Ground Zero Mosque

metrovelvet

Let's put up a German Lutheran churh in Benzenhurst and see what happens, you know...as a show of solidarity.

Memnoch

metrovelvet wrote: »

Let's put up a German Lutheran churh in Benzenhurst and see what happens, you know...as a show of solidarity.

Standard whataboutry. How about answering the points raised instead?

metrovelvet

I'd like to know where the money is coming from for that real estate.

Overheal

Memnoch wrote: »

So the guy seems to believes in Sharia? So what? Big deal. There are many different forms of Sharia, including some that can be implemented safely and fairly within western democracies while still respecting the overall law of the state.

There are plenty of Christians who believe that US law should be based on the bible (i.e. religious doctrine superseeding secular state law) are they all terrorists also now?

This.

I also enjoyed the editorial's word-in-mouth bit. "Oh he didn't sign the pledge THAT OF COURSE MEANS HE THINKS SHARIA TRUMPS FREEDOM"

More revealing is the fact that Rauf himself has refused to sign a straightforward pledge to "repudiate the threat from authoritative sharia to the religious freedom and safety of former Muslims," a pledge issued nine months ago by ex-Muslims under threat for their "apostasy." That refusal is a tacit admission that Rauf believes that sharia trumps such fundamental Western principles as freedom of conscience. [Editorial]

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/behind_the_mosque_yXUJDCpszRLF9dG1heLU1H#ixzz0uofoDle2

Uhm.... Jump much?

Memnoch

Overheal wrote: »

This.

I also enjoyed the editorial's word-in-mouth bit. "Oh he didn't sign the pledge THAT OF COURSE MEANS HE THINKS SHARIA TRUMPS FREEDOM"

Uhm.... Jump much?

Yeah, standard strawman mud-slinging. But then again, it's the Post so you can hardly expect better.

dlofnep

Amerika wrote: »

First and foremost… The grounds of common decency.

What grounds of common decency? It seems perfectly decent to me to build a Mosque 2 blocks away from the Twin towers.

Amerika wrote: »

And I object to the preachings of Feisal Abdul Rauf, the NYC imam who wants to build this mosque.

That's fair enough. I object to the preachings of all religions. Do you know what I do? Not attend their services. Problem solved.

Amerika wrote: »

He preaches that the radical Islamic terrorist problems we face today is the fault of Christians.

Most of those lunatics are pissed off at the West because wacko Christian nutjobs have invaded their countries and slaughtered 100,000's of innocent people. To say that they are not motivated by invasions of their countries would be disingenuous.

Now, if he was to say that he supports attacks on innocent people like what happened on 9/11 because of America's involvement in Iraq & Afghanistan, then that would be different. and I'd join you in condemning him, and telling him to bollocks off. I don't know anything about him - so perhaps you can fill me in on which criteria he meets.

Amerika wrote: »

Anyone care to take a guess at the amount of synagogues that have been allowed to be built in Iran or Saudi Ariaba?

Well, if you want to use Iran & Saudia Arabia as the basis for common decency, be my guest. As for how many Synagogues in Iran - Nearly 40 from what I gather. 18 of which are in Tehran alone.

Do you know how many Synagogues are in Ireland? Six.. That's right, six.

Nodin

Amerika wrote: »

And how many were recently built?

I've no idea. You've some evidence of permission being refused......?

Amerika

People here asked how far away from Ground Zero would be okay. Anybody realize that the building now on the site has been shuttered since landing gear from one of the September 11 planes crashed through its roof.

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

People here asked how far away from Ground Zero would be okay. Anybody realize that the building now on the site has been shuttered since landing gear from one of the September 11 planes crashed through its roof.

That doesn't really answer the question though, unless you're asking what's okay enough for avoiding airborne debris from future plane-strikes.

edit:

Take for example a basic fact that the so-called ground zero mosque is actually not on ground zero. This prompted commentator Chris Matthews on MSNBC to ask - what distance away from ground zero could any mosque be in order to be deemed appropriate? If building a house of worship two blocks away from where the worst terrorist attacks on American soil killed over three thousands innocent souls is sacrilegious then why has making money off the memory of this tragedy by souvenir and tourist gawking not evoked any similar protest?

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/76605

jank

metrovelvet wrote: »

I'd like to know where the money is coming from for that real estate.

Maybe it comes from cooking babies and selling them as easter eggs!

Care to answer my point above?

Black Swan

jank wrote: »

Maybe it comes from cooking babies and selling them as easter eggs!

No, that was a modest proposal (parody) to the rich Brits by Jonathan Swift when HM ruled the waves long ago.

BluePlanet

Amerika wrote: »

Anyone care to take a guess at the amount of synagogues that have been allowed to be built in Iran or Saudi Ariaba?

List of Synagogues in Iran

wes

metrovelvet wrote: »

I'd like to know where the money is coming from for that real estate.

From a recent interview:

“We want to build Park51 so it has something for everyone”

--SNIP--
Will you pledge make all funding sources fully transparent? What are your criteria for accepting funding from a foreign source, to assuage concerns about extremist influences?

We have not yet launched our fundraising campaign. Park51 will incorporate as a non-profit and seek federal tax-exempt status. We are pledging to pursue this fundraising campaign in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. We have hired legal counsel and top-notch auditors to oversee this process from start to finish.

We will hire security consultants to assist us in the process of reviewing potential financiers and philanthropists as we begin to establish our fundraising strategy. We will refuse assistance, financial or otherwise, from any persons or institutions who are flagged by our security consultants or any government agencies.
--SNIP--

--SNIP--
Let me tell you a little bit about the history of this project. We’d been looking for at least seven years to find a space to accommodate the growing population of Muslims in lower Manhattan. We found this site in January of 2006 and getting to the finish line and acquiring the real estate was proof that persistence pays off. We had also been eager to contribute to the revitalization of lower Manhattan, in part because this is our area of business and also because as New Yorkers we wanted to give back to our city and help make it a better place to live.
--SNIP--

So the guy is in the real estate business, and bought the land himself, and they haven't yet started looking for the rest of the funding.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

When strippers band together and giggle their way onto the streets of NY, attacking innocent bystanders who are guilty of nothing more than wanting to enjoy the liberties our country provides, with their 6 inch stiletto heels... then I will also protest their presence (with camera in hand ).

Why do you want New York to emulate the religious intolerance of Iran and Saudi Arabia? I can think of no greater insult to the pluralistic intent of the Founding Fathers than to allow similar bigotry to take hold in the United States.

First, they have the right to build the mosque, and I have the right to peacefully protest it. No better representation of the Founding Fathers intent IMO. I will expostulate what this imam wants to do. It is not the fault of Christians that we are being targeted by radical Islamic terrorists. To me, this mosque is a symbol of the man who wants to build it IMO.

And my point about Iran and Saudi Arabia was to point out the hypocrisy of some of the posters here as they seem to attack the liberties experienced by Americans, yet these countries seem to get a free pass.

dlofnep

Amerika wrote: »

When strippers band together and giggle their way onto the streets of NY, attacking innocent bystanders who are guilty of nothing more than wanting to enjoy the liberties our country provides, with their 6 inch stiletto heels... then I will also protest their presence (with camera in hand ).

What has the actions of extremist muslims got to do with normal muslims? Why do you continue to lump the two together?

Amerika

dlofnep wrote: »

What has the actions of extremist muslims got to do with normal muslims? Why do you continue to lump the two together?

What part of "I will expostulate what this imam wants to do. It is not the fault of Christians that we are being targeted by radical Islamic terrorists. To me, this mosque is a symbol of the man who wants to build it IMO." is so hard to understand?

dlofnep

You haven't explained what he wants to do. I asked you in a previous response, with which you have failed to respond to.

Amerika

dlofnep wrote: »

You haven't explained what he wants to do. I asked you in a previous response, with which you have failed to respond to.

Let me get this straight… you recognize in prior posts that my problem with this mosque being built primarily has to do with the teachings of the iman who wants it built, yet you subsequently accuse me of continually lumping extremist muslims with normal muslims? Again, what part of "It is not the fault of Christians that we are being targeted by radical Islamic terrorists" which is what he professes, do you not seem to understand? Or is it that you just don’t like my answer?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dlofnep

Amerika wrote: »

Let me get this straight… you recognize in prior posts that my problem with this mosque being built primarily has to do with the teachings of the iman who wants it built, yet you subsequently accuse me of continually lumping extremist muslims with normal muslims? Again, what part of "It is not the fault of Christians that we are being targeted by radical Islamic terrorists" which is what he professes, do you not seem to understand? Or is it that you just don’t like my answer?

You still haven't explained what it is about his teachings you object to.

Examples please.

Also, would you be happy with a Mosque being built there if this said person was not involved?

Overheal

Amerika wrote: »

When strippers band together and giggle their way onto the streets of NY, attacking innocent bystanders who are guilty of nothing more than wanting to enjoy the liberties our country provides, with their 6 inch stiletto heels... then I will also protest their presence (with camera in hand ).

Have muslims done this? Minus the stilettos.

First, they have the right to build the mosque, and I have the right to peacefully protest it. No better representation of the Founding Fathers intent IMO.

An intended intent for an unintended one, yes.

I will expostulate what this imam wants to do. It is not the fault of Christians that we [Christians] are being targeted by radical Islamic terrorists. To me, this mosque is a symbol of the man who wants to build it IMO.

I think thats more bigoted than protesting the Mosque, to be fair.

Islam is attacking Christianity? Because I wasn't aware that the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were religious artifices. Surely if Christianity was under seige, they would have done a suicide bombing run on the Vatican?

They attacked the United States. Just because Christians make up 3/4s of this country - that doesn't give your Religion ownership.

And my point about Iran and Saudi Arabia was to point out the hypocrisy of some of the posters here as they seem to attack the liberties experienced by Americans, yet these countries seem to get a free pass.

I think it's funny you use Saudi Arabia and Free in the same sentence.

I feel as though you're posting as a Christian and not - frankly - and American.

Amerika

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I object as a matter of common decency to the building of the mosque, built on a building shuttered by the landing gear of one of the planes on 9/11, by an imam who professes that American and Christians are also to blame for radical Islamic terrorist attacks. I will keep answering the question the same way... sorry!

Let me refresh some memories to my original response to the topic:

I have read some of the quotes and viewpoints of Feisal Abdul Rauf, the NYC imam who wants to build this mosque. Hmmmm, so all the radical islamic terror problems we are facing today are the fault of Christians? I think Sarah Palin was far too kind in her tweet.

I’ll give you one example of the imam who doesn’t believe in religious dialog, and who advocates the addition of Shari'a law to the law of the land:

On September 30, 2001, Feisal Abdul Rauf was interviewed on 60 Minutes by Ed Bradley. Here is a transcript of a portion of that interview:

BRADLEY: Are — are — are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?

Imam ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.

BRADLEY: OK. You say that we’re an accessory?

Imam ABDUL RAUF: Yes.

BRADLEY: How?

Imam ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.

So what? Are New York's 600,000 Muslims "radical Islamic terrorists"?

If they all feel they need to worship at a mosque who's imam professes that American and Christians are to blame for radical Islamic terrorists, and wants Shari'a law incorporated to the law of our land ... then maybe yes.

After Thomas Jefferson and James Madison proposed the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom in 1779, and Virginia representatives voted down an effort to rephrase the wording in an expressly Christian way, Jefferson wrote that the law would "comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahomedan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination." I think if Jefferson were here today, he would strenuously resist the so-called "patriotic" attempt by some to prevent any Muslim presence in the vicinity of Ground Zero.

Maybe so. But I think he would fight to the death to protect the right of "the so-called "patriotic" attempt by some to prevent any Muslim presence in the vicinity of Ground Zero."

And as for: "Also, would you be happy with a Mosque being built there if this said person was not involved?"

Yes. Throw the imam out for his objectional teachings, bring in a more tolerant one, and I might just be fine with it.

dlofnep

I don't see anything wrong with what he said.

He didn't say that they deserved what happened, he stated that American policies caused the extremists to attack. That's pretty much spot on. What exactly do you find wrong about this?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

dlofnep wrote: »

He stated that American policies caused the extremists to attack. That's pretty much spot on.

So it's okay in your books to attack and kill innocent people not involved in a conflict in any way? And you wonder what I find wrong with this? I wonder about you.

Amerika

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Have you ever seen me advocate for Ron Paul? I think he's a bit of a nut.

Overheal

Hell I'd tell you the same thing. And it's no secret about Bin Laden's special relationship with the United States. That dates back decades.

Amerika

So if I’m reading some of the recent responses correctly, you’re claiming it’s right and understandable to target Americans for the actions of some, but not okay to target muslims for the actions of some?

dlofnep

Amerika wrote: »

So it's okay in your books to attack and kill innocent people not involved in a conflict in any way? And you wonder what I find wrong with this? I wonder about you.

Are you being purposefully obtuse? I have no time for ignorance. You know very well I never made such a statement.

I stated that America's actions caused extremists to attack the United States. I didn't say at any point that those said attacks on American soil were justified in anyway, shape or form. Neither by the way did that Muslim in question.

So I ask you again - What exactly is it that he has said that you object to? The fact that he highlighted the obvious that American intervention in the middle-east has pissed off a couple of extremists, who have in turn decided to attack the US? It's a fact. The extremists have said it time and time again, that is exactly why they attack or plan attacks on the US.

And if you even attempt to twist my words one more time, you'll be reported and blocked on the spot.