At the back of the hill

Warning: If you stay here long enough you will gain weight! Grazing here strongly suggests that you are either omnivorous, or a glutton. And you might like cheese-doodles.
BTW: I'm presently searching for another person who likes cheese-doodles.
Please form a caseophilic line to the right. Thank you.

Friday, August 13, 2010


There has been inordinate amount of noise recently about the stated intent by a Muslim organization to build a mosque on ground zero, which is hallowed ground. The mosque will mark Islamic dominance, and the Muslim victory over the West.

Except, of course, that that is balderdash.

The only part of it which is true is that mosque will be called “The Ground Zero Mosque” by most people.
You can thank America’s bigoted moron fringe for that last development, as the name they have given it will stick.


In actual fact it is a cultural centre which will include a mosque in addition to restaurants, plus recreational, educational, and exercise facilities.
It is not on ground zero but two blocks away – and in so populous a city as New York, two blocks is a very fair distance.
It's on private property, manifestly not part of the ground zero site, in a district which is centrally located, and home to a very large number of people from all over the planet – Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, Animists, Atheists, and G-d knows what else including possibly worshippers of Saint Sarah Palin, Moose Killer.

The actual location is a defunct Burlington Coat Factory store.
At present, bums micturate against its 'hallowed' walls.

The opposition to the "mosque" is spearheaded by, among others, Pamela Geller, John Joseph Jay, Robert Spencer, David Yerushalmi, Newt Ginggrich, and Dutch political maverick and sometime media whore Geert Wilders.

These people are not exactly sane and balanced - the best that can be said for them is that they are possibly human. None of them is particularly known for rational discourse.

Truth be told, despite the Jews who have jumped on board the anti-mosque bandwagon, what fuels this debate is mean spirited Christian bullshit.
Bucket loads of it.

There's also more than a hint of racism in the opposition to the 'mosque'.

That, too, is a reflection of mean spirited Christian bullshit.


"If two blocks is too close to Ground Zero, how far away would be acceptable? Six blocks? One mile? Ten miles?"
------Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg

Two of the most prominent buildings in San Francisco are cathedrals - the Catholics have their monstrosity on the edge of Japantown, the Anglicans occupy the top of Nob Hill with a Gothic wedding cake. Both of these Christian houses of worship dominate their areas in a way which will be impossible for Cordoba House in New York.

Frankly, the presence of both of those Cathedrals repulses me. The long struggle for survival against Spain, Portugal, and the Church of Rome that my Calvinist ancestors fought still demands requital, and that the pussy Anglicans built a neo-Gothic horror out of cement, with frills and curlicues, instead of something more serene and Californian in its inspiration, demonstrates more than anything else possibly could that those sneering and superior WASPS can be as tacky, tasteless, and nouveau riche as anyone else.

Both of those buildings are scarce more than vulgarity brushed broad.
But in the United States, freedom of religion includes the right to build your religious edifices where and how you please.

1.General rule. No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government can demonstrate that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly or institution
a. is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
b. is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.


Pamela Geller and her repulsive cronies also wish to assert that Ground Zero, and everything within several blocks of it, is sacred territory, and that the Muslims by their evil plan would pollute it. Fie!

Bollocks - There is NOTHING there that is sacred. We Americans are not idolators or death worshippers. New York real-estate is by no means magic, and other than the actual site of ground zero, there is no symbolic value to any plot of land there.

"Sinds die Engelstaligen de boel verpest hebben is Nieuw Amsterdam naar de kloten gegaan."
['since the English speakers poxed the place, New Amsterdam has gone to the testicles'.]

I absolutely refuse to worship New York. Or its pizza. Or any of the stuff that is so New Yorkese.
I do not watch 'Friends' or 'Barney Miller'. Kojak was a lousy show too.
Broadway sucks. New York franks are pretty much crap, cheesecake gives me bile, big-ass sandwiches are an abomination.
As a refugee from that G-d forsaken place once said, "it was insanely loud, hot, and smelled like sulfur; perhaps for some folks it's their vision of the life hereafter."

To finish, let me quote another friend: "If New York represents anything, it represents the diversity, tolerance and vitality of America. Standing against a mosque and cultural center does not honor those traditions."



  • At 2:51 PM, Blogger Telmac said…

    Or, as described in the hitchhiker's guide, "New York City in the fall smells as if someone has been frying a goat in it" And yes, I do know that quote from memory.

  • At 11:38 AM, Blogger Spiros said…

    I kinda like Our Lady of Maytag, aka St. Mary's Cathedral. I very much like New York City, because it is a place that embraces diversity (and where you can get a doner kebab at 2:00 AM).

  • At 8:20 PM, Anonymous Ari said…

    I have no problem with an Islamic cultural center 2 blocks from Ground Zero for the following reasons:

    - it is primarily a cultural center, although it will house a mosque too

    - other nearby mosques have existed in that area for decades

    - freedom of religion, diversity, tolerance, etc

    What does concern me, though, are a few things:

    - Where is the funding coming from? If it's coming from states that sponsor terrorism, then it has no place here.

    - Why does its name invoke a time and place where Muslims treated Jews and Christians like second-class citizens?

    - Although the center's imam has condemned terrorism (btw, I'm not impressed -- Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and others have said similar things), he also said in the weeks following 9/11 that US policies were an "accessory to the crime." Really?

    As you see, I'm not opposed in principle to the idea of a mosque in that location, or anywhere, but I have concerns about the name, funding and imam's views.

  • At 5:11 PM, Blogger The back of the hill said…

    Those are valid concerns. Clarifications regarding funding would be excellent.

    As far as Cordoba is concerned, strange to name it after the site of Spain's greatest triumph against the invading Moors. Perhaps they should also ceremoniously open their centre on June 29th., that being the day on which King Ferdinand captured the city. ;-DDDD

    You're completely right about the condemnations of terrorism from the countries you mentioned - they condemned formulaicly, and with so many conditions plus ifs ands or buts added that it would have been better and more honest for them to remain silent.

  • At 11:51 AM, Blogger Rabbi Pinky Schmeckelstein said…

    Bravo, esteemed RABAM. This is indeed a "created" controversy by the politicians who seek it. Sadly, the ADL and others have fallen into the trap, undoubtedly because of some influential donors. From my perspective, unless Al Quaida or their ilk is building the mosque, there should be zero controversy. This would be like opposing building a synagogue in Rome or a church in Jerusalem. Or a synagogue in Saudi Arabia. This is racism coated with nationalism polished with stupidity.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older