"This is America"

[Update: Glenn Greenwald et. al. are now saying Obama is somehow walking back from his comments, noting how much of a "very limited nature" they are. Digby is linked with a usual "what a weak willed loser" type of analysis.

But, I'm with TPM. What did they read the first time? Obama didn't "support" the choice directly; he said they had the right, pursuant to local ordinances (and local officials, nearly unanimously, did authorize their actions), to do what they are doing. This to me was a good thing to do, especially mixed in with some nice words about Muslims as a whole. The overall message being sent is supportive -- you don't usually emphasize rights like this when let's say the KKK wants to march or something.

As to avoiding the question if this is "the right thing to do," getting involved in specific placement questions like that really is likely to be troubling. His opinion on every odd thing might be raised and isn't that more a local zoning issue? Again, the two questions are likely to be felt to be tied together anyways, but not explictly so. Best of both worlds in a way. {Last few sentences added.}

I call, like TPM, false controversy. Also, the reference to "lower Manhattan" is helpful since all this talk of "Ground Zero" implies it is actually being built there, not blocks away in place of a coat factory building. Sacred ground, is it?]

When judging various controversial matters in recent days, we have to remember who we are. There has been some controversy over the building of an Islamic Center in lower Manhattan. Confusion aside, no, it is not being built on the ashes of the Twin Towers. It is planned for a few blocks away, replacing a Burlington Coat Factory store. The local planning board, with one exception, okayed the deal. The mayor (my mayor) supported the move eloquently:

“The simple fact is, this building is private property, and the owners have a right to use the building as a house of worship, and the government has no right whatsoever to deny that right. And if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Furthermore:

“Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11, and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. We would betray our values and play into our enemies' hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else. In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists, and we should not stand for that.

But, others have been upset. They think it a travesty. President Obama disagreed:

But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure.

The Muslims here are part of our nation, one with core values:

They are part of an unbroken line of Americans that stretches back to our Founding; Americans of all faiths who have served and sacrificed to extend the promise of America to new generations, and to ensure that what is exceptional about America is protected - our commitment to stay true to our core values, and our ability to perfect our union.

I don't think the Omar Khadr trial truly stays true to these values. One lawyer involved in human rights cases in Britain put a certain spin on the issue, saying that he can be tried by a military trial for alleged violations of laws of war (and perhaps should have combatant immunity), even given his age (which can be treated as a mitigating factor), but still the trial is trouble:

My objections are to (i) the trial taking place at all in Guantanamo Bay, out of sight and out of mind and largely “under the radar” of public scrutiny and (ii) the flawed procedure of the Military Commission process. ... It says much more that the Court has ruled confessions admissible – see Omar Khadr’s trial has been tainted by coercion.

This is a trial which should not have proceeded and the international reputation of the United States will only be damaged as it continues.

After all, this is America. Is this supposed to be the face of the military commission process?*

---

* One person who has angrily denounced this trial is Glenn Greenwald, who spends much of his time in Brazil. He doesn't do so for the weather. His partner lives there and under U.S. law -- unlike there -- residency allowances are not provided to same sex partners. Again, is this really America?