[Editor’s note: Alan Dershowitz submitted an article to Frontpagemag.com criticizing the Anti-Defamation League’s opposition to the plans for a mosque to be built at Ground Zero. We decided to run the piece with a rebuttal by Victor Davis Hanson. An extra round between the two follows.]
Anti-Defamation League Should Not Oppose Mosques At Ground Zero
By Alan M. Dershowitz
The ADL’s decision to oppose the building of a 13 story Muslim center two blocks from Ground Zero is inconsistent with its mission. The ADL has a long and distinguished history of opposing bigotry, supporting multiculturalism and advocating tolerance. Though it began as an organization dedicated to combating anti-Semitism, it has become one of the most potent forces against all forms of religious, ethnic and racial bigotry. Following the mass murders perpetrated on 9/11 by Islamic extremists, the ADL was in the forefront of standing up against those who would use this hateful attack to generalize hatred against all Muslims or all Arabs.
In light of this history, I would have expected the ADL to support the building of this Muslim community center, which would include a mosque, a performing arts center, a pool and a restaurant. At the very least I would have expected it to remain silent and not to lend its powerful and distinguished voice to an opposition that includes many bigots along with many decent people who have expressed legitimate concerns about the structure.
Reasonable people can disagree about the merits of building a Muslim center so close to the sight of a horrendous crime committed in the name of Islam by extremists who do not represent their religion. Many Jews were deeply offended when a Roman Catholic covenant was built adjacent to Auschwitz.
Supporters argue that the proximity of the mosque to the site of this crime sends a powerful message that there are many Muslims in the world who identify with the victims rather than the perpetrators. The most influential opposition comes from families of many of the victims who were killed at Ground Zero, though some families favor the project while others have remained silent.
Let the debate continue, but let the ADL not lend its imprimatur of tolerance to those who stand in opposition. Inevitably, this has become a political debate with rightwing republicans such as Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich leading the political campaign against it, while Mayor Michael Bloomberg has strongly supported the project on grounds of religious freedom, arguing that government should have no role in dictating where a mosque can be situated. As Bloomberg put it, “what is great about America, and particularly New York, is we welcome everybody, and if we are so afraid of something like this, what does that say about us? Democracy is stronger than this…”
The ADL’s decision to join this debate on the side of those who oppose the mosque was exacerbated by the reason given by Abe Foxman, a friend and a man who I admire, for why the opposition of some families was an important part of why the ADL came down against the project. Mr. Foxman, who himself survived the Holocaust, was quoted in The New York Times saying: ”Survivors of the Holocaust are entitled to feelings that are irrational.” Referring to the loved ones of the 9/11 victims, he added, “Their anguish entitles them to a position that others would categorize as irrational or bigoted.”
This is a dangerous argument that has implications totally inconsistent with the mission of the ADL. Bigotry is often a result of victimization, perceived or real. Many Germans felt victimized following World War I, and some blamed the Jews. Although their position was “irrational or bigoted,” they were not entitled to act on it. Nor are Palestinians who feel victimized by Israel entitled to be bigoted against Jews. There is simply is no excuse for bigotry, and the ADL ought to know that better than any other organization.
The ADL was founded as the result of irrational bigotry directed against a Jew named Leo Frank by a Ku Klux Klan type organization calling itself the Knights of Mary Phagan. They lynched Leo Frank in the name of an alleged victim of rape and murder. The fact that Frank was totally innocent didn’t matter to them. Their anguish over her victimization did not entitle them to their irrationality and bigotry. The ADL should know better than to provide an “abuse excuse” to bigots based on perceived victimization.
The vast majority of those who oppose the mosque at Ground Zero are neither bigoted nor irrational. Some are. So are some who favor it. That is not the issue. The issue is whether a great human rights organization should oppose the building of a Muslim center near Ground Zero. I have heard no rational reason from the ADL why it should stand in opposition to this project.
I hope that Abe Foxman was misquoted or misspoke and that he will withdraw both his opposition to the mosque and most especially the argument he offered for it. The ADL should continue with its noble mission of siding with the victims of bigotry rather than making excuses for those who engage in bigotry.
Alan Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. He is the author of more than 20 works of fiction and non-fiction, including Blasphemy: How the Religious Right is Hijacking the Declaration of Independence (2007) and The Case for Israel (2003).
*
Emboldening the Enemy
By Victor Davis Hanson
I am not well enough acquainted with the history of the Anti-Defamation League to offer a competent analysis about its proper reaction to the Mosque at Ground Zero controversy. But the issue raises larger questions that I think all reasonable people should be concerned with.
1) What little we know about Khan/Rauf family connection to the Mosque is not encouraging; at the least, it seems that a key proponent of the mosque cannot fully explain exactly from where all the funding arises, or whether in the past Mr. Rauf has shown sympathy for radical terrorists. So there is a legitimate concern that those in the past who offered apologies for the tactics of Islamic terrorism are now to be financially connected to those building a mosque near a site where 3,000 American perished due to Islamic terrorism. Why not a simple, transparent and full accounting?
2) Municipalities, through zoning pressures and laws, make all sorts of decisions about the sorts of construction allowed. Surely, this falls into the category of taste. Professor Dershowitz cites the Roman Catholic convent near Auschwitz as a parallel. Aside from the fact that the construction of such a building likewise showed poor taste and so, as I recall, was closed by Pope Paul II in 1993, it is an inexact parallel, in that the perpetrators of the Holocaust were agnostic or atheist Nazi pagans, who saw the church as valuable only as a social institution to preserve order and tradition.
Indeed, the Nazis targeted many Christians for their pacifism, anti-Nazi activity and sympathy for the Jews. But at Ground Zero, the religious symbolism of a huge mosque, fairly or not, resonates with the purported beliefs of the mass murderers. Hawaiians would not allow a Bushido shrine (unlike the Nazis, the Japanese fascists absorbed religion into their ideology) near the USS Arizona, not because they are bigots, but because they are sensitive to the dead and the symbolism that might thus arise. They know it would insult the memory of those who were entombed below, and at the same time give encouragement to right-wing fanatical Japanese extremists.
I see no difference between Islam, Nazis, or the Klan. These groups kill people. There are lots of pictures of Hitler with Muslims. The Klan is an organization that hates different people, like Islam hates the Jews and Christians. Islam teaches we are apes and pigs. How many churches are in Saudi Arabia?
Its all just hate on your dial. Same circus, different clown outfits.
Mustafa either ignorant of the history and teachings of your own religion—the Qur’an, Hadith and Sunna—or is practicing “kitman,” a formal Islamic doctrine of deception. Kitman is telling the truth but not the whole truth with the intention to mislead unbelievers—the kuffar.
Here are some Suras and excerpts from the Qur’an that you can start to explain away:
Sura 9.29, 30: “Declare war upon those to whom the Scriptures were revealed but believe neither in God nor the Last Day, and who do not forbid that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who refuse to acknowledge the true religion [Islam] until they pay the poll-tax without reservation and are totally subjugated.”
“The Jews claim that Ezra is the son of God, and the Christians say, ‘the Messiah is a son of God.’ Those are their claims which do indeed resemble the sayings of the Infidels of Old. May God do battle with them! How they are deluded.”
“And they fully deserve any punishment they get.”
Sura 8.65: “O Prophet! Rouse the Believers to fight,” the Qur’an orders, and promises the twenty Muslims, “patient and preserving,” would vanquish two hundred unbelievers; if a hundred, they will vanquish a thousand.
Sura 2.191: “And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter.”
Sura 9.5: “fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them.” This famous Sura (9.29) of the Sword leaves no room for ambiguity. It abrogates the much over quoted Sura 2.256, “Let there be no compulsion in religion.”
Sura 58.3: The Qur’an assures Muslims the right to own slaves—“to possess their necks”— either by purchasing them or as bounty of war.
Sura 5.63: According to this Sura Jews have an intense hatred of all true Muslims, and as a punishment for their sins, some of the Jews had, in the past, been changed into “apes and swine,” and others will have their hands tied to their necks and be cast into the fire on Judgment day.
If one of the main stated goals of the mosk is reconciliation, let's ponder what that means.
When I read about reconciliation I see such concepts as taking responsibility, repentance, building confidence and trust, and empathy. One source states that reconciliation based on ambiguity can not last.
The first step is healing the wounds of the survivors, accompanied by some form of retributive or restorative justice, with truth-telling and reparation of the damage.
The muslims need to recognize and acknowledge the role their religion played in 9/11. This is not blaming others, calling them 'hijacker-hijackers' of the religion, but rather stating honestly what parts of their own text helped lead to the attack.
I see little of true reconciliation in the manner in which this mosk has been promoted and pursued. This logically leads to questions of true motivation.
Totally lacking in empathy, no acceptance of responsibility, no truth-telling and no reparation of damage means no reconciliation.
Pushing the mosk under this scenario is hurtful and self-centered.
If they really want reconciliation they will put the process on hold and enter into a true dialogue leading to a legitimate process of reconciliation.
Why don't I find any discussion of this in the commentary?
Almost three thousand innocent people were murdered by muslims at Ground Zero, More than eight thousand American service men and women were killed by muslims. Four hundred American citizens were held captive in Iran for more than a year. Muslims have murdered more muslims than were killed in all the wars since 1948 with Israel.
See what would happen if Christians tried to build a church in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt or any muslim country. It would never happen. Ask American soldiers who risk their lives daily trying to bring democracy to muslim countries what they think of building a mosque at ground Zero. Mayor Bromberg has his own political and financial reasons for wanting this. It has nothing to do with freedom of religion. There are other places to build a mosque.
if this mosque is to be built let's build a Hooters next door, a rib joint on the other side & a
dog kennel across the street. infidels have rights in america too.
you know what? I actually love this idea. the Muzzies would threaten to cut off some infidel heads, and Mayor Bloomberg would castigate us for not being tolerant to our Islamic buddies. Eric Holder would swoop into town with a lawsuit against the infidels and Al Sharpton would organize a protest.
I say a dog grooming business on one side, and a Tony Roma's on the other. boo-yah!
NEver forget liberals like Dershowitz and Bloomberg live in an "intellectual" world…talking, discussion, school studies, books, abstract thoughts and words about things they never encournter…..fighting, protecting ones family from marauding bands of genocidal killers (Sudan), watching bombs blow up their neighbors in markets, seeing their nation torn apart by Islam (Lebanon, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan), seeing women in shrouds, kept in virtual slavery without any rights….etc etc…..so to liberal intellectuals, it's all news articles they might comment on….nothing more. To them a mosque at Ground Zero is not an insult or a provocation…no, it's just a legal matter, an issue for discussion and shrugging acceptance. This is why Michael Savage said, "Liberalism is a mental disorder/" Liberalism refuses to see the real world….instead, sets up an idealized, abstract intellectual world of moral equivalency, respected rights, treaties and all the rest of the delusions…..
We, the Muslims go into the Democratic sphere in order to acquire weapons from its arsenal. We become Lords, MP's, Councillors and Officials of all descriptions. We do this to paralyze Democracy with its own assistance. If Democracy is stupid enough to give us unlimited immigration, benefits, expenses and credibility for providing this service then that is its affair. We'll take any legal and sometimes illegal means to revolutionise and undermine the existing situation. If we succeed in putting 1000 or 2000 agitators and radicals into positions of power then the state itself will supply and finance our fighting machinery. One should not believe that parliamentarism is our goal. We come like the wolf tearing into the flock of sheep, that is how we come. Now you Dhimmis have opened the door, we will pour through it.____This is plagiarised from a speech given by Goebbels in 1928.____
I think what gets me is the fact that the Muslims say that this thing will be a cultural centre. What culture ? I suppose they could provide music, dancing and art, however there is a slight problem. All these things are Hallal. So what will we get ? Perhaps they can stage stonings, female genital mutilation, Burqua parades, authentic hallal ritual slaughter, people chopping the hands off thieves, hangings, shootings, rocket attacks and perhaps if we are very lucky a Muslim blowing himself up with the aid of a suicide vest. Muslim culture ? Don't make me laugh !
Hanson is mistaken in one regard — there are indeed Shinto shrines within blocks of the Arizona memorial.
Alan Dershowitz is a self hating Jewish liberal who does NOT understand what Islam is and its aspirations to turn the world into an Islamic caliphate similar to the Taliban. Building a mosque near the Ground Zero is an insult to the victims and shows how Muslims are showing their victory over the American infidels. They have built mosques on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. They turned the cathedral in Istanbul into a mosque and in India over Hindu temples where angry Hindus took hammers and destroyed the Islamic insult to their faith after 400 years. I'm still waiting for angry Jews to destroy the Al Aqsa and Golden Dome mosques.
Bloomberg's endorsement of the mosque is plain treason and should be prosecuted in a court of law.
Preferably followed by an extremely punitive sentence.
TO: Reason for Life:
"If America is so weak that we cannot withstand an insult without sacrificing the First Amendment, then perhaps we don't deserve the liberty that the Founders sought to establish. "
My goodness! Stop wasting our time with cheap philosophies that fit better in the mouths of the leftists/liberals/progressives, whatever they call themselves nowadays! Sometimes a dilemma will be resolved by studying each case by each case rather than throwing them all into one big bag, like a zombie that walks over everything! Arab muslims and all other muslims will be attacking us for for the sake of attacking because they are such primitive savages and not because we do this or that.
I take my hat to ADL for taking the RIGHT position on this matter! When oh when will people decide on studying the separate matters and not go on like a zombie walking over everything???
The most effective arguments for building the ground zero supremacist mega mosque the Muslims and their Leftist allies are using is the religious freedom argument and the argument that if Muslims can’t build mosques, then Christians and Jews will not be able to build churches and synagogues too.
However, everyone against the building of the ground zero supremacist mega mosque are missing a really great opportunity to expose what Islam really is when they fail to challenge those religious freedom arguments head on, since Islam besides being a religion, is also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination. Hence, you can’t dissect Islam and take only a tiny part of it, while at the same time you ignore the greatest part of it to circumvent the constitution. You must take Islam in totality for what it really is, a totalitarian theo-political ideology with the main goal and sole purpose of subjugating the world via the imposition of Sharia, and no such system is protected under the first amendment of the constitution or any other amendment for that matter.
Indeed, every time that Islam is being referred to as being a religion only, a patriotic American should insist on clarifying what Islam really is. If we keep allowing this inaccurate perception of Islam to go unchallenged, then we may as well submit to dhimmitude, because that is what in essences will happen.
Moreover, on the religious aspects of Islam, we should also not let even that part go unchallenged, as Islam in stark contrast to faith-based religions is also the only religion of submission in the world, whereby all Muslims must submit to the will of Allah, i.e., Sharia, the divine will of Allah. Then lets remind everyone what Sharia is, a harsh totalitarian legal system that institutionalizes discrimination against females and non-Muslims and that also incorporates a system of draconian punishments such as stonings, amputations, and beheadings.
Not only that, but the religion of Islam also forbids the freedom of conscience under the pain of death. Hence, a Muslim can’t leave the religion of Islam as that is murtaad (apostasy), which is a very serious offense in Islam that is punished by death. Furthermore, a Muslim can’t even question the tenets of their religion, as that is blasphemy, an offense under Islam also punishable under the pain of death.
Indeed, unless we are prepared to meet the freedom of religion arguments head on then we will never stop the impending Islamization of our society. Therefore, we must oppose the building of the ground zero supremacist mega mosque not only because it is a symbol of Muslim supremacism and an indignation to the victims of 9/11, but also because Islam is not just a religion, since it is also a very radical form of totalitarianism that seeks world domination. Don’t believe me? Hell, just look inside every Muslim country in the world today and tell me what you see!
How about a memorial honoring SS stormtroopers next to Yad Vashem in Israel?
Mr. Dershowitz is like many Jewish people who will bend over backwards in order to prove they are fair.
Sadly they only prove they are weak and insecure. Since there are many like him I fear the fate or Israel will be ugly.
What is missing from his argument is that most New Yorkers (cab drivers exempt) do not want the mosque …what about their rights ? They do have a dog in this fight whether Dirtshowitz likes it or not.
Hasn't anyone noticed? Alan Dershowitz is a liberal. He always argues against any position which is less liberal than his own. He cannot help himself. He may pretend to be loyal to the Jewish people, but his true loyalty is to progressivism, and his own image as a defender of the downtrodden, or whatever. RJ of NM is right – Hanson has the whole of western history behind him. Also, current realities.
Dershowitz and Bloomburg are bad for the Jews. Isn't there someone out there who will investigate this commission that approved the building of the mosque? I strongly suspect there was a lot of petro-dollars paid out, possibly in cash, to get this thing thru. Either that or New Yorkers really are as dumb as they appear (after all they elected Bloomburg for mayor and were represented by Shumer and Clinton in the Senate).
Let us not forget that it was Muslims who flew the planes into the WTC causing the deaths of 3000 Americans. It was not a military maneuver. They were civilians. They were part of the radical Muslim group wishing to demoralize or conquer the "Great Satan". Muslims are against Christianity, cannot live alongside Christians in their own country, nor wish to live alongside Christians anywhere else. The people wishing to build the Mosque are civilian Muslims claiming to a peaceful mission while denying their affiliation to that radical faction of Islam, but they have yet to prove that there is no connection financially or religiously. That group has yet to openly condemn radical Islamic al Queda operations. This is America founded on Christian principles, still considered a Christian Nation, and most of the average people all across this country appear to be against allowing such a "piss on you" monument to be built next to what is considered a site of an Islamic attack against our principles.
George Jonas wrote an excellent commentary in the National Post, titled: "A strange way to promote 'understanding'". He argues that we don't have to give credence to their "phony rationale" about "building understanding" of Islam. Unless, of course, the building of this mosque at/near Ground Zero entails "understanding" that Islam is a triumphalist religion with zero respect for the feelings of victims of Islamic terrorist attacks! The "understanding" certainly cannot be about easing "tensions" — clearly this is designed to increase tensions (and, who, pray tell, wishes to increase tensions if not radical fundamentalists?) (I'm also going to look up Dershowitz's Chutzpah text…to review some of his arguments.)
STRAW DOGS AND MR DERSHOWITZ
Mr. Dershowitz, when he might have addressed the issue on the merits built two straw dog and proceeded to rend them to bits. That a Jew might say, out of the recollection of his pain and as a lyrical expression of the horrors of a holocaust, that Jews are entitled to their irrationalism, Mr. Dershowitz took him literally and used up most of his space preaching to the choir that bigotry is wrong. His argument regarding bigotry is as correct as it is irrelevant. What then precisely is his point? That we Americans must bow our heads and debase ourselves and our nation by permitting the building of a mosque in the rubble of the Twin Towers– this to show how liberal and "multicultural" we are. (By the way, Jews did not survive the ages by being multicultural; they survived by being Jews!. How well would multiculturalism have worked for Jews had they embraced its ideology in say, Germany around 1935)?
Are we, like Mr. Dershowitz, so without the capacity of literary illusion, that like him we cannot see in the building of this mosque a symbol of Jihadist martial, moral and intellectual conquest? While, of course, Mr. Dershowitz took pains to see that the word bigot found its way into his analysis– and surely somewhere in the U.S., somewhere hiding in his hole and reading NAZI literature, is a bigot or two. But his reference to the bigot simply demonstrates that he is wrestling straw dogs. This is not about bigotry.
The immediate victims of the 911 killing spree are not bigots. Neither are Americans. Mr. D's accusation that this is otherwise, that bigotry figures as a real issue in this debate, that is, indeed, a shameful species of argument.
The Cordoba Mosque is named for the Cordoba Mosque in Spain built on the ruins of a Catholic church precisely to be an eternal a symbol of Islamic Triumphalism. So long as the Spanish might look upon it they would recall the pain, misery and dishonor of their defeat. Should we permit precisely this infamy in New York? If we do, we will convince no one that the sentiments that pass for virtue in Mr. D's cosmogony, will prove our strength and multicultural enlightenment. We will instead prove the cowardice and defeat, weakness and at last dissimitude into which Mr. D has poured his faith.
ROBERT
Dershowitz is wrong, wrong, wrong!
Dershowitz lives in the microcosmic world of petty intellectualism, abstract discussion, pedantry and debate…meanwhile ten medical workers were slaughtered by the Taliban in Afghanistan. This is the REAL world , Alan…not the Joy Behar show, not lectures at Harvard, not symposiums in the peaceful campus settings ….no the REAL world is the horror of life in Sudan, Somalia and Pakistan….Iraq….near daily terror bombings that have killed thousands over the past year…….People like Dershowitz live to watch talking heads on MSNBC or CNN….they read books and articles…but fail to see the obvious. They cannot grasp what they are embracing….a huge mega mosque just steps from Ground Zero. Are you serious, Alan…you cannot see what this represents? Are you a living man or just another topic on the View or a column in the Sunday NY Times? Michael Savage was so correct: Liberalism is a mental disorder.
OH, PS , sign the petition to halt this project……….nearly 25,000 AMericans have signed the petition. Thanks
Ground zero would be the 2nd victory mosque. The first is the Crescent of Betrayal site of Flight 93 in Shankstown, PA. Misguided fools do not recognize the symbolism and layout of this memorial either.
It's Crazy & Unbelievable to me that it isn't obvious to all, that the Muslims see us as weak & stupid (because of our degeneracy) (and their Quite right of course) & that the true purpose of this mosk is a claim on America & a monument to their victory in knocking down the twin towers. Muslims must be laughing with glee all over the world. What an encouragement for universal jahad. It sure won"t be long before we nave those CRAZY Islamic Demonstrations here like they have in Europe.
Why did the Muslims hide the fact that they only own part of the building 1/2 to be exact, con ed owns the other half.
If I might quote from Jonathan Rosenblum's article in the Jerusalem Post of 6 August:
"From its inception, Islam was a religion of conquest. MUSLIM CONQUERORS INEVITABLY DESTROYED THE PRE-EXISTING HOUSES OF WORSHIP IN CONQUERED TERRITORY AND BUILT MOSQUES IN THEIR PLACE. (Today the same impulse is expressed in efforts to build mega-mosques in major urban centers far away from Muslim population centers.) … There is no Islamic . . . recognition of the legitimacy of any legal system other than Sharia. Islam, in short, lacks vital tools for participation in a tolerant multi-cultural society. . . . Wouldn’t allowing them to build such a center next to Ground Zero constitute a gratuitous, posthumous victory for the hijackers and a desecration of the memories of their more than 3,000 victims?
Once again Dershowitz displays his dogmatic supidity with regards to the very people who will happily kill him. Despite what he sees across the world he still comes to the conclusion that we must tolerate our enemies in our very midst. I wish he would just take a vaction to the UAE, Morocco, etc. and just get it over with – let him destroy himself without harming others any further.
"They lynched Leo Frank in the name of an alleged victim of rape and murder." Wow Dershowitz — selectively minimize horrific suffering much? There was nothing "alleged" about the murder or rape of Mary Phagan. She was a child, brutally, unambiguously violated and slaughtered, most likely by a serial woman-abuser (possibly serial killer) who testified against Frank.
Facts matter.
So do human lives. Equally, right? Isn't that the point? Phagan and Leo Frank, who was surely innocent of her murder and was railroaded, died in precisely the same way. Terrorized, strangled and killed. The quotient of Frank's suffering is not reduced by denying Phagan's. Dershowitz commits the precise act he denounces.
The creepiest part is how casually he tosses off this lie, rewriting the fact of an innocent child's rape and murder in the name of celebrating tolerance. How ignorant — and yet how typical of so much of the politics of "tolerance" as they are practiced.
Build the ground zero mosque, but only after the greater body of Islam denounces and expels terrorists from their religion.
Dershowitz is wrong. This mosque is a Muslim provocation and true defenders of anti-racism, religious freedom and peaceful co-existence must make clear that disrepecting and insulting the victims is not acceptable.
Mutual respect is the beginning of true tolerance and of true religious freedom. Since this mosque is supposed to be dedicated to mutual understanding, these Muslim must understand that building a mosque in this location is very offensive. They can prove their sincerity by dedicating their mosque to all victims of Muslim terror or by relocating this mosque in another location.
Leftists don't see this mosque as an insult because they don't give a damn of 9/11 victims.