Hello George,

I write to you from Canada to support Uriah Fields position that building the Downtown NYC Mosque is a measure of American commitment to religious freedom and tolerance.

(1) In response to Jean Wyant's position and others that the construction is " is hurtful beyond measure – to the 9/11 families" I respectfully disagree. The 9/11 families have a heterogeneous of political ideologies and emotions like any group of people and we cannot presume to speak for all of them.

For example: http://www.peacefultomorrows.org/article.php?id=988

(2) Second, I respectfully disagree with Ms. Bryant that the mosque would be built on 'hallowed ground' and that planners should "Build the mosque elsewhere, not at a site 150 yards from Ground Zero, a mere 2-minute walk from where the Twin Towers stood,"

This photo essay describes the area at the same distance from Ground Zero:
http://daryllang.com/blog/4421

(3) Third, I wish to oppose the viewpoint that "The attacks were a direct product of accepted teachings, beliefs and practices of Islam, and were perpetrated in the name of Islam."

I am not a fan of any particular religion. However, Al Qaeda's global organizational structure and catastrophic, pan-utopian narrative seems to have more in common with the modernist zealotry of initiatives including the Soviet, early Anarchism and global Neo-Liberalism.

There's an interesting book called Al Qaeda and What it Means to be Modern by John Gray of the London School of Economics. Gray takes issue with the idea that story of 9/11 is of a modern society facing the barbarism of a medieval, backward, freedom-hating vandals. http://www.amazon.com/Al-Qaeda-What-Means-Modern/dp/1565848055

(4) Finally Ms. Wyant mentions that:

"Prof. Akbar Ahmed, who chairs the Islamic studies department at American University, has an even better suggestion: Rather than raise $100,000,000 to build a glitzy, superfluous mosque to serve a privileged few in the financial district (NYC has hundreds of mosques – dozens in Manhattan alone, and several within a mile from Ground Zero, including Imam Rauf’s own congregation for 25 years, located half a mile away), why not use those funds to help the millions of flooding victims in Pakistan."

According to former CIA Case Officer and now author Robert Baer and many other sources, the Saudi Royal Family is a very significant funding source for the Islam Studies initiatives of American University in D.C. and many other secondary institutions as well. I accept Baer's argument that the brand of Islam practiced by some Saudis and the Saudi Royal Family is particularly abhorrent to egalitarian values, and so I while I may agree with Mr.Ahmed's sentiment, I disagree with his choice of workplace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/See_No_Evil_%28book%29

There seems to be no end to the complex perversions of religion and politics. As your home page borrows from Yeats: "the worst are full of passionate intensity." In such a situation I believe principles, not morals, are our best defense against encouraging people to be obnoxious and violent.

I support Uriah Fields position, then, regarding the mosque and the principles of religious tolerance and the separation of church and state. I believe that these may be the best principles that any society may admire.

Best,

Andrew J. Holden (Electronic mail, August 28, 2010)
Hamilton, Ontario