Category: News and Views
Anyone hear this story? Or how Obummer is defending it? Oh, gee, how about a General Custer museum near a site of atrocities against the Sioux, or a museum of Nazi memorabilia in Williamsburg or another heavily Jewish neighborhood? I am not against the building of any center of worship, and the U S Constitution in its First Amendment guarantees freedom of, and from religion, but to build a mosque on a site of thousands of deaths is mocking the survivors. One poor guy even lost his pregnant wife on one of these flights. I cried during the Flight 93 special. And the reciprocity isn't there in Muslim majority countries. What ever happened to denial of building permit & telling 'em to build somewhere else?!
What I want to know is what the hell happened to the memorial or whatever it was they were supposed to build? And what building this thing is supposed to accomplish besides for piss a lot of people off?
you do realize that, A. some of the people who died in the world trade center towers were actually muslim, and that B. The terrorist organizations in the muslim world have been renounced by many leaders of the muslim faith right? Have you even looked at the muslim faith? Have you ever noticed that the vast majority of muslims are not blowing themselves up or crashing planes? Besides, it says near, how insulting is near? Are you going to start getting worried about relatively close to, perhaps a good old fashioned "in the general area of" or the dreaded "somewhere in the same city, but not exactly on the same street, but still within the same zip code as"? I mean, those things can be frightening. You could have a gun store almost but not quite close to being nearly right next to your child's school. What ever will we do? The world may very nearly but not entirely almost explode!
Now then, do you understand how stupid it sounds to get your panties in a bunch because a religious building is being built near ground zero? If anything, I think its a good thing.
Before you start judging religions, remember that the terrorist didn't only high-jack those planes, they also high-jacked the muslim beliefs, and you should really give sympathy to those muslims who don't hate america, and are yet persecuted for the actions of a small group.
Imagine if everyone in your state was put in jail because you had 100 murderers in your population, you wouldn't like it either. Try some understanding.
While I can understand how this may upset some people, I must agree with you SilverLightning. I think that there is far too much hatred, blame and general ignorance spewed towards Muslims these days and I'm quite honestly tired of it. I'm not Muslim but have several good friends who are and none of them would ever agree with what terrorists do. Let's use pure logic. Some Muslims are terrorists. The people who destroyed the World Trade Center were Muslim and terrorists. Therefore all? Muslims are terrorists? But wait. The premice said "some" Muslims not all. Here's another. All Muslims believe in Allah. This person is a Muslim therefore he believes in... killing? Uh, no! And yet that's exactly how some people act. They hear the word and right away start assuming things. Remember the pitty towards the blind board, and how we all hate it when sighted people automatically think that we're deaf, slow, stupid or need help? That's exactly what happens when you see a Muslim and automatically call him a terrorist, only the consequences are far worse. I'll never forget, right after september 11th, I was in French class in high school and one of the students came in crying. Her mother wore the veil and was literally beaten by people who thought she was a terrorist. The poor woman was just going to buy groceries!
So let them put up their mosque. Maybe, people can go there and if they do feel shame towards what others in their religion did, they could offer whatever it is they do for forgiveness in order to cleanse themselves and be healed. They're victims too, after all, of some lunetics stealing their beliefs and using them for personal and political gain. Remember that their are still Nazi conscentration camps standing right where they were all those years ago. No, the people don't like them there, but it does serve as a reminder of what happened and how people need to start being civil towards one another to avoid something like that ever happening again. If Muslims are forever shunned from Ground Zero, no one will be able to heal.
what people don't understand is that most muslims actually don't want this stuff done in their name. Most of them want peace between all cultures, it's only a relatively small number of extremests among the millions of muslim people who actually want to do harm to people to prove their point. they are just people like you and I, working their jobs to support their families.
they are also the sorts of people who actually would realise that the building of a mosque in this area is offenseve to all the people who lost theire lives, so don't think that they are all against you on this, but you should realise, that not everyone who died was an average white american.
Have I ever looked at the faith? I've read the Qu'ran in English language translation, and even accepted it some years ago. I changed communities in moving to another part of the states, and was treated like a big piece of trash by these so called peaceful people. Some were even nice enough to talk about my daughter as if she was a retarded child. I've probably hears slurs like "white trash" and "nigger" out of Arab mouths up here more than I ever did in the deep south.
Sure, SOME victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorism were Muslim, but the group makes up a whopping 3% of the U S population, and the majority of people on those planes weren't part of the group. The people perpetrating the acts claimed to be of the faith. What is the average American who knows little of this faith supposed to think?!
Read too the "Stoning to Death" thread. It will show my experiences in a Muslim majority country, which is currently under armed guard. Really I wouldn't care if a mosque was built somewhere else in New York, but still think it is disrespectful at Ground Zero.
I agree with Sponge on this one. It is a travesty to the people harmed in the Trade Center attacks if we allow this to occur. To those arguing religious freedom, consider this. A Catholic church was also near ground 0, well before 9/11. It was damaged in the attack, and had to get permission from the Zoning Commission to rebuild. That permission was denied. It was said that the church, 11 stories tall, would obscure the view of Ground 0. Now, they want to build this mosque near it, which is 15 stories tall. Where was the religious freedom for the church that was previously there?
When the bombings happened, many American Muslims denounced it, but others, and certainly most Middle Eastern countries celebrated openly. Now we are going to erect a monument to that on the very site it happened? I do not understand. My heart aches for the families of both the dead and the living who were in the towers that day, and the dishonor being done to them.
Well, I certainly agree that it's not right what they did to the church, especially considering that it was already there. Allowing the mosque and not the church is simply wrong and I can see how it might lead to anger and outrage. If they don't allow the one then they shouldn't allow the other one either.
Agreed: Fair is fair; no church = no mosque. Ironically it's usually the fundies crying religious freedom and then denying it to others, while now the softfoots are doing it.
Ironically when I first heard of the Mosque thing, my reaction was ... oh boy, here we go again! Primarily because of the excessive tomfoolery going on on the right right now. I say excessive because I thought I saw tomfoolery at its worst when at university with a bunch of pseudo-maoist, pseudo-marxist numbskulls but man, much of what comes out of Fox News has those guys (I use that term loosely) beat. Appeals to change the constitution for citizenship by birth, and the rest of it; all done up like perfect urban mythology. Problem is, no matter how long you cry wolf, eventually there will be a real wolf.
The problem with this debate is that there are extremists on both sides who seem to be leading the debate. On the right, there are extremists who think all Muslims are evil terrorists. On the left there are extremists who will demonise anybody who opposes the mosque and highlight the connections of some people on the right, creating the impression that people on the left are not connected with extremists, even though there are people on both sides who have extremist connections.
The new building will be on private land two blocks away from the World Trade Centre - not right next to it. I presume the Catholic Church was oing to be closer to the World Trade Centre, which presumably isn't going to be restored. I can see how that bbuilding (if it is so close to Ground 0) would obstruct views.
If it is as far away as the mosque would have been, I see no reason as to why the proposed church should be rejected.
I can't agree with Cody on his schpiel. If they did burn that Caholic church down, why in the world would they build a mosque? That, to me, makes no sense. This is not at all called religious freedom.
I think anything that goes on the Ground Zero site should be approved by the families of the victims. As they don't appear to want this mosque built there, it should not be built there.
But it's not on the grounds of Ground Zero. It's two blocks away.
Silver and all others who disagreed with my post and Spongebob's post,
I was raised in an Islamic area with muslims and practiced Islam myself for a while. I have read the qur'an both the Arabic version and the English translation. The premise that most individuals in Islam do not look down upon and hate the west is false. The Qur'an, the text that the Muslims follow, calls on believers to eliminate the unbelievers in God's name. Islam calls for the beating and stoning of women. Wake up people, this is not extremist Islam, this is everyday Islam. Yes, most Muslims do not blow up buildings and other stuff but I see two reasons for that, and none of those are because of a lack of hatred for the west and western ideals. First, not every individual Muslim has the capability to blow up a building, and second, even if they did, I'm sure some of them are more peaceful and wish to preserve themselves and their families. Also, not every Islamist believes in everything the Qur'an asks of believers, just as not all Christians follow all parts of the Bible. Some Muslims interpret the Qur'an different than others. I am not a right-wing fanatic and neither am I a left-wing liberal. If this was an issue of religious freedom, I would fully support this mosque going up. But all this is going to do is give an excuse to every Muslim to sing and dance about having a Mosque put up where so many western infedels died.
For anyone who wishes to understand a little bit more about what I'm saying, please read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book "Infidel". Also, please feel free to PM me on the site to ask questions.
to those of you who are strongly against this, it's about religious freedom. people may not share your beliefs, but there's no need to criticize them for it, or say that they have less rights than you.
To abbie_freak: If you're willing to admit that they don't always do it and if you agree that there are peaceful Muslims out there, then why do you make it sound as if all Muslims are instinctively like that, as if the only reasons why most don't harm the innocent is lack of ability or self-family preservation? Couldn't you argue the same thing for Christians too in that case? I mean, I bet they'd have a field day with those of us who are pagan if they really followed their texts. Yet I don't see any sincere desire to cause destruction in the ones whom I know and the same holds true for the Muslims.
Abbie - which suras of the Koran call on Muslims to eliminate unbelievers? If you name the sura, I can read it for myself.
Personally I say let them build it. Are we going to tell them they can't practice what they want to practice?
amen brother, lets get someone to open up a pork slotter house right across the street. Think we could get a few hot dog vendors out in front to sell those big old pork sausage rolls as well?
spongebob, I think you're missing ocean-dream's point here. she agrees with the majority, but thinks that there's no need to say their laws are wrong cause they'd say the same about ours.
Interestingly the Dutch have had to address this very issue: not a Mosque on Ground Zero, but Fighter and the rest of you, the Dutch granted asylum to many muslims who then wanted to practice their beliefs, which, incidentally, involved restricting the public activities of others.
The Dutch made a wise choice: You may practice insofar as you do not restrict the rights of others.
The probllem is, so many people are so hell bent on individual rights that often other's rights are eliminated or restricted to support the alleged rights of the alleged offended.
If you had a fundamentalist Christian who claimed it was her right not to see certain things in store windows as she walked by, does she? I think not. Said stores belong to other people, and her rights cannot inflict on the rights of the shop owner or the patrons. And many of you would, like me, support the shop owner in that instance.
So while the mosque issue may be up for debate, especially if we're talking its location not being on Ground Zero (let's at least give some credence to units of measure), no group is automatically granted the right to restrict the rights of others. If they are allowed to have it there, then it would be because it falls within a particular zoning jurisdiction.
Senior, you wanted one, so here it is for everyone to see, translated into English. Feel free to look it up as well if you wish. This is by far not the only one.
Qur'an (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Well, my question would be that if they burned down the Catholic church that was there because they didn't want it there, why in the world would they build a mosque in place of that? That is conflicting with religious rights there, isn't it? It's not the fact that that it's 2 blocks from ground 0, that doesn't concern me at all. My concern is that they had to burn a Catholic church down to put a mosque in place of it.
Thanks Abbie_freak for providing me with a verse. Recall that in post 14 you said that the Koran calls for Muslims to eliminate unbelievers. If this verse is taken on its own, disregarding the rest of the theme sura from which it is taken, the verses before and after it, the rest of the Koran and the context in which it was written, people may conclude that it calls for Muslims to eliminate unbelievers.
But rather than do that, let's interpret the verse, taking the theme and context of the sura into account, as well as what is written in the other verses.
The theme of the sura is war. It mentions three categories of people - the strong believers, weak believers and unbelievers.
Verse 12 is recalling a battle in which Muslims fought non Muslims, and the instructions in that verse are those that the angels and Muslims received before the battle.
We know this because of the next verse, which explains that those were the consequences of fighting God and his messenger. Obviously this was a battle, so the other side would also have been violent towards the Muslims. They weren't just going about their daily business when all of a sudden, Muslims came along and started carrying out those instructions.
We know that God is talking about disbelievers who are fighting the Muslims and not disbelievers in general, because of sura 8:15.
So in sura 8:12, God is not calling on Muslims to go around eliminating the disbelievers, where ever they may be..
This is so cool! I've never seen anyone use the Koran like that, truly explaining the meanings behind things that have been taken out of context. I hope to learn more from future posts!
Okay, well if you ever hear anything that makes the Koran look bad and you want to find out if it is true, just ask and if I know, I'll answer.
To me, there are two separate issues in this debate. The first, which has been discussed here is the plan to build a mosque near Ground 0. I don't have any objections to that. It isn't on Ground 0. It's on private land. Though part of one of the planes went through a building that is there, that building wasn't considered Ground 0 before 9/11.
The second issue, is whether or not those involved in the project have links to Islamic extremists or shair their views. Some politicians in the US say questions about their links shouldn't be asked, but I think it is right to question their links, as that tells us more about them. If Feisal Abdul Rauf is not an Islamist and opposes all Islamic extremists, he won't have links to Islamic extremists, nor will any group in which he has a significant role. Given the opportunity on New York station WABC to call Hamas terrorists, Feisal Abdul Rauf refused.
The Cordoba House Project say they picked the name because of the way in which Muslims, Christians and Jews lived harmoneously in that city and the places that were controled from there - not because it represents the conquest of non Muslims by Muslims.
At the time the Great Mosque of Cordoba was built, conquerers who followed a different religion would replace buildings in which the conquered practiced their religion, with buildings in which the religion of the conquerers could be practiced. Such actions were not unique to Muslims. People who followed other religions such as Christianity would do the same.
The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church damaged by one of the towers continues to seek and be denied permission to rebuild itself. I think it has more right to be there than the mosque, because it was there before. I would think the same had a mosque been destroyed and a group were given permission to build a church, while the people whose mosque was destroyed were denied permission to rebuild it.
Meanwhile, those behind the project won't say whether they would accept funding from Saudi Arabia and Iran, and they insist the mosque must be near Ground Zero. A Democrat says he opposes the idea of a mosque near Ground Zero. Given opportunities to reassure people, they always seem to decline and that only makes people more suspicious.
Nancy Pelosi wants to investigate those who oppose the mosque. My view is that all those who may be extremists on both sides should be investigated.
Look at it this way:
If somebody wanted to build a church in Afghanistan we would not take no for an answer. We'd kick and scream and say we're Americans goddamn it and we do what we want.