It is Islamist's hobby to make their buildings around places sacred to other religions

Submitted by Rajeev (United States), Aug 17, 2010 at 23:18

Dear Dr Pipes, The name 'Cordoba House' (due to Cordoba's connection with Spain when it was under Islamic occupation) itself is in bad taste. So I will call it park 51 (as you have done). I find nothing new in Park 51 as far as Islamic fundamentalism and expansionism is concerned. It is Islamist's hobby to construct their monuments in the areas sacred to other religions. Let us begin by ignoring the entire history of Mecca. But the Jewish temples in Jerusalem, the Cordoba church in Spain, Hagia Sofia in Turkey, the Church of St. Johns in Damascus are some of the well known examples.

Muslims occupied parts of India at the beginning of 13th century and had a field day for 500 years. The Babri Masjid in Ayodhya (the birth place of god Rama), the mosque that towers the birth place of Krishna in Mathura, and Akbar's fort at the confluence of the rivers Ganges and Yamuna in Prayag (promptly renamed to Allahabad) are examples of such structures in India. All these three sites are one of the holiest to the Hindus.

So the proposed mosque in Manhattan is just a continuation of the same tradition. Allowing or disallowing the mosque in Manhattan is not the issue here. Opposing the wisdom (or lack there of) behind the desire of constructing this structure to the maximum is what is needed. The Islamist's expansionist mentality must be curbed.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".