation, the promotion of which this execrable project’s supporters claim is its raison dêtre?  How can Sullivan blithely ignore the clear symbol this mosque will represent to the Islamic world should it be built on this site – a site that is arguably part of Ground Zero, despite the protests of its backers?  As Rush Limbaugh so brilliantly observed Monday on his radio program:

This has everything to do with optics.  Optics is the popular word these days.  Everything to do with optics, signals.  Twin towers are now a hole in the ground, right?  Two blocks away a 13-story mosque.  There’s your optic.  The World Trade Center, a hole in the ground, two blocks away, a 13-story mosque.  And the infidel is too gullible to interpret it for what it is.  The American left, the Democrats, Obama on down, are too gullible to interpret that optic for what it is.

Indeed.  It’s to Sullivan’s disgrace that he apparently can’t comprehend this.

Pages: 1 2