Skip to content

The Truth About The Grand Jihad Victory ‘Mosque’

14 September 2010 @ 17:43

‘The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.’

—Verbal [aka: Keyser Soze], The Usual Suspects

I don’t know why this hasn’t gotten more play in The Blogosphere…

Last Friday, the New York Post published a column by Amir Taheri that laid before us the true motivation behind the desire to build an ‘Islamic Community Center’ [what I have been calling ‘The Grand Jihad Victory Mosque’] in Ground Zero.  As you will not be surprised to hear, what the Mohammedins involved in the project have been telling us are outright lies and deceptions in keeping with Islamic teaching on Taqiyya.

From the column:

…what is proposed is not a mosque — nor even an “Islamic cultural center.”

In Islam, every structure linked to the faith and its rituals has a precise function and character. A mosque is a one-story gallery built around an atrium with a mihrab (a niche pointing to Mecca) and one, or in the case of Shiites two, minarets.

Other Islamic structures, such as harams, zawiyyahs, husseinyiahs and takiyahs, also obey strict architectural rules. Yet the building used for spreading the faith is known as Dar al-Tabligh, or House of Proselytizing.

This 13-story multifunctional structure couldn’t be any of the above.

The groups fighting for the project know this; this is why they sometimes call it an Islamic cultural center. But there is no such thing as an Islamic culture.

Islam is a religion, not a culture. Each of the 57 Muslim-majority nations has its own distinct culture — and the Bengali culture has little in common with the Nigerian….

Islam is an ingredient in dozens of cultures, not a culture on its own.

In fact, the proposed structure is known in Islamic history as a rabat — literally a connector. The first rabat appeared at the time of the Prophet.

The Prophet imposed his rule on parts of Arabia through a series of ghazvas, or razzias (the origin of the English word “raid”). The ghazva was designed to terrorize the infidels, convince them that their civilization was doomed and force them to submit to Islamic rule. Those who participated in the ghazva were known as the ghazis, or raiders.

After each ghazva, the Prophet ordered the creation of a rabat — or a point of contact at the heart of the infidel territory raided. The rabat consisted of an area for prayer, a section for the raiders to eat and rest and facilities to train and prepare for future razzias. Later Muslim rulers used the tactic of ghazva to conquer territory in the Persian and Byzantine empires. After each raid, they built a rabat to prepare for the next razzia.

It is no coincidence that Islamists routinely use the term ghazva to describe the 9/11 attacks against New York and Washington. The terrorists who carried out the attack are referred to as ghazis or shahids (martyrs).

Thus, building a rabat close to Ground Zero would be in accordance with a tradition started by the Prophet. To all those who believe and hope that the 9/11 ghazva would lead to the destruction of the American “Great Satan,” this would be of great symbolic value.

A rabat in the heart of Manhattan would be of great symbolic value to those who want a high-profile, “in your face” projection of Islam in the infidel West.

This thirst for visibility is translated into increasingly provocative forms of hijab, notably the niqab (mask) and the burqa. The same quest mobilized hundreds of Muslims in Paris the other day to close a whole street so that they could have a Ramadan prayer in the middle of the rush hour.

One of those taking part in the demonstration told French radio that the aim was to “show we are here.” “You used to be in our capitals for centuries,” he said. “Now, it is our turn to be in the heart of your cities.”

Before deciding whether to support or oppose the “Cordoba” project, New Yorkers should consider what it is that they would be buying.

As to the ‘great symbolic value’ Mr. Taheri refers to, I think Roger Kimball’s explanation is dead solid perfect:

…and what is the symbolism? There is a short, two-word Anglo Saxon imperative beginning with the letter “F” and ending with “You” that about sums it up….

No ‘about’ about it: that’s EXACTLY the message the Mohammedins want to send.

I think it imperative that we make damn sure this atrocity exhibition is not built.

  1. David R. Graham permalink
    15 September 2010 @ 02:21 02:21

    It has taken, what, about five or at most six years for the truth expressed in this post to make its way to the surface of the blogosphere, which means to what, wasn’t it Jung?, called the collective unconscious/conscious and Teilhard called complexification/Christogenesis?

    In my estimate, this is a profound and profoundly encouraging phenomenon, that these Mohammedan bastards have been marked so relatively quickly by so widely found a demographic.

    And the marking of them gets bolded, as here. This is really good news. It means their deceit, their dissembling has failed. Americans are on to them. Scholarship and common sense have done their job. Hooray! It’s only a matter of time now before those bastards quit the field, gutted of their power to intimidate. They have no ability to fight straight up. If they can’t intimidate, they can’t get their way, for, they have no other way of imposing their will but by intimidation. Note in corroboration of that fact the hagiography of one Barry Soetero.

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      15 September 2010 @ 08:32 08:32

      Rev: Encouraging news indeed. I owe you for helping with my personal enlightenment on this matter [or should I say ‘my personal illumination’?…nah…too Bolshe-sounding, that].

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: