Is the controversy over building a mosque near ground zero a grand distraction or a grand opportunity? Or is it, once again, grandiose demagoguery?
It has been said, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Are we not overly preoccupied with this controversy, now being used in various ways by grandstanding politicians? It looks to me like the politicians are “fiddling while the economy burns.”
The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.
Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.”
Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate, raises the question of just why and driven by whom?
In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.
They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars. A select quote from soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq expressing concern over the mosque is pure propaganda and an affront to their bravery and sacrifice.
The claim is that we are in the Middle East to protect our liberties is misleading. To continue this charade, millions of Muslims are indicted and we are obligated to rescue them from their religious and political leaders. And, we’re supposed to believe that abusing our liberties here at home and pursuing unconstitutional wars overseas will solve our problems.
The nineteen suicide bombers didn’t come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. Fifteen came from our ally Saudi Arabia, a country that harbors strong American resentment, yet we invade and occupy Iraq where no al Qaeda existed prior to 9/11.
Many fellow conservatives say they understand the property rights and 1st Amendment issues and don’t want a legal ban on building the mosque. They just want everybody to be “sensitive” and force, through public pressure, cancellation of the mosque construction.
This sentiment seems to confirm that Islam itself is to be made the issue, and radical religious Islamic views were the only reasons for 9/11. If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible.
There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred?
If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable.
The justification to ban the mosque is no more rational than banning a soccer field in the same place because all the suicide bombers loved to play soccer.
Conservatives are once again, unfortunately, failing to defend private property rights, a policy we claim to cherish. In addition conservatives missed a chance to challenge the hypocrisy of the left which now claims they defend property rights of Muslims, yet rarely if ever, the property rights of American private businesses.
Defending the controversial use of property should be no more difficult than defending the 1st Amendment principle of defending controversial speech. But many conservatives and liberals do not want to diminish the hatred for Islam–the driving emotion that keeps us in the wars in the Middle East and Central Asia.
It is repeatedly said that 64% of the people, after listening to the political demagogues, don’t want the mosque to be built. What would we do if 75% of the people insist that no more Catholic churches be built in New York City? The point being is that majorities can become oppressors of minority rights as well as individual dictators. Statistics of support is irrelevant when it comes to the purpose of government in a free society—protecting liberty.
The outcry over the building of the mosque, near ground zero, implies that Islam alone was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to those who are condemning the building of the mosque, the nineteen suicide terrorists on 9/11 spoke for all Muslims. This is like blaming all Christians for the wars of aggression and occupation because some Christians supported the neo-conservatives’ aggressive wars.
The House Speaker is now treading on a slippery slope by demanding a Congressional investigation to find out just who is funding the mosque—a bold rejection of property rights, 1st Amendment rights, and the Rule of Law—in order to look tough against Islam.
This is all about hate and Islamaphobia.
We now have an epidemic of “sunshine patriots” on both the right and the left who are all for freedom, as long as there’s no controversy and nobody is offended.
Political demagoguery rules when truth and liberty are ignored.
Processing your request, Please wait....
ron’s more than a little ignorant about the teachings of islam and the percentage of “radicals” out there and that their anger at the usa comes from their teachings, not what the usa does or did. but I hope he gets to become president so he can learn
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree with Ron Paul’s assessment about the Congressional Demagoging over the Mosque at ground zero and I agree with Ron Paul’s stand on the hatred that we ALL see coming from the Middle East Islamic nations toward the US being due in big part to our Interventionist, warmongering foreign policies under the leadership of BOTH political parties. What I am still curious about and can not find anywhere is what Ron Paul knows about Islam in general. I want to know what he thinks of it as both a religion and a Socialistic Theocracy and how that would influence his foreign policy and interaction with the Islamic world if he were elected President in 2012. I have spent boatloads of time reading the Quran, reading the founding documents of the Muslim Brotherhood, who have captured the governments of Egypt and other Islamic nations that have had a “Revolution” of late and I want to know how he intends to deal with them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
While I certainly applaud Mr. Paul for saying this bold and brash statement; today on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 I am reminded of one name that has been left off the roll call of those who perished under the Twin Towers collapse. This name is not that of a person; but of a building. Not just any mere building; but a church which stood in Lower Manhattan for 85 years before the South Tower’s collapse totally decimated it. I’m referring to St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church; and ten years later they are STILL BEING STONEWALLED by the city, county & state of New York to rebuild their shrine to a saintly bishop who is better known here in the west as ‘Santa Claus’. While I do believe that Muslims have a right to build a mosque near Ground Zero; I also hold the same should go for the Orthodox as well; if not firstly.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
I’m really getting sick of people taking 3 words or half a sentence from Dr. Paul on this topic and using it as an attack against him.
Today I saw “I don’t believe for a minute that the, quote, religion of Islam is our enemy”, several times in reference to him supporting Sharia law and supporting Al-qaeda and terrorists. It was in reference to our Congress wasting time discussing the building of a Mosque near the WTC site when they need to be focused on our financial crises. Not to mention violation of civil and property rights. He’s right in this.
The U.S. was supposed to be a “religious tolerant” place, where waves of people in the past have fled to escape persecution. Those of us who are multi-generational Americans had ancestors who came here between the 1600′s to 1800′s for that reason. To blame an entire religion for an extreme sector within it is ridiculous.
I’m sick of the fact that the media is leaving out that Dr. Paul distinguishes between the radical Islamist and the religion (as should be done).
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
This is something you would never hear any other politician say. It just goes to show that the White House has never changed Paul. And when he becomes president, things will really start moving. Finally, peace for everyone.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
This is easily the bravest, and most patriotic statement by a politician in my lifetime.
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Fools folks, why you all change your topic from radicals Islam into black white racist.
Look mid east, you will find same skin color, same hairtype, same eyes color, but it fight and kill each others in the name of “most true translation of arab quran holy language”. After they all in one , then they will fight again in the name of “family group” and so on.
America is one greatest nation because it implement differences. Shariah can’t implement this thing. So what happen is the fight between democracy againts shariah just like before yesterday once more democracy againts communism.
Just prepared for one rambo action once more.
Like or Dislike:
1 
2