Update, 1:17 p.m. | Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf promised on Monday to resolve the fierce dispute around plans to build a Muslim community center and mosque two blocks from ground zero, while noting that he does not believe the spot chosen for the center is “hallowed ground.”
Speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, he promised to find a way out of the current impasse around the planned center, which opponents say is insensitive to the memory of 9/11 and which supporters say sends the opposite message, that Muslims, like other Americans, object to and were victims of the attacks.
"Everything is on the table," he said. "We really are focused on solving it" in a way that will be best for everyone concerned, he added. "I give you my pledge."
Update | Also, he said it was “absolutely disingenuous” to say that “that block is hallowed ground,” noting that the block of office buildings two blocks from ground zero includes a bar (the Dakota Roadhouse), and an off-track betting office; a strip club is nearby.
He did not specify what compromises or measures might be part of the solution, although he welcomed what he said was a flood of good will and advice being offered, and suggested that a deliberate pause in moving forward was one possibility.
One council member asked Mr. Abdul Rauf if he would consider delaying the project to take that time to have more public conversations.
“Our advisers have been looking at every option "” including that,” Mr. Abdul Rauf said. De facto, such a pause is already under way, since the center’s planners are mainly focused on addressing the furor, and the project still lacks blueprints, an architect or funds for the $100 million construction, let alone its ambitious programming, said to include athletics, cultural programs, interfaith dialogues and more.
Among the ideas under discussion, according to neighborhood allies of the project, is expanding the interfaith programs already planned at the center to include worship space for people of other faiths as well as Muslims, as Mr. Abdul Rauf suggested last week in an Op-Ed article in The Times.
The imam does not control the location of the center — the real estate developer Sharif el-Gamal does, and he and his supporters have said a move would not satisfy critics.
The imam appeared more relaxed than he has been on his other appearances since returning from a State Department-sponsored speaking tour to discuss life as a Muslim in America with Muslims abroad.
He thanked "those who have voiced their objections to our plans with civility, with respect and with open minds and hearts," adding, "You affirm my belief in the decency and the morality of the American people."
Explaining his conviction that the United States is a great place to be a Muslim and that Muslim faith is completely consistent with American citizenship, he said America gave Muslims a freedom they do not have in many Muslim countries "” to choose voluntarily to observe their religion, or not.
And, asked by the Council president, Richard N. Haass, why "” even if the vast majority of Muslims are not terrorists "” "so many terrorists are Muslims," he said it was a problem with roots that are political, religious and socioeconomic "” but mainly political.
He said that many Americans may sincerely not realize the distinction between the religion and people who commit violence in its name.
"I'm not at all suggesting that people against the center are actually extremists," he said. "There is a lot of unawareness of Islam in this country."
To even engage in any compromise on this topic implicitly legitimizes the conflation of mainstream Islam with terrorism. Al Qaeda has as much in common with mainstream Islam as the Hutaree militia and Westboro Baptist Church have in common with mainstream Christianity.
I sincerely hope the imam does not back down from building the mosque as he originally planned. What a blow to America’s most fundamental belief in religious tolerance that would be! And what a boost it would give to those right-wing politicians who are using this as a wedge issue for purely political advantage at the expense of American values. And they claim they are the real Americans!?! Where are the leaders who know better and why are they not speaking up during this period of hysteria? A year from now we will look back and see who stood where (or were silent) on this matter. God save America!
The most tolerant and productive way to move forward would be to be sensitive to those who support freedom of religion, but who wish to remove this controversy from the immediate ground zero area.
The best way to do that: keep the idea, keep the community center, but in sensitivity to the feelings of all who are offended, find a different location.
It strikes one as terribly odd that a man who comes in peace, with background of conciliator, would continue to insist on something which causes pain to so many.
All self-interests to the contrary, why not move the location to another area in Manhattan, and reduce the harm this has and may cause?
Freedom to gather, assemble, and worship will be upheld, and it would appear the Imam is truly sensitive to the image and ideas he would like to spread.
Is the need to insist on polarizing Americans so grand that this could not be relocated, in the name of true harmony? It would not be an issue of “backing down”; maturity demands that a peace-seeking man and religion would not force itself when such intense sensitivities are involved.
And I am definitely not one of those influenced by partisan or stir-it-up interests.
unfortunately most Americans are unaware of true Islam,most Muslims are Peace loving, Alqaida is not Islam, actually Alqaida has killed more Mulims than any one else. so one has to nstudy real Islam, before saying any thing
On 11th sept. i was flying from Berlin to Rome and i happened to read an article on India and its development. really kudos to the writer..well writen and worded…i liked the difference highlighted between south and north india..it is ture that education can take us to heights of self liberation and bring wealth too. i congratulate the writer.
Here’s what to do: Let it be a Muslim-funded interfaith cultural center for the three Abrahamic museums, with a chapel for worship by Christian, Muslim, and Jewish groups, plus an official mission of promoting interfaith understanding.
No problem, then.
The Imam says that there are no plans, no architect, and no funding as yet, so it looks like we have a controversy without any substance. I assume that anything built in the city will have to be approved by the NYC Planning Commission, and without any architectural plans there is nothing but talking points and debate. Where I come from that’s putting the cart before the horse
Why not propose that the Center’s focus become a “Mini Jerusalem” where multiple faiths can be observed, heard and interact with each other and none is viewed as either dominant or subordinate to the other?
While that might approach the intent of the Imam, the problem always arises when someone raises the question of which set of beliefs is “correct”. The answer to which is, “None”, as no one of us should be so vain as to think he or she truly knows that answer.
Read Full Article »