The debate over the mosque in lower Manhattan has caused our country's political volcano to erupt. Republicans and Democrats, among them Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have argued that the designated site for the Cordoba House, a Muslim community center and mosque, is too close to hallowed ground. President Obama defended the mosque supporters' Constitutional right to build it where they choose.
But there is a much larger rationale for building a Muslim community center near the former site of the Twin Towers: It can be used as a weapon to defeat al Qaeda.
Since Sept. 11, 2001, our counterterrorism strategy has focused on stopping terrorist attacks. That's an important goal, but only part of the equation. A comprehensive strategy should include a greater focus on removing the root causes of terrorism. The only way to deliver a sustainable defeat to al Qaeda is to both destroy its leadership and cut off its ability to recruit.
Building a Muslim community center near the site of Ground Zero will bolster our ability to do the latter. Imagine an al Qaeda recruiter attempting to sway a potential charge by citing an imaginary American war against Muslims but having to face the counterargument that Americans built a Muslim community center near the site of the former Twin Towers.
The Cordoba House would be a powerful symbol of U.S. tolerance and freedom that will stand in direct contradiction to al Qaeda's narrative that Americans hate Muslims. As a symbol, its construction demonstrates that the U.S. is not at war with Islam and that Muslims are welcome in America. It communicates a message of moderation that stands in stark contrast to al Qaeda's bankrupt ideology.
As I discovered as a high-level interrogator of al Qaeda members in Iraq, symbols like this matter. Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and the policy of torture and abuse handed al Qaeda its number one recruiting tool. Those who think al Qaeda will not be able to spin this controversy to their advantage are disastrously mistaken -- but it can be a victory for America as well.
The political uproar over the Cordoba project, and in particular the use of harmful, bigoted rhetoric by some opportunists, leaves America facing a choice. It can project one of two symbols: One of integration, acceptance and positive affirmation of American values; or one of intolerance, rejection, and animosity. The former will work to undermine al Qaeda as part of a long-term strategy to defeat them. The latter will bolster Islamic extremists' arguments that America is an intolerant country hell-bent on war with Islam, aid recruitment efforts and add support for more terrorist attacks.
The choice is obvious. Let's build the Cordoba House.
Follow Matthew Alexander on Twitter: www.twitter.com/htbat
Salam Al Marayati: 5 Questions Swirling Around the 'Ground Zero Mosque' Debate
Loading comments… 
What this issue comes down to is two constituen
It is not a sign of bigotry to ask them to build the mosque in a different location, all it is is a recognitio
http://the
(And you know that the chatter is up on not just extremist Muslim sites, but also the moderate Muslim sites. The WSJ had an article today about it. This is what the right wing courts. The party of "Family Values" who tout their superiorit
The key idea: "It [America] can project one of two symbols: One of integratio
...
The choice is obvious. Let's build the Cordoba House."
Symbols do matter --- which is why the right-wing want desperatel
Apparently the strip club down the street from Ground Zero didn't fit the criteria for exploitati
Please ask yourself a question. You make a great deal of the importance of the site not being on Ground Zero.
What if it was?
What if the religious facility, where I can't buy a pork sandwich in the cafeteria or swim in the same pool with my wife and daughters, were ON ground zero?
1. Does anything change?
2. Is everyone in opposition still a bigot?
3.Should we still all shut up about it?
And don't change the subject. They bought the land. The permits are there. No one will try to stop them legally. And there are no other religious facilities there.
If your answers change in the slightest, then all we disagree about is distance.
I'd appreciate an answer
To respond, they would have the right to build it on any land that they owned. If the owner of a building or lot didn't want it to be converted into a community center, they would not have sold Rauf's group that land. I don't think I'm going out on a limb saying that they would have had trouble purchasing Ground Zero itself.
You're not responding to the question. Of course they have the right to build, no one contests that (at least no one sane). And of course, no one was goint to sell them ground zero.
It was a hypothetic
People answer them all the time. The reason I kept cutting and pasting was because people, if they responded at all, never answered the question, but made some unrelated statement usually involving white robes with pointy hoods,my boots and the Constituti
I guess it would have to be ok for it to be built on Ground Zero. Not the wisest thing in the world (consideri
For all those shocked about this, one day that land of Ground Zero will have something different on it just like, in the past, it has had other things on it. During the history of the world, it has had many different things on it and will have many different things on it. I am not going to go crazy about what is put on it or near it.
The memory of the pictures of 9/11 are immortaliz
If anything gives Muslims the impression they are not welcomed here it is the American left's cottage industry of manufactur
Allowing the building more mosques will not deter Muslims from joining Al Qaeda.
But maybe ceasing the slaughter of innocent Muslims will deter Muslims from joining Al Qaeda.
Good luck with that!
A mosque near or at Ground Zero will eventually be needed due to the current shortage of space for Friday prayers for the Muslims working in that area. And when WTC is re-built at the GZ site, there will undoubtedl
So the current hysteria against the Park51 project is ridiculous