THE DAILY BLADE: On The Eve Of Destruction?
NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan says he is “just a little bit apprehensive” that the “noble values” of tolerance and unity in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks “may be a bit at risk in the way this conversation and debate about the site of the mosque is taking place," adding, "I sure don't have strong feelings on where the mosque should ultimately be.”
It is difficult to say whether his caviling and quailing statement refers to the majority of Americans and NYers who have no objection to a mosque being built in lower Manhattan as long as it is outside the physical and psychological boundaries of Ground Zero – certainly not close enough to where the Twin Towers once stood so as to have had airplane parts raining down on its roof that day – or to the militant Islamists and lunatic fringe liberals who object to a mosque (which Jonah Goldberg calls “an Islamic Niketown”) being built unless it is built in close proximity to where human remains of terror victims continue to be recovered nearly a decade after the attack.
In any case, proponents of the Ground Zero mosque can no longer smear opponents as racist, since they include not only the usual targets of this tactic but also New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D) - who represents the lower Manhattan district that includes Ground Zero - Gov. David Paterson (D-NY), Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) – as well as 68 percent of all voters, including 54 percents of Democrats, 70 percent of independents, 61 percent of moderates, 45 percent of liberals, and 58 percent of non-white minorities, according to a recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll.
What to do? What to do? Forget racism; equate Ground Zero mosque opponents with … terrorism! In the August 23rd issue of New York magazine, Peter Maas writes (emphasis throughout, The Stiletto):
W.J.T. Mitchell, a visual theorist at the University of Chicago, has noted that monuments and images can gain power by being attacked. The World Trade Center is an example - a pair of ungainly and unloved office buildings acquired a tragic halo once they were destroyed. …
A similar dynamic occurred in Afghanistan when the Buddhas at Bamiyan were blown up in 2001, turning them into global symbols of Taliban extremism—though in Afghanistan itself, the Taliban proudly disseminated images of the desecration. Previously, only religious scholars had paid much attention to the Buddhas, chiseled into the side of a cliff.
The lesson, for those who would wish to destroy a worthy item that is embedded with religious, cultural, or political value, is that they’re playing a dangerous game. …
The irony is that by trying to destroy the project, these opponents are making it all the more meaningful.
For her part, CBS News anchor Katie Couric (Is she still around?) commented (emphasis, The Stiletto):
There is a debate to be had about the sensitivity of building this center so close to Ground Zero.
But we can not let fear and rage tear down the towers of our core American values.
Maas and Couric are creating an equivalency between the physical destruction of the Twin Towers and the Buddhas and opposition to the construction of a mosque at Ground Zero that isn’t even in the blueprint phase yet. This rhetorical overreach is so desperate as to be beyond contempt.
There Ought Not To Be A (Sharia) Law
Applying Sharia law, a Saudi Arabian court has ruled that a man convicted of paralyzing a man in a fight should be rendered paralyzed himself by having his spinal cord severed, despite pleas from international human rights groups not to impose such a stunningly barbaric punishment. Saudi government officials are trying to broker a deal to forestall the sentence, reports The Washington Times:
According to reports from Saudi Arabia, the court in Tabuk, on the northwest coast of the kingdom, has approached a number of hospitals about the possibility of cutting the convicted man's spinal cord.
So far at least two hospitals have refused to carry out the procedure, citing ethical concerns.
In the Saudi justice system, the court establishes guilt and the family of the victim or the victim himself has the option of inflicting the same injury upon the guilty party, seeking blood money or offering a pardon.
"The sentence of 'an eye for an eye' has always been in conflict with medical ethics," said Christoph Wilcke, a senior researcher for Saudi Arabia at Human Rights Watch, adding, "This case is a new angle in the sense that doctors are speaking out." …
Other cases of retribution sentences, known in Arabic as "qisas," have included eye-gouging, tooth extraction, and death in cases involving murder. Under the Saudi justice system, people are flogged for some offenses, thieves have their limbs amputated and those found guilty of murder, rape, drug smuggling or blasphemy are beheaded in public.
Saudi officials, meanwhile, say they are trying to persuade the paralyzed man to drop the demand that the defendant's spinal cord be severed and instead accept compensation.
Editorial Note: Against this backdrop, The Obama Administration has submitted a report to the U.N. Human Rights Council admitting that there are human rights issues in the U.S.
The Definition of Chutzpah: Part XII
Washington Post food critic Tom Sietsema received an E-mail from reader Art Taylor who described a recent dining experience at a Panera in Fairfax, VA:
[D]uring a busy lunchtime -- the woman beside us had commandeered a four-top for herself, her computer, her paperwork and a large rolling suitcase that blocked the area between her table and ours. (She didn't offer to move it as I tried to maneuver into our seat.) She was neither eating nor drinking anything from Panera, merely conducting phone calls and e-mails for her business as a wedding photographer. Soon after we sat down, she motioned to the busy barista to come over (she was seated right by the counter) and asked him to please plug in her laptop behind the counter, since her battery was running down, and spent several minutes trying to get the cord to reach properly! But the real kicker? Halfway through our meal she dug into the rolling suitcase and pulled out her lunch: a sandwich she'd made at home.
Comments