creators.com opinion web
Conservative Opinion General Opinion
Susan Estrich
17 Feb 2012
The Santorum Surge

Could it really happen? Could Rick Santorum be the Republican nominee? Is God a Democrat? Not to be mean, but … Read More.

15 Feb 2012
That's What Friends Are For

Here we go again: a tragedy in the music world, a tragedy waiting to happen that did. Disturbing headlines … Read More.

10 Feb 2012
What Happened to Newt and Mitt?

Newt's easy. While all of us on the Democratic side were playing "root for Newt," Republicans were … Read More.

The Convent at Auschwitz

Share Comment

Recently, I found myself on Fox News defending the "Ground Zero mosque" before I'd fully thought it through. Truth be told, when someone called to set up the "hit," I thought they were talking about another mosque project I'd heard about on the radio. So there I was, invoking the First Amendment, arguing that our enemy is terrorism, and that the only way we would ever win that fight is by gaining the support of the overwhelming majority of Muslims who are not our enemies and who we need to respect as friends. All true.

Then the mail started coming in. I don't need the latest Time poll to tell me that 60-plus percent of Americans are against the project. My e-mail told me that.

When I discussed it with my son later, he asked me whether I actually agreed with what I'd said on television, and the fact is that I do. Nothing I said was wrong in my book. We can't make Islam our enemy, or we will find ourselves in a war that, frankly, terrifies me. So what's wrong with my position, and that of the president of the United States, who waded into the fight entirely of his own accord?

Just this: the convent at Auschwitz.

Some years ago, an order of nuns announced plans to build a convent at the infamous death camp, and a community I am very close to — the community of survivors and their children — strongly protested the plan. How could they? It wasn't a matter of "right." Presumably, the nuns had as much right as anyone else to build a convent wherever they wanted.

But for those who survived the Holocaust, and for those of us who are committed to preserving the memory of the millions who were lost, building a convent on the site was just not appropriate.

It wasn't about being anti-Catholic. I'm not anti-Catholic. It wasn't because I'm still smarting from what Pope Pius XII might have done but didn't. I don't want to rehearse the history of anti-Semitism, play blame games or fan flames of mutual distrust. It just seemed very clear that of all the places on the planet to build a convent, Auschwitz shouldn't be one.

The Nazis who chose to march in Skokie, Ill., some years ago precisely because so many survivors lived there assuredly had the First Amendment right to do so. But what a hostile, negative and cruel thing to do, reinforcing yet again — as if any reinforcement were needed — just what kind of people they are.

The presence of a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, in the home of a former Burlington Coat factory, clearly strikes many of those who lost loved ones on that horrible day in the same way that the convent at Auschwitz struck me. It doesn't mean that Islam is our enemy. It's not a matter of right.

Tolerance is a two-way street.

The Time poll also found that one in four Americans thinks Barack Obama is a Muslim, slightly less than the percentage of people who think a Muslim should not be allowed to be president.

Clearly, we have a long way to go on both sides of the street.

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

22 Comments | Post Comment
So...if you weren't Jewish you would have no problem with the Mosque on Ground Zero.
Also, The Prez said he was of the Muslim faith on ABC news. I don't believe any Christian would make that blunder.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Early
Fri Aug 20, 2010 6:21 AM
As a lawyer and professor of law, do you not find legal precedent in Justice Holmes' comment that "freedom of speech does not entitle one to cry 'fire' in a crowded theater?" The overriding concern is the public safety. While I agree that they have a "right" to build the mosque anywhere they please, they should have the decency not to incite public wrath. I will predict that their pursuit of this will only worsen relations with Muslims, both domestic and foreign.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Ron Johnson
Fri Aug 20, 2010 10:12 AM
Once again the "peaceful" majority of the Muslim faith sit quietly by and watch their faith used as a battering ram against others. This refusal to stand up and say this in not right, time and time again, can only lead one to believe there is an implicit support of the ram. The silence is deafening. There is a big difference between a religion that aspires to peace among men and one that aspires to subjugate and conquer with its faithful being willing to live peacefully among others.
Comment: #3
Posted by: SteveJ
Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:02 PM
One is surprised that Ms. Estrich did not go on to mention that the nuns relocated their convent when they encountered objections. Contrast that to Imam Rauf and the intelligentsia, who are basically telling the public to shut up. It is never safe to try to guess what is in another's mind, but the actions of the "Mosqovites" are certainly not promoting "healing".
Comment: #4
Posted by: Gregg Shepherd
Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:17 PM
Islam is not monolithic. No religion is. Just as there are different Christian and Jewish denominations, there are differents denominations of Islam, including the Sufi sect that is building the Park51 community center. This sect, like the majority of Muslims, have spoken out repeatedly against the violence of the al Qaeda fringe. It's just that the Murdoch media won't publicize it, and the mainstream media are too lazy to.

I daresay there were more Muslims working at the World Trade Center who were killed on 9/11 than there were Catholic nuns killed at Auschwitz, so your comparison doesn't stand up. There is Muslim worship at the Pentagon, just yards from where the plane hit that day. For that matter, Muslim worship is going on near Ground Zero now, in a center that houses Christian and Jewish worship, as well.

I highly recomment Roland Martin's column in today's Creators.com for further insight into this situation.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Tom Blanton
Fri Aug 20, 2010 4:24 PM
Unfortunately, Ms. Estrich your liberal/progressive sentiments are showing...you make excuses for Obama, Democrats and yourselves, in a collective sense, exactly like children and stupid children at that..your knowledge of Islam is staggeringly lacking in both judgment and perspicacity..you need only read the Qu'ran to realize how ignorant you actually are; oh and by the way, if America and its' values that you so obviously despise come under the subjugation of Islam & Shari'a law, you will be the first to go and Muslims will see to it that you are...
Comment: #6
Posted by: Kristen McFarland
Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:56 AM
Susan, this is a nice article, but you should mention that the matter was resolved normally when Pope John Paul II made sure the convent got moved to a less controversial location. Your article would be complete if you finished by advocating that the Park 51 mosque imam follow the same path as JP2.

BUT, it is good that you mentioned those neo-Nazi gangsters deliberately choosing Skokie. I'd forgotten about that, but it is apposite to your argument. Of all the places they could have chosen, they zeroed in on Skokie for the nasty effect they would have on the holocaust survivors there. I see the Park 51 mosque as a similarly deliberately nasty boot in the face of New Yorkers and all who mourn the innocent lives lost on 9/11.
Comment: #7
Posted by: VforVictory
Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:04 AM
What is it about building a mosque, or a Muslim-oriented community center, relatively close to the WTC that makes it objectionable to some? Is it because all Muslims are to be blamed for 9/11? No sensible person would say that, though I'm confident that is part of what's going on with some of the opponents. Clearly if a church or synagogue or a gym or concert hall were under construction, there would be no uproar. Is it because only buildings and projects of a certain stripe belong on or near what has become sacred ground? There is a strip club and OTB parlor just as close to the site (and by the way, the actual site, given the urban setting, does not feel at all like one is in the "shadow" of the former WTC. Two blocks in this case make a world of difference. I used to work in that neighborhood.), and no outcry about that. Why are people offended by the proximity to the WTC?
I gather that the convent at Auschwitz was to be built on the camp grounds, which makes all the difference. The Auschwitz site itself had become a symbol of Jewish suffering in particular, and that was the thrust of the protest against the convent. The compromise at Auschwitz was to build a center outside the camp grounds, but still in proximity to it, and that was satisfactory to the protesters. Note that at Auschwitz, the focus was not on the genocide perpetrators, but on the victims. At the WTC, as some proponents of the mosque have pointed out, no one ethnic or religious group can claim they suffered to the exclusion of others. And the proposed project is not on the WTC site, but in Manhattan terms, clearly not related or even adjacent to it. There is no fair comparison to the Auschwitz controversy, and no valid reason to deviate from Estrich's initial constitution-based response to the WTC/mosque controversy.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Buddy Gottlieb
Sat Aug 21, 2010 9:39 AM
Seriously, how is a convent "at Auschwitz" the same as a mosque/community center two city blocks away from Ground Zero?
Comment: #9
Posted by: cadbury
Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:20 AM
This "center" was intended to be a monument to Muslim triumphalism. Placing it this close to the site of the WTC in place of a building damaged on 9/11 is no mistake.

There already is a war on. it is a war of civilizations.

It is time to wake up.
Comment: #10
Posted by: pb1222
Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:35 AM
Guess what Susan. I work in Saudi Arabia and here the people are bewildered by this Inman wanting to build a mosque at or near Ground Zero. The Arab News ran an article about it and overwhelming the people were against it.
They see this as a wrong move for this Inman out of Egypt to put forward, because they saw that Osama bin Laden was heavily influenced by Al Zawari an Inman out of Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood which they view as disgusting.

So if the Saudi's do not believe the so called cultural center should not be built at this site I would have to agree with them.
Comment: #11
Posted by: Gene44
Sat Aug 21, 2010 1:29 PM
So your original reason for supporting it comes down to being *scared* of what would happen if you don't? At core, that's a negative reason. It's a bad move to come up with an avoidance plan because you are scared. At least deal with your fear FIRST and then rethink it.

And then you could naturally understand it when it came to the nuns, but not Ground Zero? What is missing in your psyche, what kind of white noise is messing up the signal in there, that this needed to be explained ?

I'm surprised at you. This is easy.
Comment: #12
Posted by: colleen
Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:19 PM
There is no analogy here; unless one is totally ignorant of the facts.

Consider these and think it through, again Susan.

1. Auschwitz/Birkenau was a German (Nazi) concentration camp established in the Polish city of Oświęcim.
2. Jews were not the only victims. Historians estimate that among the people sent to Auschwitz there were at least 1,100,000 Jews from many the countries of occupied Europe (the largest group were Polish citizens), over 140,000 non-Jewish Poles (mostly political prisoners, priests and nuns), approximately 20,000 Gypsies from several European countries, over 10,000 Soviet prisoners of war, and over 10,000 prisoners of other nationalities.
3. Nazis did not kill all these people (some ~1.5 M) in the name of Catholicism (or Christianity for that matter). Nazis were exterminating Catholicism with total commitment and killed many Polish members of clergy, nuns, and religious activists.
4. Many non-Jewish Poles died or risked their lives (my grandfather including) trying to save Jews from peril.
5. Father Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish Catholic priest died in Auschwitz, offering his life for another prisoner who was sentenced to death. He was later brought to the altars as a Catholic Saint.
6. Likewise, Carmelite nun named Edith Stein (Sister Benedicta of the Cross) met her death at Auschwitz-Birkenau, later also canonized.
7. The Order of Carmelite Nuns who moved to the building adjacent to the camp had nothing to do with the atrocities committed by the Nazis. They in fact were also the victims. They were not making any political statements and were not publicizing it in any way. Their mission in life was to pray for forgiveness for what was done and for the souls of the victims. They were somehow vilified for that.
8. There is a Carmelite convent just outside the walls of the former Dachau concentration camp (in Germany), and the Christian cross on the top of it is within sight of, and only a few yards from, the Jewish Memorial which was built at a later date. The convent at Dachau has an entrance through one of the former guard towers at the camp and it is open to tourists who are visiting the former concentration camp.
9. In Oświęcim, local residents reacted furiously when Jewish activists from the USA and Israel (led by Rabbi Weiss in New York) staged a series of protests at the site. The Poles interpreted the protests as a hostile foreign intrusion and an assault on the sovereignty of the Polish nation by the citizens/governments of other countries.
10. In the name of peace, John Paul II instructed the Carmelite Nuns to take another residence. In the spirit of obedience, they did.

This said…

On September 11, 2001, 19 Muslims acting in the name of Islam and funded and directed by Muslim leaders killed 3000 Americans. Why? Because they were Americans and because they were not Muslims. Muslim Imam directed and funded by Muslim leaders wants to build a mosque essentially on the site of that atrocity.
Comment: #13
Posted by: Max Baxter
Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:28 PM
[Posted again without Polish Characters]

There is no analogy here; unless one is totally ignorant of the facts.

Consider these and think it through, again Susan.

1.Auschwitz/Birkenau was a German (Nazi) concentration camp established in the Polish city of Oswiecim.
2.Jews were not the only victims. Historians estimate that among the people sent to Auschwitz there were at least 1,100,000 Jews from many the countries of occupied Europe (the largest group were Polish citizens), over 140,000 non-Jewish Poles (mostly political prisoners, priests and nuns), approximately 20,000 Gypsies from several European countries, over 10,000 Soviet prisoners of war, and over 10,000 prisoners of other nationalities.
3.Nazis did not kill all these people (some ~1.5 M) in the name of Catholicism (or Christianity for that matter). Nazis were exterminating Catholicism with total commitment and killed many Polish members of clergy, nuns, and religious activists.
4.Many non-Jewish Poles died or risked their lives (my grandfather including) trying to save Jews from peril.
5.Father Maximilian Kolbe, a Polish Catholic priest died in Auschwitz, offering his life for another prisoner who was sentenced to death. He was later brought to the altars as a Catholic Saint.
6.Likewise, Carmelite nun named Edith Stein (Sister Benedicta of the Cross) met her death at Auschwitz-Birkenau, later also canonized.
7.The Order of Carmelite Nuns who moved to the building adjacent to the camp had nothing to do with the atrocities committed by the Nazis. They in fact were also the victims. They were not making any political statements and were not publicizing it in any way. Their mission in life was to pray for forgiveness for what was done and for the souls of the victims. They were somehow vilified for that.
8.There is a Carmelite convent just outside the walls of the former Dachau concentration camp (in Germany), and the Christian cross on the top of it is within sight of, and only a few yards from, the Jewish Memorial which was built at a later date. The convent at Dachau has an entrance through one of the former guard towers at the camp and it is open to tourists who are visiting the former concentration camp.
9.In Oswiecim, local residents reacted furiously when Jewish activists from the USA and Israel (led by Rabbi Weiss in New York) staged a series of protests at the site. The Poles interpreted the protests as a hostile foreign intrusion and an assault on the sovereignty of the Polish nation by the citizens/governments of other countries.
10.In the name of peace, John Paul II instructed the Carmelite Nuns to take another residence. In the spirit of obedience, they did.

This said…

On September 11, 2001, 19 Muslims acting in the name of Islam and funded and directed by Muslim leaders killed 3000 Americans. Why? Because they were Americans and because they were not Muslims. Muslim Imam directed and funded by Muslim leaders wants to build a mosque essentially on the site of that atrocity.
Comment: #14
Posted by: Max Baxter
Sun Aug 22, 2010 4:32 PM
Please read the whole story on the convent. It is in fact different from what is present. Beside the fact that it is Poland and not the U.S., so our Constitution does not hold, there are some other important differences. The controversy was not about the convent itself, but a large cross that was erected within sight of the camp. The nuns were instructed to close the convent, and it took nearly 5 years to do so. And the cross that was the center of the controversy is still standing. I got my information from Wikipedia. If I am wrong, then please correct me.
Comment: #15
Posted by: tomilvento
Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:01 PM
Ms. Estrich, you had it right the first time: This is America, and freedom of religion is sacrosanct. Other posters have pointed out how the Auschwitz comparison is not analogous for many reasons, and how, if you're not a NYer, you might not understand that 2 blocks can be like 200 miles elsewhere. But, I want to correct something you said that I'm not sure anyone else has pointed out. Your statement that the mosque clearly strikes many of those who lost loved ones on 9/11 in the same as the Aushwitz convent is at best exaggerated, and at worst fully inaccurate. My understanding is that this was not particulalry controversial in NY, until those outside NY chose to make it an issue. The project had strong support from the local community board and prominent politicians. New Yorkers have been victimized enough by 9/11. We bore the brunt of death and trauma that day. Those who are stirring up this issue nationally are re-victimizing NYers. Is Ground Zero a national sacred site? Yes, in some ways. But those who lost their lives there that day, although from many ethnic backgrounds, were New Yorkers almost entirely. Those who claim that the mosque developers are being insensitive to those who lost their lives on 9/11 are showing the same insensitivity themselves. This is a NY City issue, to be decided by NYers.
Comment: #16
Posted by: JLE
Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:14 PM
FUrthermore Ms. Estrich, let me also point out how your reference to Skokie is also unfortunate. The marchers in Skokie were Nazis, not generic Germans (I'm not sure they were Germans at all, I believe they were American neo-nazis, actually). Would the Jewish residents of Skokie have objected if Skokie residents of German descent had wanted to build a German cultural center? Quite frankly, and I say this as a Jew, it is offensive to Muslims to compare the building of an Islamic Mosque and cultural center, in someplace like NY, that already has dozens, if not hundreds of mosques (and churches, synagogues, hindu temples, buddhist centers, etc.) to a march by neo-nazis. Ms. Estrich, stick to the principles that your gut told you were right in the first place.
Comment: #17
Posted by: JLE
Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:25 PM
The proponents of the mosque are now claiming the opposition is because of hatred of Muslims. I say it's not hatred but rather fear. We, non Islamics, see no effort within the Islamic world to rid themselves of the hatred of infidels that exists within their religion.
Comment: #18
Posted by: Early
Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:09 AM
No, silly people. It's a typical "jewish" ploy. Obalmy was ordered by his satanic "jewish" overlords to support the moslem at ground zero to incite the Low Comm (America's lowest common denominator as characterized by the neocons which, of course, are not Real Conservatives) mob, thereby increasing fervor for an attack on Iran. The yids who control America are so blinded by their own arrogance, they can't realize that intelligent, rational, Patriotic, American adults can SEE RIGHT THROUGH THEM (YOU?). Dean Berry Ministries: never be afraid of the truth, my fellow Americans. Thank You, Jesus Christ - THE ONLY MESSIAH THE WORLD WILL EVER KNOW - for creating hell for these evil animals. Amen.
Comment: #19
Posted by: DEANBERRY
Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:03 AM
Dear Susan,
I was a liberal like you until my mid thirties. I was endoctrinated through my youth and adulthood by the LA Times and local tv news, both biased to the left. I finally grew up, listened to talk radio, saw on FOX what CNN and network shows never mentioned. I was very close to an Pakastani American for 10 years before 9/11. She told me we deserved this destruction because of our alliance with Israel. For years she made stupid comments about jews: money grubbing, stealing Palestine, jibes at noses and more. I told her I had jewish in-laws and friends and theyre not like that, where did you hear this crap? She said they're told this from 3 or 4. She also believes Christains are below Muslims. Susan, honestly, you cannot fight generations of of endoctrinations against jews and christians. They don't stop believing this hatred, they westernize a little, get their citizenship, make money and blend well. And liberals love them because they're soooooo nice and good for the communties, while they're teaching their American children this hatred. It may take a few generations but their hate will spread across America and Shariah law will be prevalent. No, I am not paranoid. But it's liberals like you who stand behind them (political correctness) and allow them grow and propogate. I am truthful when I say politically incorrectly, that we must fight Islam now and not give up. Centuries ago they invaded Europe by sword and forced conversion to Islam, now they're more subtle. They don't believe in separation of church and state. Our founding fathers did not force state organized religion, they wrote into law our freedom to choose. Islam does not allow that freedom. Saudi Arabia and Egypt do not allow curches. There is punishment for muslims who convert to christianity. What kind of damn tolerance is this?!! And women? Just read the Koran. This should spell the hatred to you. Please don't tolerate hatred, Susan. Islam preaches and teaches it.
Comment: #20
Posted by: Mona Miklas
Tue Aug 24, 2010 10:17 AM
your intellectually lazy swipe at Pius XII (& by extension Roman Catholicism) is just one more
on a decades-old heap
The Chief Rabbi of Rome was so what? amazed? impressed? by that Pope's efforts
& that Church's efforts to shelter & protect Jews from Nazi pathologies
that he ultimately converted to Catholicism...
Comment: #21
Posted by: Joseph Konwinski
Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:46 PM
Dear Susan,

I am of that "one in four" thinking that Barack Obama is a Muslim. WHY? ... Because Obama said so, this is why. The camera was rolling as Obama was interviewed, and Obama spoke the words, "my Muslim faith"... Immediately, the interviewer, a well-known Washington figure, said..."You mean your Christian faith." Then Obama stuttered his correction, "I mean my Christian faith." Sooo here you have it, Professor Estrich... right from the man's own mouth. HOWEVER, the press gave Obama a pass, by saying he "mis-spoke." Now, let's be serious about this. Do you mis-speak about your religious faith? More than a mere slip of the tongue, I believe that this is a true revelation of his faith. Would you, Susan, mis-speak about your religious faith? I can confuse the names of my children at times, but never would I confuse my religious faith. Obama said he is Muslim.
Comment: #22
Posted by: Mary M
Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:31 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Susan Estrich
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 20 Feb 2012
Mark Shields
Mark ShieldsUpdated 18 Feb 2012
David Sirota
David SirotaUpdated 17 Feb 2012

23 Apr 2008 Wanted: Just a Little More Padding

13 Mar 2009 When Is a Plea Bargain Not a Plea Bargain?

16 Nov 2011 What Newt Knows (and Cain Doesn't)