I’ve been elated and then profoundly disappointed by this whole aspect of “Why The Mosque Can’t or Won’t be Built”, as it relates to trade and labor unionists.
Why? Because most of what I’ve heard on the radio are brief interviews with Union this-or-that workers who boldly claim that his union and all his fellows would not pick up a hammer to in any way aid in the construction of a Mosque at Ground Zero. That all sounds great until he gets to Part Two, which is usually something like “But if they move it six blocks away, I’ll be the first in line”.
I’ve heard and read this at least half a dozen times in the past week.
THIS unfortunately is where things are now: it started with the feeble opening gambit of those against the Mosque opening the dialogue with the “It’s insensitive” template.
(NO KIDDING!) thereafter, we’ve gotta engage in a ludicrous conversation about whether it is or isn’t ‘sensitive’.
Fact is, the Mosque should not be built anywhere in New York. It’s not a Mosque, there are already a hundred of them in the five boroughs. It’s a Presidential Palace for Imam Rauf to rule over all of NY’s Muslims, and he slowly tries to further radicalize them, and bring them ,ten or twenty years from now, AND us, a century from now, under Sharia Law.
Yes, it is disturbing. I am not for thought-policing people, but when you’ve got openly subversive groups working to destroy America you’re foolish not to take action.
Look at what happened to McCarthy. He was right on, but the threat manipulated the situation and they’ve had free reign ever since.
We’re walking a tight rope and it is too easy for the media to paint us a bigots. I think using the term Islamists is important because it let’s us take a reasonable middle ground against the most radical elements.
Focusing on Sharia, Victory Mosques and the radicalism of Imam Rauf are important as well.
Pray for the Republic.