Imam Rauf goes on CNN and says the handling of Islamic center plan is a matter of national security, because if they move the location
“The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack.”
Does that mean we Americans will be in danger?
Moving the project to another location would strengthen Islamist radicals’ ability to recruit followers and will likely increase violence against Americans, the imam said.
Do as he says or else.
Listen to him,
Veiled threats in the spirit of intertfaith understanding?
If some nut in Florida burns korans? Our national security is hurt.
If we don’t build a mosque? Our national security is hurt.
And of course the Imam claims,
“had I known [the controversy] would happen we certainly would never have done this.” Asked if he meant he would not have picked the location, Rauf said, “we would not have done something that would create more divisiveness.”
Today’s news is brought to you by the word Taqiyya:
The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralising any criticism of Islam or Muslims.
Remember that word every time the Iman opens his mouth.
At Breitbart TV
The man who continues to talk about healing and building bridges has thrown down the gauntlet. He created this entire situation by demanding that his mega-mosque be built in this exact location, despite the legitimate concerns of families of lost heroes whom he claims to care about. And now that the opposition of this mosque has fully engaged and has successfully swayed a vast majority of Americans to their side, he tells an international audience that if his plans don’t go forward, America’s national security will be at risk.
It could be that the Imam’s threats, delivered in calm even tones, might end up doing more for the case against his mosque than any rally in the streets could ever do. And given Mr. Rauf’s knowledge of the irrational and violent nature of the most radical practitioners of his faith, one has to challenge his judgment in even proposing this project in the first place.
While Rauf was out of town and disdaining all questions about such venal matters as money, New Jersey’s Bergen Record was digging up some fascinating material on the Lexus-driving Armani-clad imam’s alternate career as a proprietor of roach-infested, filth-plagued, poorly maintained, taxpayer-subsidized low-income housing in New Jersey — including some of the related financial tangles. And Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism was uncovering oddities pertaining to the tax-exempt “church” status of Rauf and Khan’s American Society for Muslim Advancement, or ASMA, which shares an office with the Cordoba Initiative, and is involved in its finances. As for building bridges… what does that mean? It’s a metaphor drawn from the same stack of baloney that the Islamic Republic of Iran served up when it proposed the U.N.’s 2001 project for a “Dialogue of Civilizations” (out of which came the UN’s current Alliance of Civilizations, now partnering with Rauf’s Cordoba Initiative). In planting one end of his bridge at Ground Zero, with all the attendant jarred nerves and publicity value, where exactly will Rauf be planting the other end? Who will be traversing this bridge? Which way? Who will be paying for it? And why?