The Cordoba Conquest at Ground Zero

Steven Taylor has an essay up at Outside the Beltway: "Ok, So What is the Problem with Cordoba House?" Unfortunately, Taylor hasn't actually focused on the question. Instead he offers a blanket condemnation of opponents of mosque construction projects elsewhere (this is Taylor's attempt to identify alleged anti-Muslim bigotry). The problem, not address by Taylor, is that Cordoba is code word to Muslims for conquest and domination, and it's a term that's historically flexible, and hence a bit devious and subterranean. This is (one more reason) why there's a "Problem with Cordoba House." See David Stein at Yes, But, However, "The “Ground Zero Mosque” – The “Cordoba” Question":

I believe Imam Rauf’s “hypocrisy” has a purpose, and I think many of his critics have missed it. Remember – this is a man who has been feted by three White Houses (including the Bush White House). By using Cordoba as his brand, he can appeal to U.S. political leaders and radical Islamists at the same time. The Cordoba name conjures up images of tolerance and plurality and savagery and persecution, depending upon which century you focus on. It was meant to be a Rorschach test.

To denounce Rauf as an “extremist” is to miss the point. He is an opportunist, reaping the fruits of presidential dinners, White House engagements, and U.S.-sponsored trips abroad, while retaining enough “street cred” to avail himself of the funding opportunities that come from radical Islam (hence his refusal to condemn Hamas – to do so would completely kill his cred).