A mosque at Ground Zero

I read a recent op-ed by Rav Shmuely Boteach in which he shares his thoughts regarding the proposed plans to build a $100 million, 13-story Islamic cultural center and mosque near Ground Zero in New York City.  Not surprisingly, the families of the dead from the mass murder of 9/11 are displeased.

Ever an optimist, however, Rav Shmuely thinks it could work.  His suggestion is to allow the construction to proceed, but to require that the cultural center include a museum charting the rise of militant, extremist Islam, its “hate-based agenda,” and how it is an evil perversion of Islam.  This, he believes, would be a “simple, elegant, and deeply moral solution” to the question of whether or not to build a monument to Islam next to the graves of 3000 people who died because of it.

I cannot quibble with his argument that America is a land where people are allowed to worship freely and—by extension—that it is well nigh impossible to legislate good taste.  Had the events of 9/11 not taken place a mere few blocks from the proposed site of the center, there would probably be no discussion of this matter at all.

But the fact is, Ground Zero and its environs are inextricable from what happened there nearly 10 years ago (the 10th anniversary of which is the chosen date to inaugurate the new Islamic center—in yet another gesture of dubious taste).  One may request or insist that Muslims build a museum that is sharply critical of Islamist terrorism, but even if they were to agree to comply (and there’s nothing to suggest that a Saudi-funded Muslim group is anything approaching critical of the events of 9/11), one man’s extremism is another’s glorified martyrdom.  Muslims may attend such an exhibition and indeed feel horror and anger at the way their religion has been hijacked by hate-mongers and blood-thirsty fanatics; others, however, either overtly or covertly, will view a detailed, gruesome account of their religion’s death-cult and its campaign of murder and mayhem with approval and satisfaction.  Because the truth is, Islam does lend itself easily to those who interpret it violently.  Their dichotomy of the world is the “House of Islam” and the “House of War” (i.e. everyone else).  Those who are not Muslims are to be despised as inferior beings, or dhimmis (unless, of course, they embrace Islam).  For a Muslim, the only time to negotiate with the Infidel is when the Muslim is weak; when the Muslim gains in strength, all bets are off and the Muslim is entitled to renege on his agreements with the Infidel.  For particularly crazed, farbrennter Muslims like Mahmoud Ahmedinejad who entertain violent eschatological fantasies, anticipating the 12th imam (the Mahdi, whose arrival marks their End of Days) can be shortened by creating havoc and destruction in the world.  The mentality described here is not concerned with creating peace in the world, with introspection, or with honoring the wishes or feelings of non-Muslims.  The reports from around the world in cities where the Muslim population is growing and gaining in influence tell of a people whose own feelings and sensitivities must be respected, but who have little regard for the feelings or sensitivities of others.

Unlike Rav Shmuely, I don’t think there is any “simple, elegant, [or] deeply moral solution” to this proposal, except perhaps to divvy up the money raised for the center and distribute it to the families of the victims.  Let’s have less submission (“Islam”) and more contrition.

Advertisement