Quick get St. Mama Grizzly and The Newtster on the case immediately.

Yes, there’s a non-zero chance that Cordoba House is front for something nefarious (though not a terribly clever one I’d add).  Equally obvious is the fact that the center has so far achieved the exact opposite of its stated goals of fostering religious tolerance and interfaith dialogue; this shouldn’t have come as a terrible surprise.

Neither of those can excuse the sheer stupidity and offensiveness of most of the opposition to it.  Never in my life have I heard so many conservatives so eagerly demand state intervention of any kind, let alone intervention to stop religious practice on private property.  Not only has due process gone completely out the door, none of the mosque’s opponents — to my knowledge — have even proposed offering to buy-out Cordoba.

By far, though, the most amazing argument is not only that Cordoba is part of some Grand Jihad, but that its construction would be a major victory for that cause.  Here’s the usually-sensible Newt Gingrich channeling Andrew McCarthy:

The proposed “Cordoba House” overlooking the World Trade Center site – where a group of jihadists killed over 3000 Americans and destroyed one of our most famous landmarks – is a test of the timidity, passivity and historic ignorance of American elites.  For example, most of them don’t understand that “Cordoba House” is a deliberately insulting term.  It refers to Cordoba, Spain – the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world’s third-largest mosque complex.

Today, some of the Mosque’s backers insist this term is being used to “symbolize interfaith cooperation” when, in fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Cordoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest.  It is a sign of their contempt for Americans and their confidence in our historic ignorance that they would deliberately insult us this way.

Really?

When Mohammad Atta piloted AA 11 into the WTC, he found solace in the fact that a Sufi would one day run an interfaith center a few blocks from the site of his wickedness?  Really? When Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was being waterboarded for the 182nd time, did he find solace in the hope that a mosque that makes a big stink over its swimming pool would soon reach completion?  Really? This is what losing to the terrorists looks like?

If Jihadis wish to believe that Cordoba’s construction outweighs the routing the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and Saddam Hussein I, for one, do not think we should try to convince them otherwise.

To be sure, some attack is either attempted, foiled or occasionally committed a dozen times a year.  But, with tremendous consistency they prove to be unimpressive, naive, or just plain stupid.  Given the ease of acquiring weapons and bomb-materials in our country, it’s pretty telling that the worst attack we’ve suffered since 2001 was committed by one handgun-wielding fanatic.  Clearly we have a problem with Muslim Radicals that needs diligent attention, but — as I’ve said before — if this is terrorism, I’m not very scared.

But then, I see something like the video below.  Asked repeatedly whether recent plots might have something to do with Jihad-seeking Muslims, Attorney General Eric Holder could not bring himself to give a straight answer:

Rep. Smith: Are you uncomfortable attributing any of their [terrorists] actions to radical Islam? It sounds like it.

AG Holder: No, no I don’t want to say anything negative about a religion… that’s not consistent with the teachings of it.

[...]

Rep. Smith: “Could Radical Islam have motivated these individuals to take the steps that they did?”

AG Holder: “I certainly think that it’s possible that people who espouse a radical version of Islam have had an ability to have an impact on people like Mr. Shahzad.”

Rep. Smith: Ok, could it have been the case in one of these three [terrorism] instances… could one of these three individuals have been incited by radical Islam…”

AG Holder: Well, I think potentially incited by an Islam that is inconsistent with the teachings [of Islam]…

Rep. Smith: It’s hard Mr. AG, it’s hard to get an answer yes or no [from you]…

[Facepalm, followed by quiet sobbing].

H/T: Dennis Prager

Addendum: I couldn’t help but notice that Rep. Smith said that the “all three of the terrorist attempts in the last year” were motivated by Radical Islam.  Really?  The Hutaree may have been losers to the core, but at least they’re alleged to have planned an attack along the lines of what one might expect from competent terrorists (for really interesting coverage about that case, specifically, about how investigators appear to have been tipped off by other militia groups, read this with this update).  And if we’re counting a depressed loser/narcissist with tangential ties to some cleric in Pakistan, is it such a stretch to count Andrew Stack, the Austin Plane Attacker?  For the record, I’m by no means saying that either of these were Tea Party-inspired, or any such nonsense.

Those chants in the background? Yep. Allahu Akbar. Lovely.

This kind of morally relativistic hogwash is the reason why I despise liberalism and why it is so very very dangerous. Obama would have us believe that countries which oppress their women, supress freedom of speech and religion and insight violence against people who don’t share their creed are no better than America.

That concept isn’t just wrongheaded, it is evil.

Obama says Iran’s energy concerns legitimate

By NANCY ZUCKERBROD
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 2, 2009 9:24 AM 

LONDON — President Barack Obama suggested that Iranmay have some right to nuclear energy _ provided it proves by the end of the year that its aspirations are peaceful.

In a BBC interview broadcast Tuesday, he also restated plans to pursue direct diplomacy with Tehran to encourage it set aside any ambitions for nuclear weapons it might harbor.

First off, Iran sits on a giant fracking sea of oil, so any “energy concerns” they may have can probably be allieviated by, oh I dunno, OIL. Second, even if he believes this to be true you do not announce it on the fracking BBC! All this will do is embolden Iran and give them more ammunition at the negotiating table. If the enlightened one believes they have the right to nuclear power then it must be true.

Myself and the parents of the other victims . . . have had to live for over thirty years knowing that our children died a terrible death at the hands of that evil pair. Hindley is due to have her case heard at the [European] Court of Human Rights. What about our rights? There is no such thing as a normal life after your child has been murdered. We live a life sentence too but there is no appeal or reprieve for us, our suffering goes on and on and is only made worse every time something like this comes up. We are the forgotten victims. Hindley has never been charged with the murder of my Keith . . . . I would like to take out a private prosecution but I cannot afford it and cannot get Legal Aid. I still do not know where my son is and all I want is to have him home and give him a decent burial.

Nobody cand doubt the agony of these parents.  Their children have died terrible deaths, and they’ve been denied the closure of a funeral. 

But despite our pity, Israel’s decision to release live terrorists in return for the bodies of dead Israeli soldiers is a terrible mistake.  Caroline Glick (H/T) explains why this is so hideously bad an idea [emphasis added]:

Despite the government’s best efforts to put a brave face on the decision, the deal with Hizbullah is arguably the most humiliating step ever taken by a government of Israel.

In exchange for the bodies of two dead soldiers — Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser — Israel has succumbed to all of Hizbullah’s demands. It will release six murderers from prison and send them to Lebanon for a hero’s welcome. It will give Hizbullah the bodies of 200 terrorists and so empty Israel’s Potters Field for terrorists. Moreover, it has pledged to close Israel’s graveyard for terrorists and so has committed future governments to never keeping terrorists’ bodies as bargaining cards for future swaps of Israeli hostages. Israel has agreed to provide Hizbullah with information on four missing Iranian “diplomats.” And it has agreed to release an unknown number of Palestinian terrorists from prison.

This deal will cement Iran’s control of Lebanon through Hizbullah. It also all but guarantees that any future Israeli soldiers taken hostage by Hizbullah will be killed on the spot. Why care for hostages when you can murder them and expect to receive the same payoff you would get if you kept them alive?

More Israeli parents will now see their children taken hostage and murdered.  The Israeli government will find itself the junior partner in this deal with the devil.