Mosque 2 blocks from Ground Zero

[SPOOLIN]

Finally someone tells it how it is....im tired of hearing about this stupid ass mosque location issue.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/08/20/martin.mosque.constitution/index.html?hpt=C2

[Total_Blender]

There were innocent Muslims who died in the towers, and there were Muslims among the first responders too. Many Muslim owned businesses and properties were destroyed on 9/11. Muslims are just as much Americans and New Yorkers as everyone else and their rights to use their property the way they want should be respected.

I think a lot of people don't realize that we were attacked by Al Qaeda, not just "the Muslims" in general. People's views are based around what they see in the media, and most of that is bad because Jihad gets more ratings than the positive aspects of the culture.

[BanginJimmy]

There were innocent Muslims who died in the towers, and there were Muslims among the first responders too. Many Muslim owned businesses and properties were destroyed on 9/11. Muslims are just as much Americans and New Yorkers as everyone else and their rights to use their property the way they want should be respected.

Not a single person against the mosque has questioned their right to build the mosque. The problem most people have, including myself, is the sensibility of it. IMO this is a case where perception is more important than reality. Put simply, people perceive this mosque as a tribute to the hijackers. Is it logical? Maybe not, but the rhetoric of the imam doesnt help. He is an anti-semite that supports Hamas. Supporting Hamas means you are supporting terrorism.


I think a lot of people don't realize that we were attacked by Al Qaeda, not just "the Muslims" in general. People's views are based around what they see in the media, and most of that is bad because Jihad gets more ratings than the positive aspects of the culture.


You need to think again. 99% of people are under no delusions about who attacked us and the ones who are are too ignorant and too few to matter.


What positive aspects of muslim culture their may or may not be dont matter to me. What does matter to me is the thousands of islamic extremists that want me dead for no other reason than I am American. I have yet to see a unified message from muslims anywhere in the world, including here, speaking out against terrorism. What I do see is the Lockerbie Bomber being treated as a national hero. That alone tells me, as an American, all I really need to know about the muslim culture.

[Total_Blender]

What I do see is the Lockerbie Bomber being treated as a national hero. That alone tells me, as an American, all I really need to know about the muslim culture.

You are attempting to judge a religion by the actions of a handful of extremists. Suppose I judged all Christians by the actions of Timothy McVeigh or Eric Robert Rudolph or David Koresh (all Christians). Should I protest that we not allow X-ian churches near the Murrah building, Centennial Olympic park, or Waco TX? What do you think my view of Christianity would be if my only info on it came from what I read about Fred Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_baptist)?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100818/pl_yblog_upshot/imam-at-center-of-ground-zero-controversy-helped-bush-administration


But such characterizations don't square with the project's mission — or the career of its spiritual leader, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. (Rauf heads up the Cordoba Initiative, the organization sponsoring the center.) Rauf was considered moderate enough during the Bush years to lecture FBI agents about Islam. And he is targeted on theological grounds by the same militant Islamists that mosque opponents claim he represents.

Rauf was sent by the State Department on several speaking tours in the Middle East under President George W. Bush, the Huffington Post's Sam Stein reports. He also attended a U.S.-Islamic World Forum with close Bush adviser and then-Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes. (Hughes has so far not commented on Rauf and his project, though another former Bush adviser, Michael Gerson, wrote in the Washington Post that "a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own.") Right now, Rauf is on another goodwill tour in the Middle East sponsored by the State Department, where he will talk about religious tolerance in the United States.

In 2003, the Kuwaiti-born Rauf was called on to speak about Islam to FBI agents, Stein reports. He is currently an adviser to the Interfaith Center of New York, which has come out in support of his plan to build the Islamic center, which Rauf says will be open to people of all faiths.

New York Times contributor William Dalrymple noted in an op-ed this week that Rauf represents a peaceful, mystical sect of Islam called Sufism. Sufi mosques are often attacked by more radical Muslims in the Middle East who oppose its pluralistic teachings, as well as the Sufi practice of permitting a wider public role for women in religious worship. Dalrymple points out that "in the eyes of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, [Rauf] is an infidel-loving, grave-worshiping apostate; they no doubt regard him as a legitimate target for assassination."


Looks like the "radical ties" the Imam has lead right to George W. Bush and the FBI. The Imam is also from an opposing sect of Islam than O.B.L and Al Qaeda. He is a Sufi and they are Wahabbi's.

I am also not buying the spin that he "supports Hamas". It seems to me like he is saying the HE, as an American Muslim, should not have to answer for what Hamas says or does.

The funny thing about this is that there has been a mosque in that area even before the WTC opened for business. Its at 20 Warren St. which is 2 blocks away from the WTC site and the mosque opened in 1970, several months before the WTC.

The Right needs to face it that Muslims (and therefore Islam) are going to be here permanently, and they are just as American as you or me. Does it occur to any of you that most Muslims come to America to escape things like Hamas, Sharia Law, etc?

[Browning151]

So as Americans, we must now be so politically correct so that we don't offend anyone or hurt anyones feelings, but if we dare get offended by something or feel it is insensitive then we are automatically labeled as racists, bigots or hate mongers right?

If this imam was a true religious leader and sought to spread understanding and acceptance of islam in this country, why would he build a mosque that many Americans feel is disrespectful to them? You're setting yourself and your religion up to be cast in a bad light as disrespectful and inflammatory. Isn't the purpose of any religion to spread the word and gain followers? Wouldn't that agenda be better served by showing people that you are understanding and compassionate instead of doing something that many feel is disrespectful? Like Jimmy said, no one is denying their RIGHT to build the mosque, but the sensibility of putting it there.

[ISAtlanta300]

So as Americans, we must now be so politically correct so that we don't offend anyone or hurt anyones feelings, but if we dare get offended by something or feel it is insensitive then we are automatically labeled as racists, bigots or hate mongers right?

If this imam was a true religious leader and sought to spread understanding and acceptance of islam in this country, why would he build a mosque that many Americans feel is disrespectful to them? You're setting yourself and your religion up to be cast in a bad light as disrespectful and inflammatory. Isn't the purpose of any religion to spread the word and gain followers? Wouldn't that agenda be better served by showing people that you are understanding and compassionate instead of doing something that many feel is disrespectful? Like Jimmy said, no one is denying their RIGHT to build the mosque, but the sensibility of putting it there.

Putting it where? 2 Blocks from ground zero? What about 3 blocks? Would that be ok? no? 4 blocks then? We could go on forever. Just admit it. For the majority it is less about "sensibility" and more about paranoia.

[bu villain]

If anything, this so called Mosque (it's really more like an Islamic YMCA) is a big middle finger to the 9/11 supporting terrorists who want to destroy us and our principles. This sort of situation is exactly what makes us better than countries like Saudi Arabia. Let's live up to our convictions.

[5speed]

I personally wouldn't mind. Fact is that there would be those hundreds if not thousands of people who would retaliate with terrorism of their own.

[Browning151]

Putting it where? 2 Blocks from ground zero? What about 3 blocks? Would that be ok? no? 4 blocks then? We could go on forever.

Two buildings that were damaged in the attack are going to be demolished, and this built in there place. How about a place that wasn't damaged on 9/11?


Just admit it. For the majority it is less about "sensibility" and more about paranoia.

What paranoia? Paranoia about terrorist who operate under the guise of religion to protect their activities? This "paranoia", as you say, that many people people have about islam could be abated if there was a unified movement of muslims to denounce these extremists using their religion as a front for their activities. Why aren't the moderate or conservative muslims speaking out against these extremists that degrade the image of their religion more? Making it known that these people do not represent islam as a whole?


Fact is that there would be those hundreds if not thousands of people who would retaliate with terrorism of their own.

There's most likely going to be no shortage of nut jobs, right and left and everywhere in between, that will feel like they need to take things into their own hands and make this an ongoing situation for many years to come. I personally wouldn't want to put myself, my family or my fellow community members in a position to deal with the nut jobs in the first place.

[bafbrian]

You are attempting to judge a religion by the actions of a handful of extremists. Suppose I judged all Christians by the actions of Timothy McVeigh or Eric Robert Rudolph or David Koresh (all Christians). Should I protest that we not allow X-ian churches near the Murrah building, Centennial Olympic park, or Waco TX? What do you think my view of Christianity would be if my only info on it came from what I read about Fred Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_baptist)?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100818/pl_yblog_upshot/imam-at-center-of-ground-zero-controversy-helped-bush-administration


But such characterizations don't square with the project's mission — or the career of its spiritual leader, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. (Rauf heads up the Cordoba Initiative, the organization sponsoring the center.) Rauf was considered moderate enough during the Bush years to lecture FBI agents about Islam. And he is targeted on theological grounds by the same militant Islamists that mosque opponents claim he represents.

Rauf was sent by the State Department on several speaking tours in the Middle East under President George W. Bush, the Huffington Post's Sam Stein reports. He also attended a U.S.-Islamic World Forum with close Bush adviser and then-Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes. (Hughes has so far not commented on Rauf and his project, though another former Bush adviser, Michael Gerson, wrote in the Washington Post that "a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own.") Right now, Rauf is on another goodwill tour in the Middle East sponsored by the State Department, where he will talk about religious tolerance in the United States.

In 2003, the Kuwaiti-born Rauf was called on to speak about Islam to FBI agents, Stein reports. He is currently an adviser to the Interfaith Center of New York, which has come out in support of his plan to build the Islamic center, which Rauf says will be open to people of all faiths.

New York Times contributor William Dalrymple noted in an op-ed this week that Rauf represents a peaceful, mystical sect of Islam called Sufism. Sufi mosques are often attacked by more radical Muslims in the Middle East who oppose its pluralistic teachings, as well as the Sufi practice of permitting a wider public role for women in religious worship. Dalrymple points out that "in the eyes of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, [Rauf] is an infidel-loving, grave-worshiping apostate; they no doubt regard him as a legitimate target for assassination."


Looks like the "radical ties" the Imam has lead right to George W. Bush and the FBI. The Imam is also from an opposing sect of Islam than O.B.L and Al Qaeda. He is a Sufi and they are Wahabbi's.

I am also not buying the spin that he "supports Hamas". It seems to me like he is saying the HE, as an American Muslim, should not have to answer for what Hamas says or does.

The funny thing about this is that there has been a mosque in that area even before the WTC opened for business. Its at 20 Warren St. which is 2 blocks away from the WTC site and the mosque opened in 1970, several months before the WTC.

The Right needs to face it that Muslims (and therefore Islam) are going to be here permanently, and they are just as American as you or me. Does it occur to any of you that most Muslims come to America to escape things like Hamas, Sharia Law, etc?

That is one of the smartest comments I have read regarding this situation. FYI, there are actually two mosques near Ground Zero. It's ironic that no one complains of the other mosques around Ground Zero and they both are only a few blocks away. Now that a new mosque is being built, it has become a problem. Why? We are supposed to pride ourselves on religious tolerance and yet, we cannot even do that. If someone advocated building a Catholic Church within two blocks of Oklahoma City Building bombing, would it receive this same level of disapproval?

[BanginJimmy]

You are attempting to judge a religion by the actions of a handful of extremists. Suppose I judged all Christians by the actions of Timothy McVeigh or Eric Robert Rudolph or David Koresh (all Christians). Should I protest that we not allow X-ian churches near the Murrah building, Centennial Olympic park, or Waco TX?

Why dont you point out where these people were treated as national heros. There is a VAST difference between a terrorist or extremist born here and a terrorist or extremist treated as a hero.




What do you think my view of Christianity would be if my only info on it came from what I read about Fred Phelps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westboro_baptist)?

Considering the fact that I believe religion as a whole is a very dangerous thing nothing, no matter how extreme, would surprise me. Not from Islam, Christianity, or Buddhism.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100818/pl_yblog_upshot/imam-at-center-of-ground-zero-controversy-helped-bush-administration


But such characterizations don't square with the project's mission — or the career of its spiritual leader, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. (Rauf heads up the Cordoba Initiative, the organization sponsoring the center.) Rauf was considered moderate enough during the Bush years to lecture FBI agents about Islam. And he is targeted on theological grounds by the same militant Islamists that mosque opponents claim he represents.

Rauf was sent by the State Department on several speaking tours in the Middle East under President George W. Bush, the Huffington Post's Sam Stein reports. He also attended a U.S.-Islamic World Forum with close Bush adviser and then-Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes. (Hughes has so far not commented on Rauf and his project, though another former Bush adviser, Michael Gerson, wrote in the Washington Post that "a mosque that rejects radicalism is not a symbol of the enemy's victory; it is a prerequisite for our own.") Right now, Rauf is on another goodwill tour in the Middle East sponsored by the State Department, where he will talk about religious tolerance in the United States.

In 2003, the Kuwaiti-born Rauf was called on to speak about Islam to FBI agents, Stein reports. He is currently an adviser to the Interfaith Center of New York, which has come out in support of his plan to build the Islamic center, which Rauf says will be open to people of all faiths.

New York Times contributor William Dalrymple noted in an op-ed this week that Rauf represents a peaceful, mystical sect of Islam called Sufism. Sufi mosques are often attacked by more radical Muslims in the Middle East who oppose its pluralistic teachings, as well as the Sufi practice of permitting a wider public role for women in religious worship. Dalrymple points out that "in the eyes of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban, [Rauf] is an infidel-loving, grave-worshiping apostate; they no doubt regard him as a legitimate target for assassination."


Looks like the "radical ties" the Imam has lead right to George W. Bush and the FBI. The Imam is also from an opposing sect of Islam than O.B.L and Al Qaeda. He is a Sufi and they are Wahabbi's.

I can only go by the quotes I have heard and I find that he was nothing more than an islamic cleric. He's an anti semite and agrees with sharia law being enforced here. I dont care what Bush did. In case you havent heard yet, Bush isnt in DC anymore. Someone else is squatting in the oval office now.


I am also not buying the spin that he "supports Hamas". It seems to me like he is saying the HE, as an American Muslim, should not have to answer for what Hamas says or does.[/quote]

You can take it that way and I must admit, his quote can easily fall either way. The Cordoba Institute seems that have to elaborate for him fairly often though to come more to the middle. He seems to speak out of both sides of his mouth fairly often though depending on his audience. He will say that terrorism is unislamic, then come right back and say the US was an accessory in 9/11.




The funny thing about this is that there has been a mosque in that area even before the WTC opened for business. Its at 20 Warren St. which is 2 blocks away from the WTC site and the mosque opened in 1970, several months before the WTC.

And their has never been an issue with it, which adds credence to the ideas that this mosque is a tribute to the 9/11 hijackers.

I'm not going to both doing the research, but if they can prove that the mosque on warren St. is too small for its current congregation then maybe it would calm things little.


The Right needs to face it that Muslims (and therefore Islam) are going to be here permanently, and they are just as American as you or me. Does it occur to any of you that most Muslims come to America to escape things like Hamas, Sharia Law, etc?

And you were doing so good, but now you are back to the mindless rhetoric. The "right" hasnt said anything about kicking muslims out or anything like that. What I do find funny is how hard you lefties work to get rid of christianity everywhere you see it, yet you posture equally hard for the rights of muslims. Isnt 1 religion equal to another in this country?

[BanginJimmy]

Putting it where? 2 Blocks from ground zero? What about 3 blocks? Would that be ok? no? 4 blocks then? We could go on forever. Just admit it. For the majority it is less about "sensibility" and more about paranoia.


Moreover, in spite of what’s commonly believed, and according to the Houston Chronicle and New York Times, the 13-story building where the mosque is planned IS sacred ground. Part of the landing gear from United Flight 175 actually hit that building.


http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2010/08/24/opinion/doc4c72e2ff86d8e910315680.txt


This site is every bit as much part of ground zero as WTC 7.

[BanginJimmy]

If anything, this so called Mosque (it's really more like an Islamic YMCA) is a big middle finger to the 9/11 supporting terrorists who want to destroy us and our principles. This sort of situation is exactly what makes us better than countries like Saudi Arabia. Let's live up to our convictions.


I see it the opposite way. I see it as a middle finger to the innocent people that died and a monument to the terrorists.

[BanginJimmy]

That is one of the smartest comments I have read regarding this situation. FYI, there are actually two mosques near Ground Zero. It's ironic that no one complains of the other mosques around Ground Zero and they both are only a few blocks away. Now that a new mosque is being built, it has become a problem. Why? We are supposed to pride ourselves on religious tolerance and yet, we cannot even do that. If someone advocated building a Catholic Church within two blocks of Oklahoma City Building bombing, would it receive this same level of disapproval?


Those 2 mosques were there before the attacks and the fact that no one has said anything negative about them proves your own, and Blender's, point wrong. No one cares about them because they are not tributes to the terrorists that flew those planes.

BTW, muslims have a long history of building mosques and other monuments on the sites of religious victories or victories over infidels.

just a wiki answers page, but i'm too lazy to do more research.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_muslims_build_mosques_on_lands_that_they_have_c laimed_victory_on

[bafbrian]

Those 2 mosques were there before the attacks and the fact that no one has said anything negative about them proves your own, and Blender's, point wrong. No one cares about them because they are not tributes to the terrorists that flew those planes.

BTW, muslims have a long history of building mosques and other monuments on the sites of religious victories or victories over infidels.

just a wiki answers page, but i'm too lazy to do more research.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_muslims_build_mosques_on_lands_that_they_have_c laimed_victory_on

First off, you didn't answer the question regarding a Catholic Church being built 2 blocks from the area of the Oklahoma City building.

Second, unless I misread, I bolded your statement, just want to make sure that this mosque being built is a monument to the terrorists on 9/11, based solely on your opinion. I find it laughable you are quoting WikiAnswers. I suppose you can't read Arabic, any dialect, if so, then you are ignorant to the fact that not all text within the Qu'ran has a direct counterpart in the English language. Why don't you quote the actual passage in the Qu'ran that says that.

Furthermore, while the WikiAnswers source is laughable, it does raise a valid point, every religion has built monuments on lands that they have conquered, Islam is no different from Christianity in this regard, so that point, is null and void.

Lastly, I find it interesting that a person who talks about no government interference is all about interfering and infringing on people's rights regarding property and religion.

[Browning151]

every religion has built monuments on lands that they have conquered, Islam is no different from Christianity in this regard, so that point, is null and void.



So if they were to say, "This mosque is a tribute to those who planned and carried out 9/11", you would have no problem with someone building a monument on American soil, where 3,000 Americans were killed, to commemorate and honor those people who carried out that act of terror?


First off, you didn't answer the question regarding a Catholic Church being built 2 blocks from the area of the Oklahoma City building.


You're attempting to equate a few radical individuals with an entire network of people, from which many videos, writings and audio recordings have been released condemning Americans just for the fact that we are American.



Lastly, I find it interesting that a person who talks about no government interference is all about interfering and infringing on people's rights regarding property and religion.

Maybe I'm loosing my sight, but I have yet to see where anyone said the gov't should step in and stop this. So far all I see is a debate of whether this is a slap in the face to those who died on 9/11 or not.



Why don't you quote the actual passage in the Qu'ran that says that.



It's not whether it says it in the Qu'ran or not, it's that these extremists have interpreted it in their way, to fit their agenda that they should do such things. No, it doesn't represent all muslims, and it doesn't represent all of islam but there are far too many uknowns as to who is funding and backing this mosque as well as examples that Cordoba has built mosques in other areas of "victory" over infidels. And yes, EVERY religion has its extremists and nut jobs, no doubt.

[bafbrian]

So if they were to say, "This mosque is a tribute to those who planned and carried out 9/11", you would have no problem with someone building a monument on American soil, where 3,000 Americans were killed, to commemorate and honor those people who carried out that act of terror?

You're attempting to equate a few radical individuals with an entire network of people, from which many videos, writings and audio recordings have been released condemning Americans just for the fact that we are American.

Maybe I'm loosing my sight, but I have yet to see where anyone said the gov't should step in and stop this. So far all I see is a debate of whether this is a slap in the face to those who died on 9/11 or not.

It's not whether it says it in the Qu'ran or not, it's that these extremists have interpreted it in their way, to fit their agenda that they should do such things. No, it doesn't represent all muslims, and it doesn't represent all of islam but there are far too many uknowns as to who is funding and backing this mosque as well as examples that Cordoba has built mosques in other areas of "victory" over infidels. And yes, EVERY religion has its extremists and nut jobs, no doubt.

I do have a problem with individuals or groups who twist religion to suit their own agenda. If the group who is attempting to construct the mosque were to outright say, "We are building this mosque to commemorate the sacrifices of the hijackers who lost their lives on 9/11", I would have a problem with that. At that point, the purpose of a religious facility is to freely and openly practice religion, not to support any specific political or ideology agenda. Also, there are numerous Americans who condemn Arabs for being Muslims, is it ok if we hate them for that? It's ok if we hate them, but not ok if they hate us? We can debate that back and forth, but it is an irrelevant point.

I bolded the first statement to illustrate my point, people are grouping all Muslims as terrorists because of the actions of a few; look at all those people who protested. Concurrently, people who lost loved ones are split on this, some agree that they should be allowed to because of the right granted to them under the Constitution while other disapprove because of a sensitivity issue. I can see this from both points, but at the end of the day, we are not governed by emotions and feelings, although they do guide our decisions, our emotions and feelings are not the letter of the law. We cannot simply restrict someone's rights merely because we disagree with the decisions they have made, I know I would love to take away the Phelp's Family of the Westboro Baptist Church rights to freedom of speech and expression because I do not believe that "God created IEDs" is right, but it is their right and I can only voice my opposition, not restrict their rights because I disagree with the message; if we were supposed to obey our emotions and feelings as the letter of the law, then it would have written into the Constitution, but since it is not, we are governed by the Constitution and subsequent laws.

But still, my question has yet to be answered, If someone advocated building a Catholic Church within two blocks of Oklahoma City Building bombing, would it receive this same level of disapproval? Is not the same as what is happening in New York near Ground Zero? What about the Mosque that supposed to be built in Murfeesboro, TN, how come it didn't get built? Why don't you research that and tell me what is the same and different in that case and the Ground Zero mosque. I can guarantee you that the primary similarity and opposition as to why people are opposed amongst these two instances is one thing, Islam.

There will always be questions surrounding how projects are funded and their intent, how come they are not front page news on a regular basis?

Lastly, the second bold statement is aimed BanginJimmy, hence why I quoted his reply. If you had read he previous responses in other threads, then you would know the reasoning behind that statement, but since you haven't, I recommend you do so, along with others who post in this section so that you can understand what some other in here believe. By doing so, it would further your knowledge and allow for a better discussion.

[BanginJimmy]

If someone advocated building a Catholic Church within two blocks of Oklahoma City Building bombing, would it receive this same level of disapproval?


Just to make you happy even though I have no clue what this has to do with the thread. It is like asking if broccoli makes you sick cause you had a bad apple once.


No people wouldnt have a problem with it. The reason is simple, McVeigh's bombing had nothing to do with religion whereas 9/11 was all about religion.

[BanginJimmy]

First off, you didn't answer the question regarding a Catholic Church being built 2 blocks from the area of the Oklahoma City building.

Second, unless I misread, I bolded your statement, just want to make sure that this mosque being built is a monument to the terrorists on 9/11, based solely on your opinion.

I should have been more clear. I'm not saying anything about the motivation behind the location. I am saying that the preception is that the mosque is being built as a monument.



I find it laughable you are quoting WikiAnswers. I suppose you can't read Arabic, any dialect, if so, then you are ignorant to the fact that not all text within the Qu'ran has a direct counterpart in the English language. Why don't you quote the actual passage in the Qu'ran that says that.

No I cant read it or speak it. Good thing for the internet. I did find what I was looking for and I should have stuck with my original thinking on this. Its not a in koran, but it is a muslim custom to build a mosque on the site of a muslim victory. That is an indisputable fact.


every religion has built monuments on lands that they have conquered, Islam is no different from Christianity in this regard, so that point, is null and void.

Actually it isnt. "because he did it" isnt a valid reason.


Lastly, I find it interesting that a person who talks about no government interference is all about interfering and infringing on people's rights regarding property and religion.

Actually I am not. You will not find a single place where I have said the govt should step in and prevent the construction.

What I am saying that in some cases perception is more real than reality. In this case the mosque looks like a monument to the terrorists. If this was about unity, like Cordoba says, they would realize that this is a very divisive subject and will only cause further resentment and mistrust. The fact that this thread is even here is proof of that.

[BanginJimmy]

Lastly, the second bold statement is aimed BanginJimmy, hence why I quoted his reply. If you had read he previous responses in other threads, then you would know the reasoning behind that statement, but since you haven't, I recommend you do so, along with others who post in this section so that you can understand what some other in here believe. By doing so, it would further your knowledge and allow for a better discussion.


I have no clue what you are trying to get at here.

[Browning151]

I can see this from both points, but at the end of the day, we are not governed by emotions and feelings, although they do guide our decisions, our emotions and feelings are not the letter of the law. We cannot simply restrict someone's rights merely because we disagree with the decisions they have made, I know I would love to take away the Phelp's Family of the Westboro Baptist Church rights to freedom of speech and expression because I do not believe that "God created IEDs" is right, but it is their right and I can only voice my opposition, not restrict their rights because I disagree with the message; if we were supposed to obey our emotions and feelings as the letter of the law, then it would have written into the Constitution, but since it is not, we are governed by the Constitution and subsequent laws.


I agree with you on this 100%. We are a nation that is governed by the rule of law, not the rule of man. Once again though, no one has contested the right of anyone to build whatever they please there, many have simply expressed that they feel that building the mosque in that area is disrespectful of those who died there, as well as distasteful in many way. Yes, under our Constitution they have every right to do it. This is where I revert to my Libertarian views, by law I conclude that they should without a doubt build it without retribution, however many people cannot look at this as simply a question of law, including myself, many feel it is an act of defiance and provocation to western society. That's not to say though, that the government should step in, in any way shape or form. While we are governed by laws, perception and reality are very different things and there is a fine line to walk between the way that people believe they are being treated and what is the letter of the law. Imam Rauf himself has said that people who feel fear and oppression may act out in acts of terrorism, this is no different with the people of America. With political correctness run amuck in this country many Americans are beginning to feel that their constitution, their government and their way of life are being trampled upon in the name of tolerance and acceptance. It is only a matter of time before people begin to react to that, and that may come as violence or terrorism itself. While I do not condone such drastic actions I can understand where people may feel they may have been pushed to such extreme measures to protect themselves and their country. I can only see this ending badly for those who choose to worship at this center and that would be reason enough for me, as a leader, to consider relocation, if nothing more than for the protection of my fellow worshipers.



Lastly, the second bold statement is aimed BanginJimmy, hence why I quoted his reply. If you had read he previous responses in other threads, then you would know the reasoning behind that statement, but since you haven't, I recommend you do so, along with others who post in this section so that you can understand what some other in here believe. By doing so, it would further your knowledge and allow for a better discussion.

I have read this entire thread, from the beginning. You quoted him because he said it was a tribute to the people who carried out the attack, and then asked where that was stated in the Qu'ran, and I addressed that in my previous post.

[Total_Blender]

Why dont you point out where these people were treated as national heros. There is a VAST difference between a terrorist or extremist born here and a terrorist or extremist treated as a hero. ?

Fugitive Eric Robert Rudolph was aided and abetted for YEARS by his supporters.

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/Teror_92/4264_72.htm


"What some hatemongers and extremists are saying is, this person is a hero whose crusade against abortion and the government is noble and praiseworthy," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "What is even more troubling is that some of the chatter is calling for violence or lone-wolf acts to be carried out in Rudolph's name. Others are using the arrest as an excuse to spread twisted conspiracy theories about Jews. As we have seen in the past, this can be a dangerous mix."

You might say that the people who applaud these guys as "heroes" are on the lunatic fringe and aren't really relevant to, or representative of, mainstream American Christianity. And you'd be right, for the most part. Most X-ians are not extremists. Not all X-ians agree with each other, there are sects that with varied practices and varied degrees of orthodoxy.

And neither are Osama, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc relevant to or representative of the entire religion of Islam. They are the lunatic fringe of that religion just as Rudolph is the lunatic fringe of Christianity. Most all Muslim Americans have denounced terrorism, continuously since 9/11. Sending the message to Muslims that "we don't want you here" or "your practice of your religion is disrespectful to me" will push Muslims in the US more in the direction of radicalism because it will validate all the anti-American propaganda coming from the terrorists.

You say the OK City attacks were not religiously motivated, but what about Eric Robert Rudolph's bombing the Olympics? That had EVERYTHING to do with religion. He even signed the letters claiming responsibility for his bombings with the phrase "Army of God":

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/31/rudolph.profile/index.html

Rudolph and his family were connected with the Christian Identity movement, a militant, racist and anti-Semitic organization that believes whites are God's chosen people.

Rudolph's mother, Patricia, spent time with Nord Davis, a Christian Identity ideologue who built a walled compound called Northpoint in the Nantahala community. Davis wrote propaganda decrying a "New World Order" that he claimed was controlled by Jews, and he advocated killing gays and those who engaged in mixed-race relationships.

So suppose some moderate X-ian sect that repeatedly denounced Rudolph and advocated tolerance wanted to build a church near Centennial Olympic park. Would you be outraged about that?

[ISAtlanta300]

Two buildings that were damaged in the attack are going to be demolished, and this built in there place. How about a place that wasn't damaged on 9/11?

So you really think you can walk into any building on wall street and say "Hi.. I wanna built a mosque here. Pleasa vacate the building and give it to me".

How about they are using that building because it is... AVAILABLE? No one else want it? They want it. Just happened to be right there.




What paranoia? Paranoia about terrorist who operate under the guise of religion to protect their activities? This "paranoia", as you say, that many people people have about islam could be abated if there was a unified movement of muslims to denounce these extremists using their religion as a front for their activities. Why aren't the moderate or conservative muslims speaking out against these extremists that degrade the image of their religion more? Making it known that these people do not represent islam as a whole?

Why don't we ask Christians to do the same, and speak out against Christian extremists and terrorists to state that they do not represent Christianity as a whole? Heck, while, we are at it, let us pick up every latino down the street, line them up and make them speak out and denounce gang activity, for example. Yes. that will put us at ease right there.

[ISAtlanta300]

I see it the opposite way. I see it as a middle finger to the innocent people that died and a monument to the terrorists.

Because, as everyone knows, it is the MUSLIMS that attacked us, not Terrorists. Sorry, must have missed that in the news coverage. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Total_Blender]

How about they are using that building because it is... AVAILABLE? No one else want it? They want it. Just happened to be right there.
e.

Its good for the area that Cordoba DOES want the site, because no one else does. That building had been vacant for a couple of years even before 9/11. Cordoba developing that site will be good for property values on that block and it will bring in more patrons to surrounding businesses too... except maybe the "Off track betting" kiosk or the :boobies: bars. I don't think Muslims are too into that scene.:lmfao:

[Browning151]

That there just prove my case. You really think all muslims are nutjobs. I assume u also avoid black neighborhoods cause they be stealin' yo sneakers. Paranoia much?

I think you should re-read my statement.



So you really think you can walk into any building on wall street and say "Hi.. I wanna built a mosque here. Pleasa vacate the building and give it to me".

How about they are using that building because it is... AVAILABLE? No one else want it? They want it. Just happened to be right there.


I'm sure there are NO other buildings in NY or Lower Manhattan for that matter that are empty and available right? The only building available to build a mosque just happens to be one that was damaged during 9/11? Doubt it.




Why don't we ask Christians to do the same, and speak out against Christian extremists and terrorists to state that they do not represent Christianity as a whole? Heck, while, we are at it, let us pick up every latino down the street, line them up and make them speak out and denounce gang activity, for example. Yes. that will put us at ease right there.


Doesn't matter the religion, Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Scientology, Judaism etc. etc. If there were a large number of terroristic or extremist activities carried out by numerous followers of any religion or affiliation, I'd say the same thing. If that's not what you stand for speak out and let it be known that's not what you're about.

[ISAtlanta300]

I should have been more clear. I'm not saying anything about the motivation behind the location. I am saying that the preception is that the mosque is being built as a monument. .

At last, the truth is revealed. What did I say? Paranoia. Public perception about Muslims.

[ISAtlanta300]

I'm sure there are NO other buildings in NY or Lower Manhattan for that matter that are empty and available right? The only building available to build a mosque just happens to be one that was damaged during 9/11? Doubt it. .

Maybe you're right, but that building is probably the cheapest / most affordable since it is damaged and due for demolition.





Doesn't matter the religion, Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, Scientology, Judaism etc. etc. If there were a large number of terroristic or extremist activities carried out by numerous followers of any religion or affiliation, I'd say the same thing. If that's not what you stand for speak out and let it be known that's not what you're about.

That is pretty prejudice to demand to the masses to 'confirm their allegiance' due to the actions of a few. If it was me I woudl be like "if you expect me to speak out, then you have already judged me".

[Browning151]

That is pretty prejudice to demand to the masses to 'confirm their allegiance' due to the actions of a few. If it was me I woudl be like "if you expect me to speak out, then you have already judged me".

Confirm their allegiance? Not even close, nothing I said indicated that someone should "confirm their allegiance" to any group or belief. More or less the point was, educate people. Let people know what you stand for, and address misconceptions that people have. Someones view of your movement or religion may be skewed by misconceptions, instead of writing them off as bigots or whatnot, educate them. That's a far cry from people "confirming allegiance" to any religion.

[ISAtlanta300]

Confirm their allegiance? Not even close, nothing I said indicated that someone should "confirm their allegiance" to any group or belief. More or less the point was, educate people. Let people know what you stand for, and address misconceptions that people have. Someones view of your movement or religion may be skewed by misconceptions, instead of writing them off as bigots or whatnot, educate them. That's a far cry from people "confirming allegiance" to any religion.

Please. even if they were to 'educate' as you say, I bet you half of Americans won't believe them anyway. So why bother?

I mean you already DON'T like them based on their religion, hence the reason we have this whole Mosque controversy going on at the moment.

Like I said before "If you need me to confirm to you that I am NOT a Terrorist, you have already judged me that I AM".

[Browning151]

Please. even if they were to 'educate' as you say, I bet you half of Americans won't believe them anyway. So why bother?


You're right, many may not, but many would as well.




I mean you already DON'T like them based on their religion, hence the reason we have this whole Mosque controversy going on at the moment.


Is that directed at me specifically or anyone who opposes the mosque?

[bu villain]

I see it the opposite way. I see it as a middle finger to the innocent people that died and a monument to the terrorists.

But even after reading all your posts, I still don't understand why anyone would see it that way. Do you think these muslims may be terrorists? These are sufis, probably the least likely sect to ever become terrorists. If you agree that these muslims are not terrorists then why would their mosque be a monument for terrorism?

[Total_Blender]

If there were a large number of terroristic or extremist activities carried out by numerous followers of any religion or affiliation, I'd say the same thing. If that's not what you stand for speak out and let it be known that's not what you're about.

The Imam has denounced terrorism and Al Qaeda many times:

http://www.islamfortoday.com/60minutes.htm

Faisal: Fanaticism and terrorism have no place in Islam. That's just as absurd as associating Hitler with Christianity, or David Koresh with Christianity. There are always people who will do peculiar things, and think that they are doing things in the name of their religion. But the Koran is... God says in the Koran that they think that they are doing right, but they are doing wrong.

That was actually his gig when he was employed by the State Dept. He traveled all over the middle East giving speeches against terrorism and such.

[BanginJimmy]

Fugitive Eric Robert Rudolph was aided and abetted for YEARS by his supporters.

http://www.adl.org/PresRele/Teror_92/4264_72.htm


"What some hatemongers and extremists are saying is, this person is a hero whose crusade against abortion and the government is noble and praiseworthy," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "What is even more troubling is that some of the chatter is calling for violence or lone-wolf acts to be carried out in Rudolph's name. Others are using the arrest as an excuse to spread twisted conspiracy theories about Jews. As we have seen in the past, this can be a dangerous mix."



You might say that the people who applaud these guys as "heroes" are on the lunatic fringe and aren't really relevant to, or representative of, mainstream American Christianity. And you'd be right, for the most part. Most X-ians are not extremists. Not all X-ians agree with each other, there are sects that with varied practices and varied degrees of orthodoxy.

And neither are Osama, Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc relevant to or representative of the entire religion of Islam. They are the lunatic fringe of that religion just as Rudolph is the lunatic fringe of Christianity. Most all Muslim Americans have denounced terrorism, continuously since 9/11. Sending the message to Muslims that "we don't want you here" or "your practice of your religion is disrespectful to me" will push Muslims in the US more in the direction of radicalism because it will validate all the anti-American propaganda coming from the terrorists.

You say the OK City attacks were not religiously motivated, but what about Eric Robert Rudolph's bombing the Olympics? That had EVERYTHING to do with religion. He even signed the letters claiming responsibility for his bombings with the phrase "Army of God":

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/31/rudolph.profile/index.html

Rudolph and his family were connected with the Christian Identity movement, a militant, racist and anti-Semitic organization that believes whites are God's chosen people.

Rudolph's mother, Patricia, spent time with Nord Davis, a Christian Identity ideologue who built a walled compound called Northpoint in the Nantahala community. Davis wrote propaganda decrying a "New World Order" that he claimed was controlled by Jews, and he advocated killing gays and those who engaged in mixed-race relationships.

So suppose some moderate X-ian sect that repeatedly denounced Rudolph and advocated tolerance wanted to build a church near Centennial Olympic park. Would you be outraged about that?



You want to compare neo nazi's response to Rudolph to the Libyan President meeting and hugging al Megrahi? Is that really as good as you can find?

[BanginJimmy]

At last, the truth is revealed. What did I say? Paranoia. Public perception about Muslims.

With absolutely nothing to back that up right?


Oh and perception and paranoia are 2 very different things. You might want to find a dictionary and look up the 2 words.

[BanginJimmy]

Do you think these muslims may be terrorists?

I dont know them so I have no clue.




These are sufis, probably the least likely sect to ever become terrorists.

Least likely doesnt make it impossible.



If you agree that these muslims are not terrorists then why would their mosque be a monument for terrorism?


I didnt agree to anything. I've already said I know nothing of their intentions. I've said multiple times and in certain situations perception is more important than reality and this is one of them.

[Total_Blender]

I didnt agree to anything. I've already said I know nothing of their intentions. I've said multiple times and in certain situations perception is more important than reality and this is one of them.

You don't seem to be all that interested in seeking the reality in this situation either. A simple google search or browsing Wikipedia for a few minutes will find you plenty of information on how the Imam is a moderate and Sufis are a peaceful, moderate, pro-West sect.

Wahabbi's (OBL, Al Qaeda, and such) hate Sufi's probably more than they hate US. Sufi Islam has more in common with Christian and Jewish mysticism than it does with Shia/Sunni/Wahabbi Islam.

As far as the release of al Megrahi, that was the BP and the British gov't making an oil deal with Libya. You'll have to take that up with the Brits, and I don't seen how that has anything to do with G-0 or the Cordoba/Park 51 project anyway.

The fact of the situation is that you don't want to know. You ask others to do the research for you and then bash it without even examining it.

[cm7k24]

Those 2 mosques were there before the attacks and the fact that no one has said anything negative about them proves your own, and Blender's, point wrong. No one cares about them because they are not tributes to the terrorists that flew those planes.

BTW, muslims have a long history of building mosques and other monuments on the sites of religious victories or victories over infidels.

just a wiki answers page, but i'm too lazy to do more research.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_muslims_build_mosques_on_lands_that_they_have_c laimed_victory_on

That is the absolutely stupidest thing i have read,
so you truly think that because 9/11 happened that the Muslim EXTREMIST did, and now to pay off 9 years later,
the other Muslims want to build a Mosque to show victory. get out of here,
first of, for going by WIKI. that can be changed by anyone out there,
and second. have you ever asked any Muslim if they like what happened that day or support it in any way?,
or if all Muslims go by what the extremist do.
my guess is no you havent.. People here just go by what the media tells them. one HANDFULL of just happened to be from Islam did this.
so now all of us Muslims are bad.

Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
I see it the opposite way. I see it as a middle finger to the innocent people that died and a monument to the terrorists.
Once again.
There no intention to pointed middle fingers for anyone. the spot they happened to find just happens to be near it.
so if was a little bit farther down, would it make a difference. no. the media just wants attention.
go look at the real new in the middle east and see whats going on over there. with all this support to make Peace. Bull shit.
all the support is going to Israel and what are they doing? Bombing school. and you hear nothing about that on the american media.

[bu villain]

I dont know them so I have no clue.

Least likely doesnt make it impossible.

I didnt agree to anything. I've already said I know nothing of their intentions. I've said multiple times and in certain situations perception is more important than reality and this is one of them.

It sounds like you are saying that perceptions coming from ignorance are somehow valid. I am surprised because you don't normally argue that public perception should trump constitutional freedoms.

[cm7k24]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxRpD2aZL6k

people, watch this video and notice the ignorance and bullshit feed to people..
some people just start talking and not knowing anything, and when the table turns to Christianity criticism, all of a sudden wrong.

[BanginJimmy]

It sounds like you are saying that perceptions coming from ignorance are somehow valid. I am surprised because you don't normally argue that public perception should trump constitutional freedoms.

No one is questioning constitutional freedoms. I dont know where you liberals are getting this idea from. Maybe the same journalists that make up the jorno-list? People are against it because because of the perception and because it is definitely in bad taste.

[BanginJimmy]

That is the absolutely stupidest thing i have read,
so you truly think that because 9/11 happened that the Muslim EXTREMIST did, and now to pay off 9 years later,
the other Muslims want to build a Mosque to show victory. get out of here,
first of, for going by WIKI. that can be changed by anyone out there,
and second. have you ever asked any Muslim if they like what happened that day or support it in any way?,
or if all Muslims go by what the extremist do.
my guess is no you havent.. People here just go by what the media tells them. one HANDFULL of just happened to be from Islam did this.
so now all of us Muslims are bad.

Show me the proof I am wrong. Show me the proof that a muslim culture to build a mosque over the site of a religious victory isnt real.

You happen to be one of those that simply goes by what the media tells them. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

If this mosque was all about peace and unity like the imam says it is, why wont he even talk to the governor about another site? Do you think building it in a place where most people dont want it will help bridge gaps or expand them?

I dont care of muslims like it or dont like it. I have yet to see a unified message from the American muslim population condemning it. I have yet to see any kind of message from the muslim world condemning it. What we do have are massive celebrations all over the muslim world immediately after the attacks.



There no intention to pointed middle fingers for anyone.

Are you in some way connected to this imam to know this? yea, didnt think so.




so if was a little bit farther down, would it make a difference. no. the media just wants attention.

Actually it would, as proven by the fact that 2 other mosques that are near the site have not even been discussed.



go look at the real new in the middle east and see whats going on over there. with all this support to make Peace. Bull shit.
all the support is going to Israel and what are they doing? Bombing school. and you hear nothing about that on the american media.

I am all for bombing schools when you have Hamas setting up their rockets on top of schools and hospitals. Do you think hamas cares about hitting a school or hospital?

[SUBY_RUE]

Im just waiting for them to build there mosque, so that someone will fly a plane into there shit. Lets see how they like it...O yeah, I went there...

Im not up to date with what is going on, but from what little bit i have read on this. I dont mind the fact that they want to build this mosque at the location they chose, But to build it just to celebrate what they did to us, well thats just shitty of them. If that is the reason they are building this mosque.

[bafbrian]

Show me the proof I am wrong. Show me the proof that a muslim culture to build a mosque over the site of a religious victory isnt real.

You happen to be one of those that simply goes by what the media tells them. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

If this mosque was all about peace and unity like the imam says it is, why wont he even talk to the governor about another site? Do you think building it in a place where most people dont want it will help bridge gaps or expand them?

I dont care of muslims like it or dont like it. I have yet to see a unified message from the American muslim population condemning it. I have yet to see any kind of message from the muslim world condemning it. What we do have are massive celebrations all over the muslim world immediately after the attacks.

Are you in some way connected to this imam to know this? yea, didnt think so.

Actually it would, as proven by the fact that 2 other mosques that are near the site have not even been discussed.

I am all for bombing schools when you have Hamas setting up their rockets on top of schools and hospitals. Do you think hamas cares about hitting a school or hospital?

I don't disagree with you on the point of building mosques on top of other holy sites, but in all fairness, Muslims aren't the only ones in history that have built religion buildings over the ruins another group or culture based around a particular religion, Christians were doing it long before them, but you failed to mention this in any post. But, you will continually state Muslims do it as if they are the only ones.

I agree with you on the notion that this individual probably listens to the media and regurgitates that same statements as his own without any independent thought. Frankly, that is what is driving this whole mosque controversy in my opinion. One side says one thing and the other counters and vice versa and a large portion of Americans accept that as their own opinion without any independent thought, thus turning them into "sheeple".

Regarding the Imam, the reason why we can assume he doesn't want to move the Mosque is because he doesn't have to. If they choose to build a mosque on private property, with private funds, then the letter of the law says they can and there is little to nothing the state government can do about. The moment that he isn't allowed to, we have rewritten law(s) illegal, thus setting a precedent for future instances wherein if the public disagrees with something, the government can step in nullify any such action.

In all honesty, if it would make a difference to move it down, how much further down would it have to move to be ok? Is there any distance far enough? Can we honestly lie to ourselves and say that their is a distance which would make the mosque favorable? Because of the events of 9/11, there will continue to be a stigma aimed at Muslims merely because they are Muslims who are perceived as violent, mindless terrorists, hell bent on world domination, and for no other reasons. As long this perception continues, IMHO, it wouldn't matter where the mosque would be built, someone is going to have a problem with it as seen in Murfeesboro, TN. There were no violent acts committed in the area, no bombings, no Islamic fanatics marching the streets voicing to people to convert or face annihilation, but what it was was good ole American ignorance and fear directed at a group who wanted to build a mosque there and because of a now embedded stigma branded onto all Muslims, fear and ignorance prevailed in this instance. Until the day that changes, the stigma will remain.

Regarding Hamas, using schools and hospitals is disgraceful, but since they are not regulated by the Geneva Conventions (although the US hasn't signed to 2 of the provisions ourselves), as such, they can use their facilities as shields, as messed up as it is. They would rather be cowards instead of confronting their enemy head-on.

[Total_Blender]

One of the main groups involved in this debacle is called "Stop the Islamification of America," so it stands to reason that they could build the thing in LA or Seattle and it'd still be too close to G-0 for them.

Heres a link to their upcoming 9/11 hate rally:

http://sioaonline.com/?p=452

[Browning151]

Regarding the Imam, the reason why we can assume he doesn't want to move the Mosque is because he doesn't have to. If they choose to build a mosque on private property, with private funds, then the letter of the law says they can and there is little to nothing the state government can do about. The moment that he isn't allowed to, we have rewritten law(s) illegal, thus setting a precedent for future instances wherein if the public disagrees with something, the government can step in nullify any such action.

I think pretty much everyone here agrees that gov't should not be involved in the decision, whether you think it should be built or not they have a constitutional right to do so and the gov't needs to stay out of it.



In all honesty, if it would make a difference to move it down, how much further down would it have to move to be ok? Is there any distance far enough? Can we honestly lie to ourselves and say that their is a distance which would make the mosque favorable?


A building that wasn't damaged during the attack would be less inflammatory to some people, but as you said, there are some people who will simply never be satisfied in any case. I chalk that up to blind ignorance.



Because of the events of 9/11, there will continue to be a stigma aimed at Muslims merely because they are Muslims who are perceived as violent, mindless terrorists, hell bent on world domination, and for no other reasons. As long this perception continues, IMHO, it wouldn't matter where the mosque would be built, someone is going to have a problem with it as seen in Murfeesboro, TN. There were no violent acts committed in the area, no bombings, no Islamic fanatics marching the streets voicing to people to convert or face annihilation, but what it was was good ole American ignorance and fear directed at a group who wanted to build a mosque there and because of a now embedded stigma branded onto all Muslims, fear and ignorance prevailed in this instance. Until the day that changes, the stigma will remain.


It's not just 9/11 that has attached a stigma to Islam, and Muslims in general. The majority, if not nearly all, of large scale terror attacks or attempts over the past decade have been carried out by Islamic extremists. That is what has attached a stigma and instilled a fear of Islam in many people, especially those who follow mainstream media and do nothing more that regurgitate talking points.

[bu villain]

No one is questioning constitutional freedoms. I dont know where you liberals are getting this idea from. Maybe the same journalists that make up the jorno-list? People are against it because because of the perception and because it is definitely in bad taste.

How is calling me a liberal and questioning where I get my information helpful at all in this debate? (Btw, I listen to right wing talk radio daily and never watch TV).

If the imam claimed this was a monument to terrorism I would agree the mosque is in bad taste. If I held all Muslims or Islam itself responsible for 9/11 I would agree the mosque is in bad taste.

Since I don't see clear evidence otherwise (only conjecture), I view this as reasonable Muslims trying to build a place of worship (and swimming). I am honestly trying to understand why the opponents feel the way they do.

[JDM onlyy]

That is one of the smartest comments I have read regarding this situation. FYI, there are actually two mosques near Ground Zero. It's ironic that no one complains of the other mosques around Ground Zero and they both are only a few blocks away. Now that a new mosque is being built, it has become a problem. Why? We are supposed to pride ourselves on religious tolerance and yet, we cannot even do that. If someone advocated building a Catholic Church within two blocks of Oklahoma City Building bombing, would it receive this same level of disapproval?

Problem with this is, the guy didn't blow up the building screaming, "For JESUS!!!!!" None of the people who were Christians claimed they did it in the name of Christianity. (I'm not Christian, I'm just stating an obvious fact) Whereas, the terrorists that were Muslim stated they were doing in the name of Islam and Allah. Get what I'm saying?

[BanginJimmy]

If the imam claimed this was a monument to terrorism I would agree the mosque is in bad taste. If I held all Muslims or Islam itself responsible for 9/11 I would agree the mosque is in bad taste.

I do hold the muslim religion as a major contributor to the attacks on 9/11 as I do with just about every other terrorist attack over the last 3 decades.


Since I don't see clear evidence otherwise (only conjecture), I view this as reasonable Muslims trying to build a place of worship (and swimming). I am honestly trying to understand why the opponents feel the way they do.

No you arent because there has been plenty of reasons that people are against this site and you simply ignore them and change the subject. You, and those like you, say anyone that doesnt want it there is a racist/biggot/whatever else. I am friends with a couple of muslims, one of them very devout, and they are perfectly ok with my beliefs. I dont trust muslims as a whole and probably never will. They have earned that mistrust and until they do something to earn trust back I will continue about my ways with no problems.

[cm7k24]

I dont trust muslims as a whole and probably never will. They have earned that mistrust and until they do something to earn trust back I will continue about my ways with no problems.
So because of a few individuals bad choices, you can hold an entire group of people for it? and saying that nearly 1/4 of the worlds population has the mind set as that...

[BanginJimmy]

So because of a few individuals bad choices, you can hold an entire group of people for it? and saying that nearly 1/4 of the worlds population has the mind set as that...


1. I wouldnt call it a few individuals, it is entire facets of the religion. Considering you have the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qeada and on and on all wanting to see Americans die for no other reason than they are American.

2. You call suicide bombing a bad choice? What about setting up silkworm rockets on top of schools and hospitals? Just another bad choice? I would hate to see what you call murderistic mindset if trying to kill as many people as possible a bad choice.

3. Yes, I am saying that 1/4 of the world's population has that mind set.

Any other stupid questions?

[cm7k24]

Sorry for the dumb questions, I only asked because you have gone around and meet me and every single muslim and seen how we all think.
how about you do some one on one with Muslims and ask if they support everything that happens with Al-Qeada, or what happens on 9/11.

thats like saying oh because an gang of African American killed a white guy over some silly reason that, that the whole black population is bad.

[BanginJimmy]

how about you do some one on one with Muslims and ask if they support everything that happens with Al-Qeada, or what happens on 9/11.

Because I dont care to. I have seen what I need to see from the muslim religion. Not every muslim is a terrorist but a high enough percentage of them are, or at least sympathize with them that I do not trust them.


BTW, your pathetic attack on Israel now makes sense. Funny how you found a reason to bring up their bombing of a school, but forget to mention the silkworm missile launchers that are being used on the roof.


thats like saying oh because an gang of African American killed a white guy over some silly reason that, that the whole black population is bad.


Not at all. Now if that gang, along with 20 or 30 other gangs were purposely hunting and killing white guys AND they all went to the same church/school/YMCA then you have a point. I would believe that anyone that goes to that same church/school/YMCA is bad.



Are you going to kill me now and be like the guy that called Boortz on thursday and threaten to kill him for calling islam a violent gutter religion cause I agree completely with Boortz on this.

[cm7k24]

Kill you? there you go with the stereo typing again, i could honestly give a shit less what you think. but all this shows you level of ignorance.

[BanginJimmy]

Kill you? there you go with the stereo typing again, i could honestly give a shit less what you think. but all this shows you level of ignorance.

well you know that stereotypes are simply an exaggeration of common facts.


I find it funny that with everything else I have said in this thread, the only things you take the time comment on are my personal opinions and not any of points I made.

[bafbrian]

Problem with this is, the guy didn't blow up the building screaming, "For JESUS!!!!!" None of the people who were Christians claimed they did it in the name of Christianity. (I'm not Christian, I'm just stating an obvious fact) Whereas, the terrorists that were Muslim stated they were doing in the name of Islam and Allah. Get what I'm saying?

I can understand that, but we cannot hold an entire religion accountable for the actions of a few individuals.


I do hold the muslim religion as a major contributor to the attacks on 9/11 as I do with just about every other terrorist attack over the last 3 decades.

No you arent because there has been plenty of reasons that people are against this site and you simply ignore them and change the subject. You, and those like you, say anyone that doesnt want it there is a racist/biggot/whatever else. I am friends with a couple of muslims, one of them very devout, and they are perfectly ok with my beliefs. I dont trust muslims as a whole and probably never will. They have earned that mistrust and until they do something to earn trust back I will continue about my ways with no problems.

That has to be the most idiotic statement I have seen. I can only imagine that you do that same in all aspect of your beliefs, you take the actions of a few and hold and entire group accountable, yet you didn't seem to have the stance when discussing the Tea Party Movement and the racist signs. You claimed that the few people who had the racist signs were not representative of the Tea Party, yet you won't grant Islam the same latitude.


Because I dont care to. I have seen what I need to see from the muslim religion. Not every muslim is a terrorist but a high enough percentage of them are, or at least sympathize with them that I do not trust them.

What empirical evidence do you have to support that claim? Or is it yet another biased assumption?

[bu villain]

I do hold the muslim religion as a major contributor to the attacks on 9/11 as I do with just about every other terrorist attack over the last 3 decades.

Ok now we are getting somewhere!


No you arent because there has been plenty of reasons that people are against this site and you simply ignore them and change the subject. You, and those like you, say anyone that doesnt want it there is a racist/biggot/whatever else.

Until your last post, I have never heard a single major opponent say their feelings were based in mistrust of all muslims. Now that you have made it clear, I understand why you feel the way you do (even though I don't feel the same way). Also, please point out in any post I ever made where I called you a racist, bigot, or any other deragotory term.


I am friends with a couple of muslims, one of them very devout, and they are perfectly ok with my beliefs. I dont trust muslims as a whole and probably never will. They have earned that mistrust and until they do something to earn trust back I will continue about my ways with no problems.

Thanks for your honesty. I wish we got that much from our elected officials.

[Total_Blender]

Because I dont care to. I have seen what I need to see from the muslim religion. Not every muslim is a terrorist but a high enough percentage of them are, or at least sympathize with them that I do not trust them.
.

Looks like the Onion just did an article about Jimmy.

Man Already Knows Everything He Needs To Know About Muslims (http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-already-knows-everything-he-needs-to-know-abou,17990/)


"I almost gave in and listened to that guy defend Islam with words I didn't want to hear," Gentries said. "But then I remembered how much easier it is to live in a world of black-and-white in which I can assign the label of 'other' to someone and use him as a vessel for all my fears and insecurities."

http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-already-knows-everything-he-needs-to-know-abou,17990/

Congrats, bro! :goodjob:

[BanginJimmy]

Until your last post, I have never heard a single major opponent say their feelings were based in mistrust of all muslims. Now that you have made it clear, I understand why you feel the way you do (even though I don't feel the same way).

Dont get the facts twisted. My mistrust of muslims has little to do with my opposition to this mosque. One of my major problems is that their publicly professed reasonings doesnt line up with the facts. They say they want to build it to show solidarity and to help bridge the divides between muslim and American cultures, but their actions go completely against that. If you want to bring about a measure of good will you dont tell someone "this is hows its going to be and I dont care if you like it or not". Do they have that right? Damn right they do and as mush as I am against the mosque, I am FAR more against that kind of abuse by the govt.


Also, please point out in any post I ever made where I called you a racist, bigot, or any other deragotory term.

Maybe I am confusing you with someone else, but the fact still remains that anytime someone speaks up against Obama, against this mosque, in favor of the AZ immigration law, they are called a racist. Hell, these days the only thing you have to do to qualify as a racist to the lefties is be conservative.





Thanks for your honesty. I wish we got that much from our elected officials.


I believe you will find strong bi-partisan support from anyone outside the beltway or state establishments in this area.

[Browning151]

If you want to bring about a measure of good will you dont tell someone "this is hows its going to be and I dont care if you like it or not". Do they have that right? Damn right they do and as much as I am against the mosque, I am FAR more against that kind of abuse by the govt.

I agree with this 1000%. In my personal opinion, many of the "*educated" people who are against this mosque feel this way, (*people who research, not just regurgitate talking points). They absolutely have the right, and as far as that goes, I as well would rather see a mosque there than the gov't exercise such power to stop it. For me it's an issue of respect, not rights and/or gov't control. That sets a much more dangerous precedent than this mosque does.

[integra938]

I say we fly a plane into it during service hours,then maybe they will show some respect.

[Total_Blender]

\
|

I guess you're volunteering yourself to pilot the plane, then? Why don't you pitch that plan to the FBI... I'm sure they'd love to hear more about it.

[integra938]

HAHA !

[profall]

I say build it.

I was born and raised in New York, and to be honest I really don't give a shit either way.

[x Resilience]

I don't see whats the problem with it.

[x Resilience]

I say we fly a plane into it during service hours,then maybe they will show some respect.

Why don't you kill yourself too? Worthless piece of shit.

[Camrazy2102]

[QUOTE=BanginJimmy;39109523]I do hold the muslim religion as a major contributor to the attacks on 9/11 as I do with just about every other terrorist attack over the last 3 decades.

Usually, I agree by what you say on your discussions but this statement has to be stupidest I have ever read by you...

[Glides]

I say we fly a plane into it during service hours,then maybe they will show some respect.

Rofl, this is by far THE most ignorant thing i've ever seen written on Import Atlanta since i've been here.

You sir, must wear an ass for a hat on a daily basis. I would agree with the volounteering of yourself to pilot the plane comment but the level of your ignorance and stupidity would exclude you from even beginning to understand the complex controls of an airplane. I am actually suprised you can even drive. Such stupidity is usually kept under wraps in a basement or in an asylum.