White House: Anti-Muslim Rhetoric Spurred By Mosque Debate Not Yet 'Dangerous'

The White House has steadfastly refused to weigh in heavily on the debate surrounding the construction of an Islamic cultural center blocks away from the site of the 9/11 attacks, deeming it a local issue that local politicians can and should deal with.

But as the vast swath of national lawmakers -- including a host of likely Republican presidential candidates -- have begun offering their viewpoints, and as the discussion has morphed into a wider debate over the place of Islam in U.S. society, the pressure for more administration input has mounted.

On Tuesday, Deputy White House Press Secretary Bill Burton again declined to detail President Obama's personal opinions on the "Ground Zero" mosque. But he did say that the White House didn't view the anti-Muslim rhetoric that appears to have emerged in the debate's wake to be "dangerous" or beyond the bounds of reasonable discourse.

Per the daily briefing transcript (emphasis mine):

Q Okay, last one. A week ago, Robert Gibbs said he didn't want to weigh in on the mosque issue in New York, he said it was too local of an issue for the White House to weigh in on. But we've now had national figures from both parties, including the majority of potential presidential candidates from the Republican Party, weigh in on this very issue. How come you're so reluctant to actually offer an opinion from the White House on what is pretty much consuming cultural and religious debate going on in this country?

MR. BURTON: Well, this is an issue that has been thought through, that's gone through a process in New York City. A decision has been made, and it's going forward. And we're just not going to be in a position where a local government is going to make a decision that we go in and re-adjudicate.

The President has made clear that we are not at war with Islam, and that we can have these sorts of discussions well within the traditions of openness and religious freedom that our country is based on.

Q Are those discussions moving beyond those boundaries of openness? And are you worried about the anti-Muslim, anti-Islamic rhetoric that's been sort of brought out by this debate?

MR. BURTON: As President, what President Obama can do is make sure that we communicate exactly how we're feeling to the Muslim world, and we're focused on that. But I don't think that the boundaries are shifting in such way that that's dangerous.

Comments

[inonoatama]

01:46 PM on 08/13/2010

A particularly disturbing pattern I have seen, particularly in HP discussion groups, is that anyone who criticizes the placement of a mosque around the corner from Ground Zero – in any way, for any reason, and using any tonality – is instantly branded an intolerant bigot.

Evidently, Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin aren’t the only ones who could use a lesson in tolerance.

Even Fareed Zakaria, on the Charlie Rose show, said “the gut reaction I think we all have is, there’s a sense of unease.” Is he too a bigot?

[ClearingtheAir2010]

01:36 AM on 08/12/2010

I still believe in America. It's clear that many do not. It saddens me.

[Richard Abbott]

11:23 PM on 08/11/2010

Criticizing religion is only dangerous when the threaten to kill you for doing it.......

[morefromLA]

11:22 PM on 08/11/2010

When I hear 'Ministers of G-d' saying that you can't be a Muslim and be an American; when I hear Americans say that no Mosques should be built in America, it's time for some professorial talk from the White House about the importance of the Constitution and what freedom of religion means and how our nation was founded by those fleeing religious intolerance.

[inonoatama]

12:01 AM on 08/13/2010

You're absolutely right, and I agree with you. But the Ground Zero mosque is a bad idea, for obvious symbolic reasons.

[mountvernon43]

03:23 PM on 08/11/2010

But I don't think that the boundaries are shifting in such way that that's dangerous.
It is easy to miss the "danger" in a situation where you are not the target.
I am getting more and more eager to have Cordoba House built, just so I can visit it.

[leyvadaniel]

03:04 PM on 08/11/2010

What these "protestors" need are jobs. If they had something productive to do, they would be doing it, rather than creating public ddisturbances and annoying everyone.

[RockyMissouri]

03:35 PM on 08/11/2010

Good point...!

[jheinze007]

02:26 PM on 08/11/2010

Muslim voices in opposition to the GZ mosque:
“For us, a mosque was always a place to pray, to be together on holidays — not a way to make an ostentatious architectural statement,’’ Jasser said. “Ground zero shouldn’t be about promoting Islam. It’s the place where war was declared on us as Americans.’’ To use that space for Muslim outreach, he argues, is “the worst form of misjudgment.’’
- Zuhdi Jasser, physician, US Navy veteran, and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2010/06/06/a_mosque_at_ground_zero/
"I don't think the Muslim leadership has fully appreciated the impact of 9/11 on America. They assume Americans have forgotten 9/11 and even, in a profound way, forgiven 9/11, and that has not happened. The wounds remain largely open"...."and when wounds are raw, an episode like constructing a house of worship—even one protected by the Constitution, protected by law—becomes like salt in the wounds".
- Akbar Ahmed, Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at American University
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/05/u-s-muslims-underestimate-911-effect-muslim-thinker-warns/

[stephenlight]

02:37 PM on 08/11/2010

Akbar Ahmed has recently written a book called "Journey into America". He had a very interesting recorded session on BookTV this past weekend. I do plan on buying his book.

[morefromLA]

11:10 PM on 08/11/2010

I will respectfully disagree with both Muslim and Christian which call for the scrapping of plans to build a mosque near Ground Zero. The first amendment is not conditional and applies particularly in unpopular situations. Tolerance anyone? Message to the world about tolerance and freedom of religion work?

[stephenlight]

01:29 PM on 08/11/2010

For all of the many supporters of the Cross Cultural Meeting Space at 51Park:

Have you read Imam Rauf's take on Sharia Law?

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/feisal_abdul_rauf/2008/03/archbishop_of_canterbury_was_r.html

If you read the above and feel comfortable with it, then you can sincerely say that the Imam and the Center are in alignment with your views on a secular society.

[Lulu-2]

11:42 AM on 08/11/2010

While I would have preferred the mosque built elsewhere just for sensitivity issues, the fact is this countly was founded first and foremost on "freedom of religion."

That said, if we're going to put our money where our mouth is on this freedom, the protesting seem contrary to said freedom, you know?

[Turukano]

12:11 PM on 08/11/2010

It is easy to take a minorities right to worship away from them. The true indicator of our values would be if we have the strength of will to follow our oaths in regard to religious freedom. To do otherwise would be a betray of everything we are as a people.

[RockyMissouri]

02:58 PM on 08/11/2010

I truly respect and believe what you say...

[Jan Allen McDaniel]

10:41 PM on 08/11/2010

A lot rides on your assessment of the sincerety of the proponents of Park51.

If they are sincere and use the building as a memorial to 9/11 in a way that heals the rift between Islam and America, it will be a good thing.

If they are not sincere and intend the building to convey the message to Muslims that they are strong enough to build a victory mosque on the site of the attack, it will poison relationships between Islam and America like nothing else possibly could.

I have reason to believe they are not sincere, and have stated them here at Huffpo.

[Richard Abbott]

11:21 PM on 08/11/2010

I don't see anything wrong with what is going on - it is a persons right to build a place of worship anywhere it is legally permitted.
It is the peoples right to object to anything they want to object to.

What I see is a free society in action - it's all good.

What would it look like under sharia though..........Hmmmmmmmmmmm

[inonoatama]

09:40 AM on 08/11/2010

There's nothing legally or morally wrong with building a mosque around the corner from Ground Zero. There’s also nothing legally or morally wrong with wearing a t-shirt with a large Jewish star on it to a party where there will be a lot of Palestinians. Would it be nice thing to do? Not in my book. Would it be upsetting? Probably. Are there alternatives? Always.

[Turukano]

12:12 PM on 08/11/2010

Fortunately, we live in a country where the right to offend is protected. An example of that would be the entire Know Nothi .... i mean Tea Party "movement"

[inonoatama]

01:09 PM on 08/11/2010

It's not always fortunate that people have the right to offend. It's a price we pay for the right to free discourse. Another unfortunate thing is when a comment one disagrees with is invariably linked to right-wing nut jobs -- like some kind of verbal tic.

[RockyMissouri]

03:00 PM on 08/11/2010

That is the truth----the party of nothing but hatred..!

[Richard Abbott]

11:27 PM on 08/11/2010

Would you be subject to violence if you did wear the T-shirt?

Freedom is subject to restrictions on how you express your dissatisfaction. The mosque protesters are peaceful - it's all good.

[godwithin]

09:17 AM on 08/11/2010

Leading the country to prevent situations from getting dangerous is his duty. Waiting for dangerousness to occur is not good enough.

[Georgie4950]

11:34 AM on 08/11/2010

So what would you suggest he do?

[godwithin]

03:22 PM on 08/11/2010

More than waiting for things to get dangerous, he needs to make a statement, though his staff or in a press release, saying he protects freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. I'm a New Yorker, I do not want others from outside the city to dictated where cultural community centers can serve our city. I know people in other communities would not want me to dictate to them where they can congregate.

[SpencersMom]

09:12 AM on 08/11/2010

"A week ago, Robert Gibbs said he didn't want to weigh in..., he said it was too local of an issue for the White House to weigh in on."

I think the same could have been said about segregation, lynching, the KKK, burning of black churches.

Mr. Gibbs has licked his finger and held it up. Once he's sure which way the wind is blowing, he'll be ready to weigh in.

PEACE

[Georgie4950]

11:36 AM on 08/11/2010

They have to be very careful about how they weigh in on this. Highly charged debate.

[Richard Abbott]

11:32 PM on 08/11/2010

.....lynching, the KKK, burning of all churches, stoning or women, execution of homosexuals, gender apartheid, the enforcement of the burqa and honor killing.....

you're right you know, the US govt should definitely weigh in as the imam in charge does advocate sharia.

[SpencersMom]

08:59 AM on 08/11/2010

Tax all churches, synagogues, temples, mosques, etc. Freedom to worship shouldn't include a special government tax incentive. Like answered prayers, there goes the deficit!

End the wars, end off-shore tax havens, end corporate welfare and start paying down the national debt.

PEACE

[Georgie4950]

11:38 AM on 08/11/2010

Many of the tax exempt that you mention help those in need. If they must pay these taxes, that will take away from that. How does that help?

[PWM]

12:07 PM on 08/11/2010

I doubt the Vatican or the Mormon church is strapped for cash.

[inonoatama]

12:03 AM on 08/13/2010

I'd love that. But it would be unconstitutional.

[redmeat ronnie]

08:58 AM on 08/11/2010

i think that this is america, and they can build the mosque if they wish....but we can put a gay bar right next door, and a pork only deli on the other side....lol.

[Eris23]

10:43 AM on 08/11/2010

This keeps getting funnier every time someone brings it up. There already is a market next door that sells pork. I believe there is a bar that sells liquor on the other side of the building. Why do you think that this would be offensive to Americans who are living here and are established in the area? A lot of people, particularly in NYC, don't much care about what you are personally doing even if they wouldn't do it themselves.

[JessCostello]

11:14 PM on 08/11/2010

More than half of New Yorkers do care. They don't want the mosque built that close to Ground Zero. Muslims already flocked to the mosque in Germany where the 9/11 attacks were organized, it's a trend called Jihad tourism. For that matter, they still flock to the Church that the Cordoba Mosque was reverted to (remember it was built atop a Christian Church) and attempt to say Salat even though it's illegal and signs in Arabic say so.

[Lulu-2]

11:43 AM on 08/11/2010

HA !!! Yours is my favorite comment !!

[PeterGSW]

08:52 AM on 08/11/2010

Where is the leadership? Where is the constitutional law prof in this argument, wherein that prof is now supposed to uphold said document in his job description. Here's your big moment.

When rhetoric like this appears, letting it go unchallenged IS dangerous. Bigotry has to be squashed. Mike Bloomberg (a man for whom I have little enough regard as a leader), said exactly what should have been said.

[stephenlight]

09:16 AM on 08/11/2010

Have you read the Cordoba Institute's website? Have you read the Imam's books? Have you done ANY research on this at all?

Or, are you just reacting based on no knowledge?

[PeterGSW]

09:31 AM on 08/11/2010

The Cordoba Institute is a pack of liars. I have done a great deal of research into the disinformation put about on Islam, and I know what a smear campaign looks like.

[RockyMissouri]

11:49 AM on 08/11/2010

Did you know that Jesus is mentioned in the Koran-- many times???