Muslims in NYC Planning to Build Second Mosque Near Ground Zero (1 Viewer)

[Desert_Power]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

That is because none of these objections are their real objection.

 

[the moops]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

That is because none of these objections are their real objection.

Terrorist babies?

 

[Desert_Power]

The piece on 60 Minutes last night said they're already in there doing their "prayers".Gym open? nope. Restaurant? nada. Pool? Shopping? Any of the other things they say this is? zilch.Prayer room? WIDE THE F OPENThis is no community center.

Don't you have better things to do than to make up bigoted objections to this on a message board?

 

[urbanhack]

Why does this need 55 pages?

it's for jon_mx, statorama and tommyboy

 

[perry147]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

That is because none of these objections are their real objection.

Terrorist babies?

Terrorist anchor babies - just wait until 2030.

 

[Statorama]

Why does this need 55 pages?

it's for jon_mx, statorama and tommyboy

Don't think I don't appreciate it either

 

[Christo]

The piece on 60 Minutes last night said they're already in there doing their "prayers".Gym open? nope. Restaurant? nada. Pool? Shopping? Any of the other things they say this is? zilch.Prayer room? WIDE THE F OPENThis is no community center.

 

[tommyboy]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

 

[the moops]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

Honestly, I don't care what type of law this guy thinks is appropriate. He could be a ####### warlock, satan worshipper, flying spaghetti monster lover for all I care. There are plenty of whacko religious figures in this country. We dont stop them from worshipping and/or building city approved, correctly zoned buildings though.

 

[Christo]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

So are we going to stop every person whose ideas we don't like from performing construction projects?

 

[TobiasFunke]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

So to review ... your argument that this is a horrible idea is based on:1. The religious views of the principal investor, U.S. born-and raised Sharif El-Gamal. Or are you speaking of Imam Rauf, who has been praised as a moderate by people like Karen Armstrong? Either way, you are showing yourself to be almost laughably intolerant.2. There's already enough mosques in New York. Why you get to decide how many is enough is beyond me. I'm assuming you've done a full study of the Muslim population in NYC, their geographic distribution, and their religious habits.3. This site is 2+ blocks from the WTC site, which is in your opinion "too close" even though you've been shown to have zero knowledge of the geographic features of the area. Just out of curiosity- how far away would be acceptable to you? What if it was a block away, but only two stories high? What if it's five blocks away, but thirty stories3. Only 30% of the US is in favor of it. Yes, we should definitely pattern our religious tolerance on majority opinion. That's a solid plan for the America I think we all envision. America- Jebus or leave it.

 

[TobiasFunke]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

Can I get a single link on the bolded? All I've found on the internet is some reasonable language about religious law being sufficient for Muslims, nothing at all about needing it to apply to the entire American population.

 

[CBus Alex]

The fact remains this is a horrible idea and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

 

[tommyboy]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

Can I get a single link on the bolded? All I've found on the internet is some reasonable language about religious law being sufficient for Muslims, nothing at all about needing it to apply to the entire American population.

 

[the moops]

You have lost your mind

 

[tommyboy]

The fact remains this is a horrible idea and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

you sound like the southern democrats that couldn't get over the fact the north won and gave freedom to slaves and took away voting rights of the former confederate soldiers. you were the vocal 30% minority that spent 10 years having tantrums killing people and forming groups like the KKK because no one agreed with you. Yet the other 70% adapted to the new reality that the north did in fact win and yes slaves were people that deserved rights.and here we are with another 70/30 issue where on the one hand you have a large majority that believes the mosque is poorly planned and in bad taste, and that there are significant unanswered questions about the motives and backers of the mosque planners. On the other hand you have a small minority of loudmouths that scream bigot and stupid because they are losing the argument and nobody is taking their bait.

 

[jon_mx]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

So to review ... your argument that this is a horrible idea is based on:1. The religious views of the principal investor, U.S. born-and raised Sharif El-Gamal. Or are you speaking of Imam Rauf, who has been praised as a moderate by people like Karen Armstrong? Either way, you are showing yourself to be almost laughably intolerant.2. There's already enough mosques in New York. Why you get to decide how many is enough is beyond me. I'm assuming you've done a full study of the Muslim population in NYC, their geographic distribution, and their religious habits.3. This site is 2+ blocks from the WTC site, which is in your opinion "too close" even though you've been shown to have zero knowledge of the geographic features of the area. Just out of curiosity- how far away would be acceptable to you? What if it was a block away, but only two stories high? What if it's five blocks away, but thirty stories3. Only 30% of the US is in favor of it. Yes, we should definitely pattern our religious tolerance on majority opinion. That's a solid plan for the America I think we all envision. America- Jebus or leave it.

This is not about religion. This is about Islamic extremists. The building is not a mosque. This is a statement. If someone can explain to me a legitimate reason why the biggest most expensive tribute to Muslims has to be within throwing distance to ground zero, then I will gladly go along with it. Otherwise it just looks like exactly what it is, radical Islamic extremists spitting in the face of America.

 

[perry147]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

So to review ... your argument that this is a horrible idea is based on:

1. The religious views of the principal investor, U.S. born-and raised Sharif El-Gamal. Or are you speaking of Imam Rauf, who has been praised as a moderate by people like Karen Armstrong? Either way, you are showing yourself to be almost laughably intolerant.

2. There's already enough mosques in New York. Why you get to decide how many is enough is beyond me. I'm assuming you've done a full study of the Muslim population in NYC, their geographic distribution, and their religious habits.

3. This site is 2+ blocks from the WTC site, which is in your opinion "too close" even though you've been shown to have zero knowledge of the geographic features of the area. Just out of curiosity- how far away would be acceptable to you? What if it was a block away, but only two stories high? What if it's five blocks away, but thirty stories

3. Only 30% of the US is in favor of it. Yes, we should definitely pattern our religious tolerance on majority opinion. That's a solid plan for the America I think we all envision. America- Jebus or leave it.

This is not about religion. This is about Islamic extremists. The building is not a mosque. This is a statement. If someone can explain to me a legitimate reason why the biggest most expensive tribute to Muslims has to be within throwing distance to ground zero, then I will gladly go along with it. Otherwise it just looks like exactly what it is, radical Islamic extremists spitting in the face of America.

Can you prove any of that or are you just talking out your ### again?

 

[EasyMorningRebel]

The fact remains this is a horrible idea and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

you sound like the southern democrats that couldn't get over the fact the north won and gave freedom to slaves and took away voting rights of the former confederate soldiers. you were the vocal 30% minority that spent 10 years having tantrums killing people and forming groups like the KKK because no one agreed with you. Yet the other 70% adapted to the new reality that the north did in fact win and yes slaves were people that deserved rights.and here we are with another 70/30 issue where on the one hand you have a large majority that believes the mosque is poorly planned and in bad taste, and that there are significant unanswered questions about the motives and backers of the mosque planners. On the other hand you have a small minority of loudmouths that scream bigot and stupid because they are losing the argument and nobody is taking their bait.

Welcome to vocal minority rule. This is not a new phenomenon.

 

[Desert_Power]

The fact remains this is a horrible idea and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

you sound like the southern democrats that couldn't get over the fact the north won and gave freedom to slaves and took away voting rights of the former confederate soldiers. you were the vocal 30% minority that spent 10 years having tantrums killing people and forming groups like the KKK because no one agreed with you. Yet the other 70% adapted to the new reality that the north did in fact win and yes slaves were people that deserved rights.and here we are with another 70/30 issue where on the one hand you have a large majority that believes the mosque is poorly planned and in bad taste, and that there are significant unanswered questions about the motives and backers of the mosque planners. On the other hand you have a small minority of loudmouths that scream bigot and stupid because they are losing the argument and nobody is taking their bait.

So now you are comparing people that are protecting the freedom of religion of Muslims to the KKK?

 

[EasyMorningRebel]

There's already 100 mosques in new york, this mosque would serve no one as its in the business district and really fails at the ideal of promoting interfaith healing.

So now the reason you are opposed to it is because there are already enough mosques in NYC?It's hard to argue with you folks when you keep changing the argument. Funded by terrorists! Too close to ground zero! Victory mosque! Too many mosques already in the city!

i've never changed my arguments, feel free to go back through the thread there tiger. The fact remains this is a horrible idea brought about by a man that thinks sharia is the way to go in the United States (documented by his books and his many quotes on the subject) and that the 30% of the US that is in favor of it such as yourself are flat out wrong.

So to review ... your argument that this is a horrible idea is based on:1. The religious views of the principal investor, U.S. born-and raised Sharif El-Gamal. Or are you speaking of Imam Rauf, who has been praised as a moderate by people like Karen Armstrong? Either way, you are showing yourself to be almost laughably intolerant.2. There's already enough mosques in New York. Why you get to decide how many is enough is beyond me. I'm assuming you've done a full study of the Muslim population in NYC, their geographic distribution, and their religious habits.3. This site is 2+ blocks from the WTC site, which is in your opinion "too close" even though you've been shown to have zero knowledge of the geographic features of the area. Just out of curiosity- how far away would be acceptable to you? What if it was a block away, but only two stories high? What if it's five blocks away, but thirty stories3. Only 30% of the US is in favor of it. Yes, we should definitely pattern our religious tolerance on majority opinion. That's a solid plan for the America I think we all envision. America- Jebus or leave it.

This is not about religion. This is about Islamic extremists. The building is not a mosque. This is a statement. If someone can explain to me a legitimate reason why the biggest most expensive tribute to Muslims has to be within throwing distance to ground zero, then I will gladly go along with it. Otherwise it just looks like exactly what it is, radical Islamic extremists spitting in the face of America.

If you assume the best of intentions, ground zero is a perfect place for the mosque. I would like to think the message getting to Muslims young and old that happen to have an affiliation with the NYC mosque would certainly be one of peace.

 

[Jewell]

This is not about religion. This is about Islamic extremists. The building is not a mosque. This is a statement. If someone can explain to me a legitimate reason why the biggest most expensive tribute to Muslims has to be within throwing distance to ground zero, then I will gladly go along with it. Otherwise it just looks like exactly what it is, radical Islamic extremists spitting in the face of America.

Can you prove any of that or are you just talking out your ### again?

Of course he can't definitively prove it. It would require getting in Rauf's head. But just to throw Jon a bone and show that his statement is not necessarily Islamaphobic, here's a provocative read from two members of the Canadian Muslim Congress that echoes Jon's position...Mischief in Manhattan, by Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah

 

[perry147]

This is not about religion. This is about Islamic extremists. The building is not a mosque. This is a statement. If someone can explain to me a legitimate reason why the biggest most expensive tribute to Muslims has to be within throwing distance to ground zero, then I will gladly go along with it. Otherwise it just looks like exactly what it is, radical Islamic extremists spitting in the face of America.

Can you prove any of that or are you just talking out your ### again?

Of course he can't definitively prove it. It would require getting in Rauf's head. But just to throw Jon a bone and show that his statement is not necessarily Islamaphobic, here's a provocative read from two members of the Canadian Muslim Congress that echoes Jon's position...Mischief in Manhattan, by Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah

And here is a link for you.

.On Islam, his main subject, Rauf’s views are clear: he routinely denounces all terrorism—as he did again last week, publicly. He speaks of the need for Muslims to live peacefully with all other religions. He emphasizes the commonalities among all faiths. He advocates equal rights for women, and argues against laws that in any way punish non-Muslims.

This guy is exactly the type person we want Muslims to identify with - not OBL.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Here is what I don't get . . . lets assume the haters are correct - this is a shrine to one of the all-time great victories in Islamic history.

As soon as there is any public demonstration to that fact by Muslims at the new center - it will become the second "ground-zero" in lower Manhattan. It will stir up a ####-storm so fierce that Muslims will lose the PR battle for generations. Not too mention any world-wide sympathy when the US carpet-bombs the middle east will be out the window.

If Muslims wanted to "gloat" about the 9/11 attacks - they don't need a community center to do so.

 

[Jewell]

.On Islam, his main subject, Rauf’s views are clear: he routinely denounces all terrorism—as he did again last week, publicly. He speaks of the need for Muslims to live peacefully with all other religions. He emphasizes the commonalities among all faiths. He advocates equal rights for women, and argues against laws that in any way punish non-Muslims.

This guy is exactly the type person we want Muslims to identify with - not OBL.

I want Zakaria and you to be correct on this one because prominent moderate Muslim voices are needed. Even if I assume that the above statements about Rauf are correct, I think he grossly miscalculated the effect of his center's location. He says he wants to build bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims, but that location has had the exact opposite effect. Rauf should have foreseen public weariness regarding that location, and Rauf has noted that international coverage of American weariness abroad is likely creating more radicals. Rauf may have a great overall record, but he grossly miscalculated here.

 

[Desert_Power]

.On Islam, his main subject, Rauf’s views are clear: he routinely denounces all terrorism—as he did again last week, publicly. He speaks of the need for Muslims to live peacefully with all other religions. He emphasizes the commonalities among all faiths. He advocates equal rights for women, and argues against laws that in any way punish non-Muslims.

This guy is exactly the type person we want Muslims to identify with - not OBL.

I want Zakaria and you to be correct on this one because prominent moderate Muslim voices are needed. Even if I assume that the above statements about Rauf are correct, I think he grossly miscalculated the effect of his center's location. He says he wants to build bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims, but that location has had the exact opposite effect. Rauf should have foreseen public weariness regarding that location, and Rauf has noted that international coverage of American weariness abroad is likely creating more radicals. Rauf may have a great overall record, but he grossly miscalculated here.People with grand overall goals can, and often do, make short term tactical mistakes. As a Patriots fan I'll take Belichick as the coach that gives an NFL team the best chance to win a Superbowl. Belichick's mistake of going into this season with a questionable running back corps, however, may have compromised that Superbowl winning goal this season. Belichick is a great one, but even the great one's are prone to miscalculations.

The community center was proposed for months with little outrage either nationally or locally(is there any locally even now?). That is, until the Fox News/talk-radio/Sarah Palin crowd started implying that it was a victory mosque funded by terrorists. I don't think it reasonable for him to have expected these people to suddenly use his attempt to build a community center into a wedge issue.

 

[Jewell]

The community center was proposed for months with little outrage either nationally or locally(is there any locally even now?). That is, until the Fox News/talk-radio/Sarah Palin crowd started implying that it was a victory mosque funded by terrorists. I don't think it reasonable for him to have expected these people to suddenly use his attempt to build a community center into a wedge issue.

Many matters continue for months, even years, before the media begins to cover them in earnest. This case is not unique.If you think that 70% of the American public (including Howard Dean) have been unduly influenced by Right Wing pundits, then I can see where you disagree that Rauf should have foreseen this pushback. Personally, I think most opposition is coming from individuals' sense of respect; and the wide variety of those opposed tends to support this conclusion. If a position is one that can offend polar extremes like Howard Dean and Rush Limbaugh, then a person as intelligent and worldly as Rauf should have foreseen that his position would likely also offend people that fell somewhere between those ideological extremes.

 

[tommyGunZ]

.On Islam, his main subject, Rauf’s views are clear: he routinely denounces all terrorism—as he did again last week, publicly. He speaks of the need for Muslims to live peacefully with all other religions. He emphasizes the commonalities among all faiths. He advocates equal rights for women, and argues against laws that in any way punish non-Muslims.

This guy is exactly the type person we want Muslims to identify with - not OBL.

I want Zakaria and you to be correct on this one because prominent moderate Muslim voices are needed. Even if I assume that the above statements about Rauf are correct, I think he grossly miscalculated the effect of his center's location. He says he wants to build bridges between Muslims and non-Muslims, but that location has had the exact opposite effect. Rauf should have foreseen public weariness regarding that location, and Rauf has noted that international coverage of American weariness abroad is likely creating more radicals. Rauf may have a great overall record, but he grossly miscalculated here.

I think it's fairly obvious that he underestimated the backlash, but I don't know that the outcome should have been any different had Rauf had a crystal ball. When we allow ignorance, wedge politics, and good old fashioned bigotry to override reason and rationality, we're losing. I'm an atheist who thinks every $ being spent on building churches/mosques/temples is a waste of money, but watching the religious right fight the building of this particular mosque has me almost ready to break out the checkbook to donate to the construction fund.

 

[Desert_Power]

The community center was proposed for months with little outrage either nationally or locally(is there any locally even now?). That is, until the Fox News/talk-radio/Sarah Palin crowd started implying that it was a victory mosque funded by terrorists. I don't think it reasonable for him to have expected these people to suddenly use his attempt to build a community center into a wedge issue.

Many matters continue for months, even years, before the media begins to cover them in earnest. This case is not unique.If you think that 70% of the American public (including Howard Dean) have been unduly influenced by Right Wing pundits, then I can see where you disagree that Rauf should have foreseen this pushback. Personally, I think most opposition is coming from individuals' sense of respect; and the wide variety of those opposed tends to support this conclusion. If a position is one that can offend polar extremes like Howard Dean and Rush Limbaugh, then a person as intelligent and worldly as Rauf should have foreseen that his position would likely also offend people that fell somewhere between those ideological extremes.

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

 

[tommyboy]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

geez, where to begin. first off, the mosque is 2 blocks from GZ. It was close enough to have been partially destroyed from landing gear from one of the airplanes. if that isn't close enough to Ground Zero for you, I don't know what is.

2nd- the imam himself specifically wanted this site because it was part of ground zero

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion...?pagewanted=all3rd- there may be a huge islamic presence in the financial district of lower manhattan where this particular location is but that is beside the point. The point is many americans and new yorkers, and foreigners consider the building of this particular project in this particular place to be offensive in the context of 9/11. One poll of arabic responders showed 58% of arabs opposed to the building of the mosque. http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/fru...ero-wtc-mosque/

Rauf may be the best guy in the world but this idea was just stupid.

 

[Desert_Power]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

geez, where to begin. first off, the mosque is 2 blocks from GZ. It was close enough to have been partially destroyed from landing gear from one of the airplanes. if that isn't close enough to Ground Zero for you, I don't know what is.

2nd- the imam himself specifically wanted this site because it was part of ground zero

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion...?pagewanted=all3rd- there may be a huge islamic presence in the financial district of lower manhattan where this particular location is but that is beside the point. The point is many americans and new yorkers, and foreigners consider the building of this particular project in this particular place to be offensive in the context of 9/11. One poll of arabic responders showed 58% of arabs opposed to the building of the mosque. http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/fru...ero-wtc-mosque/

Rauf may be the best guy in the world but this idea was just stupid.

So? It isn't at Ground Zero, it is a couple of blocks away. Saying it is at Ground Zero implies that it is on the site of the WTC, this is not true. I could care less that an internet poll says people are offended by something as silly as this.

 

[Christo]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

geez, where to begin. first off, the mosque is 2 blocks from GZ. It was close enough to have been partially destroyed from landing gear from one of the airplanes. if that isn't close enough to Ground Zero for you, I don't know what is.

2nd- the imam himself specifically wanted this site because it was part of ground zero

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion...?pagewanted=all3rd- there may be a huge islamic presence in the financial district of lower manhattan where this particular location is but that is beside the point. The point is many americans and new yorkers, and foreigners consider the building of this particular project in this particular place to be offensive in the context of 9/11. One poll of arabic responders showed 58% of arabs opposed to the building of the mosque. http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/fru...ero-wtc-mosque/

Rauf may be the best guy in the world but this idea was just stupid.

So? It isn't at Ground Zero, it is a couple of blocks away. Saying it is at Ground Zero implies that it is on the site of the WTC, this is not true. I could care less that an internet poll says people are offended by something as silly as this.

I'm tired of this hyper-technical response. Anyone who would be upset that it was being built on top of Ground Zero has just as much reason to be upset that it's being built 2 blocks from Ground Zero. Would you change your position if it wasn't "at Ground Zero" but just across the street overlooking Ground Zero? I doubt it. How about if Ground Zero is made into a multi-purpose facility that has open areas, a memorial, commercial areas and residential areas and a Muslim group leased space there? Again, I doubt it. The only worthy argument is that without evidence that an actual terrorist group or someone with ties to a terrorist group is behind the building they have as much right as anyone else to build a multi-purpose community center/religious facility in Lower Manhattan.

 

[Fennis]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

geez, where to begin. first off, the mosque is 2 blocks from GZ. It was close enough to have been partially destroyed from landing gear from one of the airplanes. if that isn't close enough to Ground Zero for you, I don't know what is.

2nd- the imam himself specifically wanted this site because it was part of ground zero

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion...?pagewanted=all3rd- there may be a huge islamic presence in the financial district of lower manhattan where this particular location is but that is beside the point. The point is many americans and new yorkers, and foreigners consider the building of this particular project in this particular place to be offensive in the context of 9/11. One poll of arabic responders showed 58% of arabs opposed to the building of the mosque. http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/fru...ero-wtc-mosque/

Rauf may be the best guy in the world but this idea was just stupid.

So? It isn't at Ground Zero, it is a couple of blocks away. Saying it is at Ground Zero implies that it is on the site of the WTC, this is not true. I could care less that an internet poll says people are offended by something as silly as this.

I'm tired of this hyper-technical response. Anyone who would be upset that it was being built on top of Ground Zero has just as much reason to be upset that it's being built 2 blocks from Ground Zero. Would you change your position if it wasn't "at Ground Zero" but just across the street overlooking Ground Zero? I doubt it. How about if Ground Zero is made into a multi-purpose facility that has open areas, a memorial, commercial areas and residential areas and a Muslim group leased space there? Again, I doubt it. The only worthy argument is that without evidence that an actual terrorist group or someone with ties to a terrorist group is behind the building they have as much right as anyone else to build a multi-purpose community center/religious facility in Lower Manhattan.

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

 

[jon_mx]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

The fallacy of your arguement is that there are hundreds of mosques in the US, but this is the only one that has real opposition. It is ALL about location. The ******* wanted it at ground zero. That is the whole point of this controversy.

 

[Christo]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

The fallacy of your arguement is that there are hundreds of mosques in the US, but this is the only one that has real opposition.

That's a lie and you know it. There have been links throughout this thread showing opposition to mosques being built in places like Tennessee and Wisconsin.

 

[jon_mx]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

The fallacy of your arguement is that there are hundreds of mosques in the US, but this is the only one that has real opposition.

That's a lie and you know it. There have been links throughout this thread showing opposition to mosques being built in places like Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Yes, there has been fringe opposition. Not opposition by 70% of the public. That is why I used the word REAL opposition. Stop mis-characterizing what I said.

 

[Christo]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

The fallacy of your arguement is that there are hundreds of mosques in the US, but this is the only one that has real opposition.

That's a lie and you know it. There have been links throughout this thread showing opposition to mosques being built in places like Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Yes, there has been fringe opposition. Not opposition by 70% of the public. That is why I used the word REAL opposition. Stop mis-characterizing what I said.

Okay, you win. I can't beat the "No true Scotsman" argument.

 

[tommyboy]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

The fallacy of your arguement is that there are hundreds of mosques in the US, but this is the only one that has real opposition.

That's a lie and you know it. There have been links throughout this thread showing opposition to mosques being built in places like Tennessee and Wisconsin.

i thought we were talking about the ground zero mosque in new york city. I could care less about what people in tennessee or wisconsin do. I'm sure if you polled americans in general they would be 70% in favor of mosques being built in tennessee or wisconsin at the same time polls have shown americans are 70% opposed to the one we're talking about at ground zero. This is a bad argument, its guilt by association without the association.

 

[the moops]

I agree the location doesnt matter. It could be in Brooklyn and the people against the Mosque would be against it there too: http://brooklynpaper.com/stories/33/40/bn_..._bk.html?comm=1

People from the mosque will be praying in the street,” insisted Susan Gerber, a former public school teacher. “People living on the block will have to step over them.

“We’ll have a building, so I don’t think we’ll be praying in the street anytime soon,” said mosque project manager Ibrahim Anse, who added that he expects construction to begin in about a month.,

 

[timschochet]

i thought we were talking about the ground zero mosque in new york city. I could care less about what people in tennessee or wisconsin do. I'm sure if you polled americans in general they would be 70% in favor of mosques being built in tennessee or wisconsin at the same time polls have shown americans are 70% opposed to the one we're talking about at ground zero. This is a bad argument, its guilt by association without the association.

tommyboy, I would like you to answer the following questions:1. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that the community center is not directly at Ground Zero but two blocks away?2. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?3. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that this is to be a community center, in which only part of it is to be a prayer center?4. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?5. You don't have the excuse of most Americans- you have read this thread, so you ARE informed of the facts. Do they make any difference to you?

 

[tommyGunZ]

I'm tired of this hyper-technical response. Anyone who would be upset that it was being built on top of Ground Zero has just as much reason to be upset that it's being built 2 blocks from Ground Zero. Would you change your position if it wasn't "at Ground Zero" but just across the street overlooking Ground Zero? I doubt it. How about if Ground Zero is made into a multi-purpose facility that has open areas, a memorial, commercial areas and residential areas and a Muslim group leased space there? Again, I doubt it. The only worthy argument is that without evidence that an actual terrorist group or someone with ties to a terrorist group is behind the building they have as much right as anyone else to build a multi-purpose community center/religious facility in Lower Manhattan.

Arguing against your shtick is the new shtick?

 

[tommyboy]

i thought we were talking about the ground zero mosque in new york city. I could care less about what people in tennessee or wisconsin do. I'm sure if you polled americans in general they would be 70% in favor of mosques being built in tennessee or wisconsin at the same time polls have shown americans are 70% opposed to the one we're talking about at ground zero. This is a bad argument, its guilt by association without the association.

tommyboy, I would like you to answer the following questions:1. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that the community center is not directly at Ground Zero but two blocks away?2. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?3. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that this is to be a community center, in which only part of it is to be a prayer center?4. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?5. You don't have the excuse of most Americans- you have read this thread, so you ARE informed of the facts. Do they make any difference to you?

1- addressed above in reply to desert power2- speculation as to fact3- false, was announced as a mosque by imam rauf in 2009 article i linked to in NY Times in reply to desert power. Once controversy ensued the talking point was switched to it being a community center.4- speculation as to fact5-none whatsoever since all of your previous points have been answered sufficiently

 

[tommyboy]

it looks like we've arrived at the crux of the liberal argument in favor of the mosque and it hangs on the determination of the mosque being at ground zero or 2 blocks from ground zero. I'm glad it only took 55 pages to get to that.

 

[Desert_Power]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

I don't really think that people saying they are offended in a poll by something that isn't really offensive at all is a good enough reason not to do it, if it has a worthwhile goal. I don't care if the political extremes are offended and have found something else to complain about. We'd all be a lot better off if we spent more time listening to people like Rauf who are actually involved in the project than the talking heads trying to scare up some ratings.

geez, where to begin. first off, the mosque is 2 blocks from GZ. It was close enough to have been partially destroyed from landing gear from one of the airplanes. if that isn't close enough to Ground Zero for you, I don't know what is.

2nd- the imam himself specifically wanted this site because it was part of ground zero

The location was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims who bought the building in July. A presence so close to the World Trade Center, “where a piece of the wreckage fell,” said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the cleric leading the project, “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion...?pagewanted=all3rd- there may be a huge islamic presence in the financial district of lower manhattan where this particular location is but that is beside the point. The point is many americans and new yorkers, and foreigners consider the building of this particular project in this particular place to be offensive in the context of 9/11. One poll of arabic responders showed 58% of arabs opposed to the building of the mosque. http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/fru...ero-wtc-mosque/

Rauf may be the best guy in the world but this idea was just stupid.

So? It isn't at Ground Zero, it is a couple of blocks away. Saying it is at Ground Zero implies that it is on the site of the WTC, this is not true. I could care less that an internet poll says people are offended by something as silly as this.

I'm tired of this hyper-technical response

. Anyone who would be upset that it was being built on top of Ground Zero has just as much reason to be upset that it's being built 2 blocks from Ground Zero.

Setting aside the irony of the first sentence, the second sentence is 100% untrue in my anecdotal experience of people I've heard realize the truth of the matter. It certainly would be a lot easier for people to be offended by a mosque built on top of Ground Zero than two blocks away next to some porno shop and it helps those of us who aren't complete dumbasses realize the point of the project isn't to be a victory monument tower to Allah or something stupid.

 

[Desert_Power]

it looks like we've arrived at the crux of the liberal argument in favor of the mosque and it hangs on the determination of the mosque being at ground zero or 2 blocks from ground zero. I'm glad it only took 55 pages to get to that.

The crux of the argument is that freedom of religion exists in America, try and keep up.The last half a page is more of a discussion about whether Rauf should have expected opposition, not if he should build it.

 

[Desert_Power]

i thought we were talking about the ground zero mosque in new york city. I could care less about what people in tennessee or wisconsin do. I'm sure if you polled americans in general they would be 70% in favor of mosques being built in tennessee or wisconsin at the same time polls have shown americans are 70% opposed to the one we're talking about at ground zero. This is a bad argument, its guilt by association without the association.

tommyboy, I would like you to answer the following questions:1. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that the community center is not directly at Ground Zero but two blocks away?2. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?3. Do you believe that 70% of Americans opposed are aware that this is to be a community center, in which only part of it is to be a prayer center?4. Do you believe if they were aware of this fact, it would make any difference?5. You don't have the excuse of most Americans- you have read this thread, so you ARE informed of the facts. Do they make any difference to you?

1- addressed above in reply to desert power

 

[TobiasFunke]

it looks like we've arrived at the crux of the liberal argument in favor of the mosque and it hangs on the determination of the mosque being at ground zero or 2 blocks from ground zero. I'm glad it only took 55 pages to get to that.

The crux of the argument is that these people have every right to build their place of religious worship where they like, and that there was zero opposition until the far right played to the worst in some of us for political gain. They know that many Americans are completely clueless regarding Islam, have an irrational distrust/dislike of all Muslims, and consider 9/11 to be some sort of untouchable tragedy and rallying point. They used this project (again, nobody raised a finger until seven months after it was announced) as a vehicle for their inflammatory rhetoric and "us vs. them" mentality. I personally don't care if there's a building there or not- I'm never going to use it. I'm just disgusted at how easily their plan worked on so many people. Not surprised, just disgusted. Also, this "two blocks away" argument you're making against the project works both ways. I could easily say the crux of your argument is that it's only two blocks away ... what if it was four blocks away, or eight?, or a mile?

 

[CBus Alex]

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

you sound like the southern democrats that couldn't get over the fact the north won and gave freedom to slaves and took away voting rights of the former confederate soldiers. you were the vocal 30% minority that spent 10 years having tantrums killing people and forming groups like the KKK because no one agreed with you. Yet the other 70% adapted to the new reality that the north did in fact win and yes slaves were people that deserved rights.

Then take the deal. If you really believe that you're the abolitionists in this scenario and I'm the Klan, then you shouldn't be worried about how your position will look to people (or even just to yourself) 30 years from now.I'm guessing you won't do it, though. Because on some level, you know which of us is on the side of right and justice, which of us will be vindicated by history.

 

[CBus Alex]

The opposition stems mainly from ignorance about the project IMO. I'd like to blame the wider media than just the Right Wing portion for that. Sure they started it, but the whole conversation is biased towards opposing it. I bet a significant portion of that number would change their vote if instead of being described as the "Ground Zero Mosque" it was more accurately described as an Islamic Community Center a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. Or if they realized there was a significant Islamic community in Lower Manhattan already. Over the last month I've had conversations with many people who didn't even realize that the "mosque" wasn't even at Ground Zero.

Pretty much every conversation I've had with a mosque opponent in real life has gone something like this:THEM: "Why do they have to build a mosque at Ground Zero?"ME: "They're not. It's like two blocks away, in an old Burlington Coat Factory."THEM: "Oh. So what's the problem then?"

 

[tommyboy]

I'll make you a deal, Tommy. I want you to write down your best arguments as to why this mosque should not be built, seal them in an envelope, and put it someplace safe. I'll do the same with my arguments for why it should be. Thirty years from now, we'll each open our envelopes, read the contents again, and decide if we are proud or ashamed of the man who wrote them.

you sound like the southern democrats that couldn't get over the fact the north won and gave freedom to slaves and took away voting rights of the former confederate soldiers. you were the vocal 30% minority that spent 10 years having tantrums killing people and forming groups like the KKK because no one agreed with you. Yet the other 70% adapted to the new reality that the north did in fact win and yes slaves were people that deserved rights.

Then take the deal. If you really believe that you're the abolitionists in this scenario and I'm the Klan, then you shouldn't be worried about how your position will look to people (or even just to yourself) 30 years from now.I'm guessing you won't do it, though. Because on some level, you know which of us is on the side of right and justice, which of us will be vindicated by history.

i wouldn't do it because I probably won't be alive in 30 years to check the answers. but if it makes you feel better about yourself I'm pretty sure that my side is the correct side and your side is the wrong one. I highly doubt my answer will change, ever, as pertains to this particular mosque