The Goal
Think about it for a moment. What is the one thing that has happened as a result of announcing this project? It has brought "Islamophobia" to the forefront, a term used in the press release by the American Society for Muslim Advancement, one of the two backers behind the project.
The announcement has forced people in all walks of life to confront religious bias. It has forced people who would otherwise have remained silent to speak out against prejudice against Muslims. It has forced a conversation where non-Muslims are pointing out that it's a "peaceful" religion and that most Muslims disassociate themselves from the extremists. It has weeded out politicians that some will call bigots. It has reinforced to Americans freedom of religion.
Essentially, it has brought the discussion of Islamic-American relations to the forefront better than even the most expensive ad campaign, and it hasn't cost a dime.
They Can Still Look Good
And what happens if they choose not to go forward with the project?
- Well, the die-hard bigots will be happy, but there's little chance of winning them over anyway. Call it a wash.
- Moving up the continuum, those "less bigoted" (let's call them "wary" of Muslims) may see it as a gesture of goodwill.
- Those who object on behalf of those who feel "hurt" by this will cluck their tongues and say, "I'm glad they saw how insensitive they were. Maybe they are not so bad after all."
- Those mainstream Muslims who considered it insensitive will approve.
- Those who genuinely thought it was a good idea can console themselves that it was just "too soon" and maintain a feeling of superiority that they were rebuffed.
- The extremist radicals might get pissed, but the Cordoba group would be happy about that. That's a win.
The man behind the project, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, does not seem like an idiot. In fact, he seems fairly intelligent, well informed, and politically savvy. Therefore, I simply cannot imagine that he didn't see this firestorm coming. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to think, "Building a mosque and Islamic center where debris from the 9/11 attacks landed? Yeh, that's gonna go over well." I have to believe he knew full well what would happen.
At least one Muslim cleric has spoken out that it would be "insensitive" and be like rubbing salt in the wounds, which good Muslims should avoid. Surely others told him this as well, and as an expert, I would expect him to at least predict this reaction from his constituents. I did, and I'm not brain scientist. Therefore, not only did he go down this path knowing that many non-Muslims would object, but he proceeded knowing that his fellow, mainstream Muslims would object at some level.
In this article, by Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah, Board members of the Muslim Canadian Congress, it reads, "the proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as "Fitna," meaning "mischief-making" that is clearly forbidden in the Koran." Could Imam have not seen this coming? I find that hard to believe. You would think, at least, he'd have the wherewithal to run it by guys like that.
In the ASMA article it says one of the backers, Khan, "finds herself somewhat shocked at everything that is going on." The modifier "somewhat" is interesting and indicates that it wasn't really a surprise (notice that word wasn't even used).
So, I offer that this project was announced knowing full well the firestorm that would result. It's no smoking gun - there isn't one.
Exhibit B: It Doesn't Look Like They Can Pull it off
How serious is the project? After all, it is estimated to require $100M. Before I would announce such a project, I would have a funding plan in place and have money in the bank already. You know, something to tell people that I'm serious.
Well, according to their (Cordoba Initiative) IRS Form 990 as of 2008, they had $18,000 in net assets. They received $80K in contributions in 2005, none in 2006, $15K in 2007 and none in 2008 even though this project, according to AMSA, has been in the works for years. This non-profit is basically Imam and a couple of people doing their thing. There's nothing wrong with that, but to put it in perspective, the JREF, a non-profit that promotes critical thinking, pays the founder, Mr. Randi, twice as much in a year than this group has received in donations over four years. The only way to donate to the Cordoba Initiative is through a generic PayPal button that can be set up in about 10 minutes.
Simply put, I have no reason whatsoever to believe that his group is capable of raising any significant capital. Their filing mentions two upcoming projects (as of 2008), neither of which had anything to do with this rather huge undertaking, so I question the notion that his project has been in the works for several years.
Their "partner" is the American Society for Muslim Advancement, which is another non-profit. It, too, was founded by Imam. I can't find any information on their financials. I will note, however, that on their "In the Press" page there is nothing between July 9, 2004, and July 16, 2010. There, they tell us that fundraising won't really start until they get approval for the landmark. The lack of "news" would indicate to me that they really don't deal in a lot of money.
Basically, the two primary parties, two small non-profits run by Imam, behind the project have not demonstrated that they are even remotely capable of raising this kind of money. They lack the experience, and they have not demonstrated that they have a reasonable start.
That doesn't mean they can't do it, of course. However, there is no evidence that they can. Again, this is not conclusive evidence, but it certainly doesn't support what I could consider a big objection to my theory, which is that this project has a good chance of getting the required money.
Exhibit C: No Mosque Needed
I also question the inclusion of a mosque. As people have pointed out, there are mosques already in the area. As I pointed out, one of them is undergoing expansion and renovation in downtown Manhattan. Their goal is a mere $800,000, and so far they have raised $1,426. This makes me wonder about the ability for Imam to raise $100,000,000.
My point is that they had a choice about including the mosque. Ostensibly, we're told, one was needed. I think that's debatable. I don't know enough to form a solid opinion, but it would seem to me that if another mosque were "really" needed, that one group wouldn't be struggling so hard to expand theirs.
So, why add a mosque to the mix when it seems like none was needed? Again, not conclusive on its own, but it makes me wonder why one was added considering the firestorm that was sure to result.
Exhibit D: Is it Really About Togetherness?
Ostensibly the project is about building bridges and bringing people together, but I don't see any non-Muslim backers or that input was solicited from any other groups. I could be wrong, but Imam's websites would surely mention it, right?
If the project is about togetherness, then why not contact the major religious organizations around the country as well as other groups interested in the same goals? After all, it would greatly increase funding opportunities. At the very least it would have helped public relations to make a joint announcement with other leaders at their side ready to bring a message of peace and reconciliation to their followers.
Now, if they didn't include a mosque, I'm sure there would have been backlash, but I argue not nearly as much. They could have worked together with other faiths and added multiple churches in addition to the mosque. Probably there would be some backlash, but not as much (opinion, of course). However, by having other faiths involved it would have been handled much better with (say) Jewish, Baptist, and Catholic leaders poised at the ready to send a message of cooperation.
I question that this project was about togetherness, and I question that something as simple and obvious as involving other faiths was not done, even if just for public relations. It's just one piece of evidence that could be interpreted many ways.
Exhibit E: Drawing Lines in the Sand
If you read the ASMA press releases about the subject, they are not the least bit conciliatory. In fact, in one press release their concluding sentence ends with, "it's hard to believe the project can be stopped." There are no comments about working with people to reach an understanding. I read that article as drawing a line in the sand, not as it says in the Cordoba Project Mission Statement, "thinking outside the box about international and intercultural conflict resolution also means thinking introspectively about each side's place within its own historical narrative with a view to devising internally oriented solutions."
They don't seem to be saying all that much at all, and what they do say is sure to tick off some people. It seems to me like they are, in a subtle way, allowing a little air to feed the flames. I could be wrong, of course, but it seems to fall right in line with my theory.
ConclusionIf I'm right, I think the guy made a brilliant move. It has started an incredible dialogue while at the same time drawing out those who are "Islamophobes." It forced the President to pick a side and forced politicians to reveal something about themselves. It was guaranteed to make people talk and force those who quietly tolerate religious bigotry to speak out. From a Machiavellian point of view, I'm all over it.
And the funny thing is, if you read the Cordoba Project's page entitled Why the Cordoba Initiative, what has happened so far is exactly in line with their stated goals.
Now, let the slings and arrows fly.
* I said mostly falsified, because I could still be right, but Imam could change his mind or unexpected things could happen that would mean the project should proceed. However, based on just what I've presented here, I'd call my theory busted if the project proceeded as planned.
