Could the mosques being rebuilt with your tax dollars be proven to have been used as weapons storage, training centers, and/or points from which to stage violent attacks from be proven? Using any religious building in such a manner is illegal under international and religous law. If we are rebuilding mosques that had been destroyed because they were used in such a manner, is this giving aid to the enemy?
On August 4th I posted a summary of the US giving $33.486 BILLION dollars to the Middle East. Paying for mosques and NOT paying for rebuilding of churches is, to many (including me), a blatant discrimonatory act. Our First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law in the repsect of establishing one religion over another. What about this? Can the president say build that mosque and have Congress pay for it while ignoring the slaughter of Christians in Niger and Nigeria? Is this administration going to reimburse for the reconstruction of churches throughout the Balkans? Absolutely not.
The other issue with paying for mosques to be built is how many of the mosques destroyed had been selected as targets because of ongoing activities that were deadly to US Forces. This would include housing and training insurgents and weapons/munitions storage.
Recently, Libyan snpiers were firing from mosques roof tops. NATO operations chief denounced Qaddafi for his use of mosques as firing positions. When the US went in to take down Hussein, there were weapons and gunmen on and around mosques. When we went into Kuwait, in the first Gulf War, there were gunmen and weaponssystems on mosques. In Israel (a country where Arabs have more rights and freedoms than in Arab countries) Hamas uses mosques for everything that can be tied to attacking Israel. In January a mosques that had been used as a rocket storage facility to attack Israel was struck. This resulted in "a lengthy series of secondary explosions and a large fire caused by the ammunitions stockpiled in the mosque."