Ground Zero Mosque...

[SwordoftheLord]

IS there a graphic of what it is going to look like? would like to see what it is going to look like.


thanks

 

[Husayn]

It's not going to be at Ground Zero, it's going to be in the same neighborhood as it.

 

[SwordoftheLord]

It's not going to be at Ground Zero, it's going to be in the same neighborhood as it.

yeah sry bout that, but that just seems to be the name given to it here.

so do you have anything else for me? besides that statement lol?

 

[Husayn]

yeah sry bout that, but that just seems to be the name given to it here.

so do you have anything else for me? besides that statement lol?

There is another thread (in the Ethics, I believe) about this topic, you should go there.

 

[razeontherock]

Ok so I'm naive. Explain this ground 0? WTC? Jerusalem?

 

[SithDoughnut]

Ok so I'm naive. Explain this ground 0? WTC? Jerusalem?

There is a plan to build a mosque in the same neighbourhood as the WTC site. Not actually on the site, as the name suggests, but near it. It's going to have all sorts of other amenities too, I believe. It's intended to be built as basically a peace offering, pointing out that not all Muslims are like the ones who flew into the towers.

Of course, a lot of people have got angry about the idea of having a mosque near the WTC site, totally ignoring the fact that there are already a number of mosques in the area.

This is the thread on the Ethics & Morality board about it, although it appears to have turned into an 'Obama is run by demons' thread or something.

 

[Husayn]

There is a plan to build a mosque in the same neighbourhood as the WTC site. Not actually on the site, as the name suggests, but near it. It's going to have all sorts of other amenities too, I believe. It's intended to be built as basically a peace offering, pointing out that not all Muslims are like the ones who flew into the towers.

Exactly, from what I have read it's going to be an Islamic Center which as you said will provide all sorts of things.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

Of course, a lot of people have got angry about the idea of having a mosque near the WTC site, totally ignoring the fact that there are already a number of mosques in the area.

Great, they can go and take care of their worshiping or recruiting business in those other number of mosques in the area. Why another "Islamic Center" near the sacred ground where Americans suffered thousands of deaths due to radical Islam? Slap me on the face! How ethical! This is the voice of so called moderate muslims? A project led by a fanatic who justifies 9/11 attacks, who calls "Christians" bombed Hiroshima and Dresden in WWII? He can take his project and build in his holy Arabia... The families of 9/11 victims don't want his "peaceful" terrorist breeding ground in the middle of NYC ...


No Mosques At Ground Zero

 

[SithDoughnut]

Great, they can go and take care of their worshiping or recruiting business in those other number of mosques in the area.

Yay for freedom of religion!

They own the land, they can build what they want on it.

Why another "Islamic Center" near the sacred ground where Americans suffered thousands of deaths due to radical Islam? Slap me on the face! How ethical!

Yeah, because all Muslims agreed with the bombing of the tower, didn't they? This must be their victory parade!

I am amazed at how a right-wing individualistic mentality can simultaneously forget that Muslims are individual people too. It takes quite a level of hypocrisy to achieve that.

This is the voice of so called moderate muslims? A project led by a fanatic who justifies 9/11 attacks,

Proof please.

who calls "Christians" bombed Hiroshima and Dresden in WWII?

A what what in the who now? That made no sense. Whatever you said, that'll probably need proof too.

He can take his project and build in his holy Arabia...

He is American. Many people involved in the project are American. They are citizens and get the same rights as you. Learn to deal with the fact that some people do things you don't agree with.

The families of 9/11 victims don't want his "peaceful" terrorist breeding ground in the middle of NYC ...

I knew this was coming. I only skimmed the post before I clicked reply in the hope that it would be an intelligent answer but I'm sadly disappointed. Basically, you're going to need proof from all of that.

No Mosques At Ground Zero

No bias there, right?

 

[Eudaimonist]

Why another "Islamic Center" near the sacred ground where Americans suffered thousands of deaths due to radical Islam?

Should Christians not build churches in the Middle-east near where American Christian soldiers had killed Muslims with cruise missiles and other weapons of warfare?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

I really love it when atheists with an anti-Christian agenda side with muslims...I didn't expect anything different.

Yay for freedom of religion!

They own the land, they can build what they want on it.

Surely, no one can say any more than that. If there is freedom of religion then there is freedom of speech and I can speak all I want against it and influence an opposite opinion in the matter. Yay!

Yeah, because all Muslims agreed with the bombing of the tower, didn't they? This must be their victory parade!

Given the person who is leading the effort, I would not put this statement on the back burner. Amazingly it always comes to all muslims/some muslims argument. Somehow this argument that relates to individuals mitigates the violent nature of the religion. Go ahead throw in the "tu quoque" and mention WBC. It should make us look equally bad therefore we can't have anti-Islamic opinion.

I am amazed at how a right-wing individualistic mentality can simultaneously forget that Muslims are individual people too. It takes quite a level of hypocrisy to achieve that.

A unified effort is being criticized here. This is not about individuals, but feel free to demonize our views.

Proof please.

A what what in the who now? That made no sense. Whatever you said, that'll probably need proof too.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

Frank Walker (21 March 2004). "West must act to end jihad: Imam". Herald Sun. Jonathan Rauch (12 October 2001). "Islam Has Been Hijacked, And Only Muslims Can Save It". National Journal.

You going to read and refute them now?

He is American. Many people involved in the project are American. They are citizens and get the same rights as you. Learn to deal with the fact that some people do things you don't agree with.

And I am doing exactly the same. The amount of donations from American Muslims being sent to overseas whether to support Palestinians, or other muslim charities show me that they do have causes they help outside of this country also. Given that perspective, him taking this effort to the holy land of Islam can be appreciated in the international muslim community, as a gesture of an "American" muslim, my views, kapish?

I knew this was coming. I only skimmed the post before I clicked reply in the hope that it would be an intelligent answer but I'm sadly disappointed. Basically, you're going to need proof from all of that.

Blah blah. It only takes a blind liberal who already forgot that they were hit by these homegrown islamists twice already. Nothing that we haven't seen, nothing that you can guarantee that this place will not breed further anti-American sentiment. Get qualified in the matter and then lecture me about what I should be concerned about protecting my citizens.

No bias there, right?

It is as much as yours...

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

Should Christians not build churches in the Middle-east near where American Christian soldiers had killed Muslims with cruise missiles and other weapons of warfare?


eudaimonia,

Mark

Ummm given the location of our Theater of Operations, we can not even carry Bibles out in the street, what church are you talking about? Which one was the last church built in the middle east by an American? By a figure like Rick Warren?

 

[razeontherock]

I really love it when atheists with an anti-Christian agenda side with muslims...I didn't expect anything different.

But Sirdoughnut did come up with some funny one liners, ya gotta give him credit fer that ..

BTW, I started a thread 'Memorial Day,' I wonder if you'd share your perspectives there? Some pretty pointed questions.

 

[SithDoughnut]

I really love it when atheists with an anti-Christian agenda side with muslims...I didn't expect anything different.

I love it when random Christians accuse me of having an anti-Christian agenda just because I disagree with them. Seriously, I'm not against any religion.

Surely, no one can say any more than that. If there is freedom of religion then there is freedom of speech and I can speak all I want against it and influence an opposite opinion in the matter. Yay!

Of course you can. Who said you can't?

Given the person who is leading the effort, I would not put this statement on the back burner. Amazingly it always comes to all muslims/some muslims argument. Somehow this argument that relates to individuals mitigates the violent nature of the religion.

The religion is not important, it is the people who follow it that are. Religions are a tool - they are used how people want to use them. For every passage that can be interpreted to promote violence, there is one that can be used to back peace. If you'll read the article you linked, you'll find that Feisal Abdul Rauf goes for the latter.

Go ahead throw in the "tu quoque" and mention WBC. It should make us look equally bad therefore we can't have anti-Islamic opinion.

Why would I do that? The WBC doesn't represent the whole of Christianity. Please at least read what my posts say instead of what you think I'm saying.

A unified effort is being criticized here. This is not about individuals, but feel free to demonize our views.

What unified effort? And I'm not demonising your views, I'm disagreeing with them. Apparently, you can't tell the difference.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

Frank Walker (21 March 2004). "West must act to end jihad: Imam". Herald Sun. Jonathan Rauch (12 October 2001). "Islam Has Been Hijacked, And Only Muslims Can Save It". National Journal.

You going to read and refute them now?

And how does this article prove that the Imam supports the 9/11 attacks? At no point in that article does he even say a single word in support of Islamic terrorism.

You still have to actually tell me what your second claim said, because it made no sense grammatically.

And I am doing exactly the same. The amount of donations from American Muslims being sent to overseas whether to support Palestinians, or other muslim charities show me that they do have causes they help outside of this country also. Given that perspective, him taking this effort to the holy land of Islam can be appreciated in the international muslim community, as a gesture of an "American" muslim, my views, kapish?

Are you implying that Muslims are not Americans here?

As for the rest of it, I'm getting the feeling that you're regurgitating pre-written statements, because what you are trying to answer here I have no idea. I think you keep missing out bits of sentences or something.

Blah blah. It only takes a blind liberal who already forgot that they were hit by these homegrown islamists twice already. Nothing that we haven't seen, nothing that you can guarantee that this place will not breed further anti-American sentiment. Get qualified in the matter and then lecture me about what I should be concerned about protecting my citizens.

I'm not lecturing you, I'm disagreeing.

I am curious, however, as to why you think that all of Islam can be represented by some terrorist acts by a few individuals, but you think that using the WBC to represent Christianity is wrong. Why the difference? Why not accept that not everyone follows their holy book to the letter, and even those who do have different interpretations? Why not judge religious people by their actions, rather than the actions you've decided their holy book tells them to do? If people judged Christianity by the Bible alone, it wouldn't get a particularly positive review.

I still need proof for your first post, by the way.

It is as much as yours...

You're seeing bias where it doesn't exist. I'm sure there is some bias in my post (you can't debate something if you're entirely neutral), but it's not the bias you think it is. In future, try to avoid reading people's posts with such obviously incorrect preconceptions of who those people are. You don't know who I am or what I think, so don't assume you do.

 

[durangodawood]

IS there a graphic of what it is going to look like? would like to see what it is going to look like.


thanks

It better not be 2 giant minarets.
.

 

[Eudaimonist]

It better not be 2 giant minarets.
.

LOL!

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

But Sirdoughnut did come up with some funny one liners, ya gotta give him credit fer that ..

BTW, I started a thread 'Memorial Day,' I wonder if you'd share your perspectives there? Some pretty pointed questions.

Yea right... Here, some credit...

Where is your thread again?

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

I love it when random Christians accuse me of having an anti-Christian agenda just because I disagree with them. Seriously, I'm not against any religion.

Considering your sig line which is offensive to the nature of the FORUMS itself, you really strike me as a credible individual! .... NOT!

The religion is not important, it is the people who follow it that are. Religions are a tool - they are used how people want to use them. For every passage that can be interpreted to promote violence, there is one that can be used to back peace.

Yep, you don't know Islam and still continue to attempt to fit it in that one-size-fits-all category, why I might think, Oh yea, you are an atheist....

If you'll read the article you linked, you'll find that Feisal Abdul Rauf goes for the latter.

Please prove me that.

Why would I do that? The WBC doesn't represent the whole of Christianity. Please at least read what my posts say instead of what you think I'm saying.

Ok let's bite, why doesn't that particular Church represent Christianity?

What unified effort? And I'm not demonising your views, I'm disagreeing with them. Apparently, you can't tell the difference.

Your opposition given the sensitivity of the situation and the location of the project shows me that you are simply insensitive to the whole thing. If you are disagreeing with me, on what grounds are you doing this? Due to the fact that I utilize the very same rights as an American to oppose any and every muslim effort to build a gathering location in a place their ideology tried to destroy? And don't lecture me to read your posts when you don't read mine. Don't call me a hypocrite when you are going to display the same attitude.

And how does this article prove that the Imam supports the 9/11 attacks? At no point in that article does he even say a single word in support of Islamic terrorism.

You read National Journal and did not see that he blamed the US for the attacks? I guess in that particular article you read, it didn't bother you that how he attacked Christians and now you are nitpicking for the sake of argument.

You still have to actually tell me what your second claim said, because it made no sense grammatically.

Ah, sorry, I should have noticed I missed the present 2d singular of be... how bad my English became thanks to text-messaging. I should have known there are native English speaker who can not understand the context if you miss an "are"...

As for the rest of it, I'm getting the feeling that you're regurgitating pre-written statements, because what you are trying to answer here I have no idea. I think you keep missing out bits of sentences or something.

I just read what I wrote and there is nothing wrong with it, if you can't follow the context of your own argument and line of questioning, I can't help you. Since this is becoming about my use of English language, I can see that you have nothing else to argue and referring to these lame tactics.

I'm not lecturing you, I'm disagreeing.

On what grounds? What is your counter-argument that I should change my views? What are you saying for them? Because I am not denying their constitutional right to do whatever they want. You really can not oppose me in that aspect, so why does it matter to you that personally I (and many other Americans) do not want their presence in that given location?

I am curious, however, as to why you think that all of Islam can be represented by some terrorist acts by a few individuals, but you think that using the WBC to represent Christianity is wrong. Why the difference?

How well are you educated in Islamic and Christian Scriptures and Theology?

Why not accept that not everyone follows their holy book to the letter, and even those who do have different interpretations?

Where did you get the gem of information that this is all about what people practice? My opposition is not to people.

Why not judge religious people by their actions, rather than the actions you've decided their holy book tells them to do?

Given my experience with Islam and yours (which I might assume non-existent), I really can't take this recommendation seriously. I find it very liberal and naive in nature.

If people judged Christianity by the Bible alone, it wouldn't get a particularly positive review.

Says who?

I still need proof for your first post, by the way.

I have given that proof.

You're seeing bias where it doesn't exist. I'm sure there is some bias in my post (you can't debate something if you're entirely neutral), but it's not the bias you think it is. In future, try to avoid reading people's posts with such obviously incorrect preconceptions of who those people are. You don't know who I am or what I think, so don't assume you do.

Wow what a punchline... Thanks for the lecture, I was in kind of an oblivion what you were defending here...

 

[Booko]

Great, they can go and take care of their worshiping or recruiting business in those other number of mosques in the area. Why another "Islamic Center" near the sacred ground where Americans suffered thousands of deaths due to radical Islam? Slap me on the face! How ethical! This is the voice of so called moderate muslims? A project led by a fanatic who justifies 9/11 attacks, who calls "Christians" bombed Hiroshima and Dresden in WWII? He can take his project and build in his holy Arabia... The families of 9/11 victims don't want his "peaceful" terrorist breeding ground in the middle of NYC ...


No Mosques At Ground Zero

I take it from your profile that you're in the Armed Services? Congratulations on your choice to make sacrifices to defend our Constitution and way of life.

Which includes religious freedom.

Even the religious freedom to build a building for a religion you don't like where you don't like it.

You can always tell someone's principles when they meet the most serious challenge, eh?

 

[razeontherock]

What do you know about the former subway system, and how this would impact it?