Now Imam Rauf says if only he had known the sensitivities involved in his proposed mosque near Ground Zero, he might not have gone ahead. Does this now mean that he is going to withdraw his controversial plan? Well, no.
The problem, you see, is those darned Muslims around the world. If Imam Rauf does the decent thing and moves his mosque elsewhere, he cannot be responsible for the rioting and mayhem that will ensue among followers of the “religion of peace.” So, as much as he regrets it, he’s going to be forced–forced, mind you–to go ahead with it.
Why is it that no matter what is done in America regarding the “religion of peace,” the answer is always the same? A bozo pastor announces that he will burn the Qur’an and everyone from the president on down pleads with him to forgo his First Amendment rights. Why? For fear of what the Muslim “street” will do, even to our well-armed and well-trained troops (as if the fanatics weren’t already doing whatever they could to kill them).
Meanwhile, an imam says he will build the offensive mosque near Ground Zero, not because he is celebrating what Muslims did on 9/11, but because if he doesn’t, the Muslim “street” will erupt at the perceived provocation.
I have a few questions. If the Muslim “street” is so easily provoked, does Islam deserve its title as a “religion of peace”? Here’s another question: If all these high-profile people can convince a two-bit, penny-ante pastor to halt his stupid plan out of fear for what the Muslim “street” may do, what message will that send to the “street”?
My guess is that it will signal that we are afraid, and that the threat of violence can work, and that America is easily cowed. Is our nation now going to weigh every decision based on what the “street” would do? That would be a dark path to walk indeed.
Yes, the bozo pastor should rethink his foolish plan to burn the Muslim holy book. But even if he does come to his senses, it’s really too late. The damage has been done. The “street” apparently has veto power in America.