Recently, Obama has publicly stated his support for a mosque to be constructed near Ground Zero. Well, that’s not entirely factual. Obama has stated his support for the project, but it is not just a mosque. This structure is intended primarily as a civic center with a mosque in the center. This is even more offensive than if just a mosque was placed in such proximity to Ground Zero. The fact that a civic center, for those sharing a religion with the people who claimed the lives of 2,995 New Yorkers, is to stand in the former shadow of the towers is astounding. How insensitive and egotistical a culture and its religion must be to recognize that their followers committed one of the modern world’s greatest atrocities and then nearly immediately ask to place a building for gatherings, events, cultural activities and worship within the blast radius of that atrocity? That’s on line with placing a giant bronzed B-29 Super Fortress in the city centers of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No one would even suggest such a monument because it would serve as a constant reminder of the pain, terror, and loss suffered as a result of what the monument represents.

Ground Zero is a place that will forever stand as a reminder that there are those that wish to harm Americans just because they are Americans. Those that died on September 11th were not a homogeneous collective of middle class white educated males. They were as diverse, unique, interesting, and lively as the city in which they lived. But they were American, and they died for it.

Obama, and his administration, has said that since there is no local ordinance against such buildings, that the organization should be free to build the civic center. Funny that the administration should fall back on the rule of law when it serves a cause they support. Let’s take a little look at how this method of reasoning is entirely inconsistent with this administration’s previous actions concerning the law: refusing to press charges against the Black Panthers who were videotaped committing voter intimidation, refusing to sanction sanctuary cities which openly defy immigration laws, allowing convicted tax cheats to sit on numerous tax committees just to name a few.

They argue that the absence of a law prohibiting a building means that anything goes. Ok, I’ll play your game, sir. Let me think of some wonderful investment opportunities that can go in the same neighborhood, across the street from the mosque … BaconTown: a fun-filled culinary experience in which the whole family can sample bacon from all over the world (can you imagine the magnificent smell from such a wonderful place? I’ll have a one year pass, please); a pork processing plant: pork chops, bacon, boston butt, and pork tenderloin as far as the eye can see; a women’s designer swimsuit boutique with live models that display the store’s product in a large glass window opposite the civic center; or, a 24 hour gay dance club.

Some may say that my proposals are offensive, and baiting. Well, what exactly do you think that this “civic center” is? My suggestions to place these establishments in such proximity to a religious institution that despises them is nothing worse than placing a monument to the religion that was the sole and direct cause for the death of 2,995 New Yorkers on the same city block as the giant crater that serves as their shared grave. Why has this particular city block, this special little spot, this section of very expensive Manhattan real estate been chosen to place this building? The very same thing that any real estate agent will tell you sells: location, location, location.

If the Muslim world wishes to truly distance itself from its violent extremists then it should really think about how it portrays itself. Erecting a building which serves those who share the basic religious ideology of the hijackers is most certainly not in line with projecting an aura of peace, understanding, and acceptance. This projects the aura of a conquering army, proudly placing its flag on conquered soil.