How Cordoba House became “Ground Zero Mosque”?

The proposed Cordoba House near Ground Zero

G.K. Chesterton, English author and mystery novelist once wrote, “Journalism largely consists of saying ‘Lord Jones is dead’ to people who never knew that Lord Jones was alive! Seven decades later, Chesterton’s words still stand true. Journalism is synonymous with truth but these days media neither tells full truth nor complete lie. Media employs a pendulum that prefers to swing in the space between the full truth and the complete lie. It is in this context, we must zero on the so-called ongoing “Ground Zero Mosque” debate.    

Media barons and editors transact with their readers in the currency of words. Words can be loose as well as loaded. Loose words can convert an issue into a non-issue. Loaded words act like a burning matchstick on dry grass. Therefore, the word “Iraqi insurgent” or “enemy combatant” is example of the loose words which have been heavily used by American media in Iraq war. On the contrary, “Jihadist” or “Muslim fanatic” is the example of loaded words which have been employed by a section of American press. The word “Cordoba House” will fall in the category of loose word while “Ground Zero Mosque” consists of loaded words.  

So at what point proposed “Cordoba House” became “Ground Zero Mosque”?

Cordoba House is two long blocks away in north from the World Trade Center site. The five-storey building housed Burlington Coat Factory till September 11, 2001. The factory building was lying vacant since then until a group of Muslims led by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf bought it in July 2009. The factory building is being used for Friday prayer.  New York Times was the first newspaper that ran a front-page feature on December 9, 2009 on the proposed Islamic centre but it never used the term “Ground Zero Mosque.” The front-page report did not attract any attention. On December 21, 2009, Daisy Khan, wife of Imam Abdul Rauf was interviewed by conservative media personality Laura Ingraham on Fox TV. The interview was cordial and Ingraham seemed to support the Cordoba Project. It was on this programme that the misnomer “Ground Zero Mosque” was used onscreen for the very first time. The term may have been used unconsciously on the programme but there was no controversy immediately after that. In fact, according to a search on Nexis newspaper archive, there was not a single news article on the mosque for next five and half months!  

On May 6, 2010, New York City community board committee unanimously voted in favour of the Cordoba House. On the same day, anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller wrote against the Cordoba House terming it as “monster mosque”. It is precisely at this point that a proposed 13-storey proposed Islamic cultural centre, which, in addition to a prayer room, will include a basketball court, restaurant, swimming pool and 9/11 memorial, was just reduced to a “mosque”! Geller went further to plant a lie that the “mosque” was being built on the site of World Trade Center! “What better way to mark your territory than to plant a giant mosque on the still-barren land of the World Trade Center?” she wrote on her Atlas Shrugs blog. “This is Islamic domination and expansionism. The location is no accident. Just as Al-Aqsa was built on top of the Temple in Jerusalem.” 

On the same day, Rupert Murdoch owned New York Post ran a story which deliberately identified Cordoba House as “WTC Mosque.” News agency Associated Press (AP) ran a story on May 7 quoting relatives of 9/11 victims with differing opinions on the “mosque”. On the same day, Geller’s group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), launched a campaign “Stop the 911 Mosque!” She posted the names and contact information for New York mayor and members of the community board, encouraging people to write. Uninformed, gullible Americans and anti-Muslims from all across the world wrote to the board without verifying the details that there is no mosque being built on the site of the terrorists attack! 

On May 8, 2010, Geller and Robert Spencer, a known-Muslim-hater and associate director of SIOA, announced first protest against the “911 Mosque” to be held on May 29. One May 10, New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser becomes the first journalist-victim of Geller campaign. She openly wrote against the “mosque” saying that “there are better places to put a mosque.” On May 13, she devoted an entire article to Cordoba House provocatively titled “Mosque Madness at Ground Zero”. The article played an important role in raising and shaping the debate in the sense that it was the first article to be published in a newspaper which portrayed the Cordoba project as inherently wrong and suspect. Peyser quoted Geller thus giving credence to an agony aunt! (Geller once suggested that Malcolm X was Obama’s real father!)  

Thus within a month, Cordoba House, unnecessarily became controversial. It began with anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller. Andrea Peyser peddled it into conservative media. Mainstream media lapped it up further. A serious newspaper like The Wall Street Journal used the erroneous term “Ground Zero Mosque” in its headline several times. Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York, termed the mosque as “desecration”. Politicians like Sarah Palin, Peter King,   Newt Gingrich and Tim Pawlenty followed suit. 

Today, the atmosphere has become so much charged and heated in America that according to CNN poll 7 in 10 Americans say that they are against the Cordoba Project. By joining the words “Mosque” and “Ground Zero”, peddlers of hate have succeeded in creating fear in American hearts. To many Americans, “mosque” is still a dangerous place. “Ground Zero” is another dangerous word. Two meanings from the American Heritage dictionary would suffice. Ground Zero means;  a) Area where an atomic bomb is detonated, b) A center of explosive change. 

It is also true that many Americans including Mayor Bloomberg of New York have spoken in favour of Cordoba House. But men like Bloomberg seem to be in minority. There is another mosque in Manhattan, near WTC and Pentagon, another terrorist attack site, has a prayer room. Why have not Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer spoken against these two “mosques” in the ongoing debate?

Americans aren’t dumb but an average American is more ignorant than an Indian. According to a recent poll one in five Americans believes Barack Obama is a Muslim, even though he isn’t! A quarter of those who believe he is a Muslim also claimed he talks about his faith too much! Where are they getting their information? Sixty per cent said they learned it from the media!

America needs to have a mass public awareness campaign against the likes of Gellers and Spencers and misleading media. Barack Hussein Obama must make a distinction between “full truth” and “complete lie.”

Till then Pamela Geller will laugh that her wildest dream has crossed the Atlantic.

The Sunday Inquilab, August 29, 2010

Source: http://mubasshir.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-cordoba-house-became-ground-zero.html

»»  read more

How Cordoba House became “Ground Zero Mosque”?

The proposed Cordoba House near Ground Zero

G.K. Chesterton, English author and mystery novelist once wrote, “Journalism largely consists of saying ‘Lord Jones is dead’ to people who never knew that Lord Jones was alive! Seven decades later, Chesterton’s words still stand true. Journalism is synonymous with truth but these days media neither tells full truth nor complete lie. Media employs a pendulum that prefers to swing in the space between the full truth and the complete lie. It is in this context, we must zero on the so-called ongoing “Ground Zero Mosque” debate.    

Media barons and editors transact with their readers in the currency of words. Words can be loose as well as loaded. Loose words can convert an issue into a non-issue. Loaded words act like a burning matchstick on dry grass. Therefore, the word “Iraqi insurgent” or “enemy combatant” is example of the loose words which have been heavily used by American media in Iraq war. On the contrary, “Jihadist” or “Muslim fanatic” is the example of loaded words which have been employed by a section of American press. The word “Cordoba House” will fall in the category of loose word while “Ground Zero Mosque” consists of loaded words.  

So at what point proposed “Cordoba House” became “Ground Zero Mosque”?

Cordoba House is two long blocks away in north from the World Trade Center site. The five-storey building housed Burlington Coat Factory till September 11, 2001. The factory building was lying vacant since then until a group of Muslims led by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf bought it in July 2009. The factory building is being used for Friday prayer.  New York Times was the first newspaper that ran a front-page feature on December 9, 2009 on the proposed Islamic centre but it never used the term “Ground Zero Mosque.” The front-page report did not attract any attention. On December 21, 2009, Daisy Khan, wife of Imam Abdul Rauf was interviewed by conservative media personality Laura Ingraham on Fox TV. The interview was cordial and Ingraham seemed to support the Cordoba Project. It was on this programme that the misnomer “Ground Zero Mosque” was used onscreen for the very first time. The term may have been used unconsciously on the programme but there was no controversy immediately after that. In fact, according to a search on Nexis newspaper archive, there was not a single news article on the mosque for next five and half months!  

On May 6, 2010, New York City community board committee unanimously voted in favour of the Cordoba House. On the same day, anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller wrote against the Cordoba House terming it as “monster mosque”. It is precisely at this point that a proposed 13-storey proposed Islamic cultural centre, which, in addition to a prayer room, will include a basketball court, restaurant, swimming pool and 9/11 memorial, was just reduced to a “mosque”! Geller went further to plant a lie that the “mosque” was being built on the site of World Trade Center! “What better way to mark your territory than to plant a giant mosque on the still-barren land of the World Trade Center?” she wrote on her Atlas Shrugs blog. “This is Islamic domination and expansionism. The location is no accident. Just as Al-Aqsa was built on top of the Temple in Jerusalem.” 

On the same day, Rupert Murdoch owned New York Post ran a story which deliberately identified Cordoba House as “WTC Mosque.” News agency Associated Press (AP) ran a story on May 7 quoting relatives of 9/11 victims with differing opinions on the “mosque”. On the same day, Geller’s group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), launched a campaign “Stop the 911 Mosque!” She posted the names and contact information for New York mayor and members of the community board, encouraging people to write. Uninformed, gullible Americans and anti-Muslims from all across the world wrote to the board without verifying the details that there is no mosque being built on the site of the terrorists attack! 

On May 8, 2010, Geller and Robert Spencer, a known-Muslim-hater and associate director of SIOA, announced first protest against the “911 Mosque” to be held on May 29. One May 10, New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser becomes the first journalist-victim of Geller campaign. She openly wrote against the “mosque” saying that “there are better places to put a mosque.” On May 13, she devoted an entire article to Cordoba House provocatively titled “Mosque Madness at Ground Zero”. The article played an important role in raising and shaping the debate in the sense that it was the first article to be published in a newspaper which portrayed the Cordoba project as inherently wrong and suspect. Peyser quoted Geller thus giving credence to an agony aunt! (Geller once suggested that Malcolm X was Obama’s real father!)  

Thus within a month, Cordoba House, unnecessarily became controversial. It began with anti-Islam blogger Pamela Geller. Andrea Peyser peddled it into conservative media. Mainstream media lapped it up further. A serious newspaper like The Wall Street Journal used the erroneous term “Ground Zero Mosque” in its headline several times. Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York, termed the mosque as “desecration”. Politicians like Sarah Palin, Peter King,   Newt Gingrich and Tim Pawlenty followed suit. 

Today, the atmosphere has become so much charged and heated in America that according to CNN poll 7 in 10 Americans say that they are against the Cordoba Project. By joining the words “Mosque” and “Ground Zero”, peddlers of hate have succeeded in creating fear in American hearts. To many Americans, “mosque” is still a dangerous place. “Ground Zero” is another dangerous word. Two meanings from the American Heritage dictionary would suffice. Ground Zero means;  a) Area where an atomic bomb is detonated, b) A center of explosive change. 

It is also true that many Americans including Mayor Bloomberg of New York have spoken in favour of Cordoba House. But men like Bloomberg seem to be in minority. There is another mosque in Manhattan, near WTC and Pentagon, another terrorist attack site, has a prayer room. Why have not Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer spoken against these two “mosques” in the ongoing debate?

Americans aren’t dumb but an average American is more ignorant than an Indian. According to a recent poll one in five Americans believes Barack Obama is a Muslim, even though he isn’t! A quarter of those who believe he is a Muslim also claimed he talks about his faith too much! Where are they getting their information? Sixty per cent said they learned it from the media!

America needs to have a mass public awareness campaign against the likes of Gellers and Spencers and misleading media. Barack Hussein Obama must make a distinction between “full truth” and “complete lie.”

Till then Pamela Geller will laugh that her wildest dream has crossed the Atlantic.

The Sunday Inquilab, August 29, 2010

Source: http://mubasshir.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-cordoba-house-became-ground-zero.html

»»  read more

Who ARE the Obamas?

Average Americans, many of whom were hornswoggled into voting for him in 2008, have only "known" Barack H. Obama - now our 44th president - for a little over two years.  Aside from liberals and members of the Democrat party, he got an awful lot of votes because he: 1.) wasn't G. W. Bush, 2.) was our first serious black candidate, 3.) seemed cool, charismatic and charming, and 4.) promised "hope and change".

That got him elected, but since then it hasn't gotten him very far.

Fast-forward to August of 2010. The national economy continues to stagnate in large part because business and the markets have a great deal of uncertainty about the next 6-12 months.  Will there be another "stimulus" - carefully crafted to funnel massive doses of your tax dollars to the hard left's favorite constituencies?  How much more will Obama, Pelosi, and Reid add to the deficit - and the National Debt?  And will they let the Bush tax cuts expire, thereby implementing the largest tax increase in American history effective 1 January 2010?  What effect will the short-term Federal bailouts of many irresponsible states have on their long-term economies? 

At a time when every job is precious and most states are running immense deficits due mainly to the cost of entitlements, our border with Mexico remains (malignly) neglected by the Federal government, permitting an ongoing flood of illegal immigrants whose presence further exacerbates the situation - to say nothing of the unfettered entree available to criminals and terrorists.

Meanwhile we're still fighting in Afghanistan and "occupying" Iraq to prop-up the nascent Iraqi government, but it's pretty obvious that the mission is poorly-defined and oh-by-the-way morale is rotten.  The SecDef is happily cutting the military budget and the C-in-C never speaks of "victory", only of "withdrawal".  Iran is less than a week away from activating a nuclear reactor which will allow them to produce weapons-grade plutonium. 

Speaking of our enemies, a group of "moderate" Muslims is pushing ahead with a plan to build a mosque in the shadow of the World Trade Center site, a.k.a. "Ground Zero".  These "moderate" Muslims, however, are only "moderate" when compared to the most zealous and murderous purveyors of militant Islam, and it has been demonstrated thay they have ties to

If ever there was a time for leadership this is it.  But what have we got?  An aloof president who doesn't "do" press conferences, or any other unscripted appearances if he can help it.  On the rare occasions when he sallies forth without his plexiglass wingmen, the "TelePropmter Twins", he is invariably forced to issue a morning-after correction of his latest gaffe - usually delivered from a position of ignorance - on one of the the issues of the day; e.g. "Skippy Gates" vs. the Cambridge Police, the Arizona illegal alien law, the "Ground Zero Mosque", etc. ad nauseum.

Twenty months ago, some of B. H. Obama's more leg-tingling admirers in the M.S.M. were likening him to F.D. Roosevelt.  Well, they're both liberal Democrats who never left an opportunity pass to increase the role of government in the lives of the governed.  But F.D.R. was a known quantity to the American people when they elected him.  Scion of an old New York family, cousin of President Theodore Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of the Navy during World War I, candidate for Vice President in 1920, and two-term Governor of New York; Roosevelt had a record of accomplishment and the obvious qualifications for the nation's highest office.

F.D.R. compiled a mixed record during the Great Depression, while his first acts in office unquestionably staved-off a national panic his later policies - which included tax increases and unprecedented government regulation - are now understood to have prolonged the Depression beyond its duration in many other countries.  But he was quite willing to acknowledge the failure of one or another of his programs or policies and scrap it in favor of an alternative; and I regard his foreign policy - at least 1938-44 - as having been largely correct.

Alas, B.H.O. is no F.D.R.  During the last twelve tumuluous months President Obama has taken no fewer than seven vacations running to some forty days - not including Mrs. Obama's lavish vacation in Spain.  None of these vacations were spent at property he owned himself - recall how often President Reagan and both Bushes were criticized for spending working "vacations" at their OWN residences in California, Maine, and Texas respectively.  Indeed, F.D.R.'s favorite retreats were his own estate in the Hudson River Valley and the cottage he purchased at Warm Springs, Ga.  Nobody doubts that the White House is able to maintain 24x7 contact with Obama when he's away from Washington, but neither do we labor under the illusion that he's devoting much time to the affairs of state.

When he does spend more than a week or so in Washington we are treated to carefully doled-out photo-ops, scripted and Teleprompter'ed remarks, and rambling statements by his press secretary.  Poltics 24x7, but damn little substance.   

So - who, and what, are these people we know so little about?  Obama describes himself as a "progressive" and claims to be a "Christian".  The former may be apt, but the latter is a bit of a puzzle.  Twenty months after settling into the White House he has yet to "pick" a church.  One of his stated reasons is a reluctance to inconvenience the other worshippers but his presence, but this contrasts rather badly with his willingness to inconvenience his fellow golfers, or beachgoers, or diners, etc. when one of his favored leisure activites is on the agenda.  He's wont to lecture us - inaccurately - on being "our brother's keeper" when it serves to advance his nationalization of health care while embracing the feminist abortion-on-demand agenda.  Reagan was pilloried for peripheral associations with Billy Graham, Jery Falwell, et al, but consider that Obama's two "spiritual" mentors are Rev. Jeremiah "God-damn-America" Wright and Fr. Michael "Non Compos Mentis" Pfleger.

Obama has been called a Marxist, a Socialist, an Alinskyite, un-American, and a closet Muslim.  It's safe to say that no other sitting president has ever been identified in this way.  The M.S.M. derides anyone who dares to voice questions about whether he really DOES answer to one or more of those designations, but they avoid the question of WHY people think these things about our 44th president.  America didn't know who this man was when they elected him.  We knew even less about his wife.  Nearly two years later we can only judge him by his words and deeds. 

One thing is clear - he and the Democrat Congress have taken the country in directions of which a majority of Americans disapprove, and they have lost the consent of the governed.  As things stand now it is very likely that the G.O.P. will reclaim at least the House of Representatives in November, and there is certainly a path open for them to take the Senate as well.  This election is as much a referendum on the Obama presidency as it is on the Democrat Congress, but the real verdict will be delivered in November of 2012. 

America has twenty-seven more months to find out who the Obamas really are.  Based upon the first half of his presidency I'm guessing they'll have a very hard time warming up to him during the second.

Source: http://archlaic.blogspot.com/2010/08/who-are-obamas.html

»»  read more