Dhimmis at Ground Zero?

"Call me jaded or unsentimental," wrote one of my readers, "but the World Trade Towers were ugly Rockefeller buildings built by the abuse of eminent domain (my friend's dad lost his job at a private firm there) and taxpayer theft and operated at a great loss to the taxpayers. They were known mainly for a dreadful remake of King Kong. While I mourn the loss of 3,000 Americans, I am not about to elevate the Towers into the Beit Hamikdash (The Temple in Jerusalem)."

My unorthodox patron was responding to news that the American Society for Muslim Advancement (quite literally) plans to erect a "Mega-Mosque" at Ground Zero. The advancing Muslims say this is a peace offering – a center intended to foster Muslim tolerance and temperance. Most Americans, well-represented by the energetic crowds that pitched up to protest this affront, don't believe them. (Taqiyya anyone?)

Neither do I. To count as a peacemaking offering, the "Sulcha" must be considered conciliatory by those it is intended to pacify.

A jaw-dropping expose on the six-month undercover operation that revealed the true terror-supporting nature of CAIR: "Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That's Conspiring to Islamize America." It's also available in electronic form at reduced price through Scribd.

Still, there is something to be said for my reader's refusal to turn the spot into Solomon's Synagogue. The Twin Towers did not originate as pantheons of individualism and creativity. And their architect, Minoru Yamasaki, was no Howard Roark. The Towers were the urban-renewal scheme of the New York state legislature and the Port Authority. The dubious David Rockefeller was in on it too, fresh from Harvard and armed with a thesis on Fabian socialism and the counsel of pals such as spy-to-the-Soviets Alger Hiss.

TRENDING: Reigning Mrs. World arrested after taking tiara from winner in ugly meltdown

Land for this statist scheme was indeed acquired through eminent domain. That's when the authorities seize private property for the "common good." According to Wikipedia, 13 square blocks of low-rise buildings in Radio Row were cleared to make way for the construction of the World Trade Center. Radio Row had been a "warehouse district on the Lower West Side of Manhattan, New York City," consisting of several blocks of bustling, if unglamorous, electronics stores.

This diminishes the Twin Towers as symbols of individual liberty but does nothing to lessen the lives lost there to Islam's emissaries. In the annals of Islam, moreover, the erection of minarets and mosques on foreign lands is a triumphal act of supremacy. Unless an Islamic Reformation has come and gone without notice, the mega-mosque project is the latest in encroaching dhimmitude. Put crudely, its construction on the spot where Americans suffered a defeat by Muslim aggressors is a bitch slap to the subjugated dhimmi-in-training.

Less clear, however, is the course of action protesters intend to pursue. Defeat this act of domination, and the invasive species will take root elsewhere. Yet, restricting acquisitive property rights in a free society should never be entertained. As far as I can tell, then, all anti-mega-mosque activists are requesting is kindness and consideration from those they regard as conquistadors.

How like dhimmis!

Such pleas remind me of the victim impact statement so popular in our courts. It is both humiliating and futile to plead for contrition from sadists who've amply proven they are incapable of such sentiments, and derive sadistic pleasure from watching their victims squirm.

There is simply no real intellectual, much less corporeal, force behind a demand for sensitivity from those you believe to be worse than insensitive. Sadly – and as much as I approve of action to peacefully prevent this religious monstrosity from replacing a statist one – it is nevertheless nothing more than frenetic Brownian motion.

Muslim culture is a macho one; the faithful purchase property and raise buildings to their faith and its aggressive political mission. Western contemporary culture is feminine; we cry publicly, perhaps punch the air in impotent rage and carry signs asking our S&M masters (elected officials included) to show us some love.

Like all assorted 9/12 projects, mega-mosque resistance simply sustains the state of heightened emotional arousal that arose in the aftermath of 9/11. Having examined only their feelings, Americans campaigning against occupiers-in-the-making have failed to examine what it is they are really saying and, then, say it out coolly and clearly, before taking cover.

If Christians raised a cathedral at Liberty Street and Church Street, most Americans would not mind. If the Hare Krishna set up a place of worship in the vicinity, and bobbed up and down the exact complex in Lower Manhattan, Americans would smile benignly. The same if a Jewish tabernacle were constructed around the corner.

It's in the faith of Islam and its adherents that Americans have no faith.