Ground Zero Mosque

[jrrtoken]

(Or how the global Muslim community is subjecting Islamic jurisprudence in Manhattan)

 

Source

 

Yep, that's right, us Muslims are a crafty folk. For over a millennia we've been scheming to suppress the world under one, united caliphate. Hell, 9/11 was a good revival, but we've taken some pointers from our Jewish brethren in Lichtenstein and their global banking array, and we've gone legit. So, to broadcast our dominion, we're building a thirteen-story mosque over the graveyard of the World Trade Center. Just like the siege of Jerusalem and the ruin of the Temple Mount, is there not a better rallying cry for our fellow Muslim brothers to rise and exterminate the Christian infidels than the raising of a spire upon the skeletal corpse of the American capitalist system?

 

Or, at least, those are the views that seem to be aggregated from a select few human loudspeakers, who are staunchly opposed to the exercise of unalienable and constitutional civil rights. Here's the picture: a rather well-to-do Islamic society wishes to transform an abandoned department store into an Islamic-based community center. The issue is, it happens to be two blocks away from the site of the former World Trade Center. The reactions have been, well, unsavory, to say the least. Obviously, in the world where all 1.5 billion Muslims think, act, and speak alike, well-formulated analogies are found, like "It's like the Germans building a brewery across the street from Auschwitz".

 

I'd probably have some sympathies to the opposition party if it was actually built on Ground Zero, but since the abandoned building was never even part of the World Trade Complex, you can say that I don't really see the point. Add some hypocrisy, racism, and conspiracy theories, and I've gained some antagonism to the opposition movement, however. The best arguments s far have been "THIS IS AMERICA, AND WE ARE A CHRISTIAN NATION" and "WE CAN'T LET THEM DISGRACE OUR PATRIOTS WHO DIED THAT DAY BY THEIR HANDS".

 

 

TL;DR:(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

 

Thoughts, gentlemen?

[Astor]

While I think it's probably not the best way of improving inter-faith relations, at the same time I think it's sad that those opposed to it can't understand that not all Muslims are extremists, although that's probably the point you were going for.

[True_Avery]

Living in So.Cal most of my life and about as far away from New York as you can get in the US, my opinion doesn't really hold much credibility in a thread like this. Still, I, personally, liked this quote the best:

 

"I think it's the right thing to do," said Marvin Bethea, who was a paramedic at ground zero. "I lost 16 friends down there. But Muslims also got killed on 9/11. It would be a good sign of faith that we're not condemning all Muslims and that the Muslims who did this happened to be extremists. As a black man, I know what it's like to be discriminated against when you haven't done anything."

 

I recently did a lot of research on the artist Maya Ying Lin, the Chinese woman who won the contest to determine who would design the Vietnam Veterans Memorial (Memorial Wall). Her design is, artistically, haunting in its beauty... but she received death threats and racial slurs both in letter and on the political stage due to her ethnicity, and the idea that a white man should have designed the memorial. It was finally built (although some questionably offensive additions were made beforehand), and now stands as one of the treasures of our nation.

 

So... No, I don't have a problem with the community center. I probably wouldn't even have a problem with some kind of understanding/outreach center on the actual (eventual) 9/11 museum site. The event was caused by a blind and ignorant hatred of an entire country and its people and it would be a sad shame to walk away with the same.

[Ping]

The fact that there is even a controversy about it proves Einstein is right; human stupidity is infinite. Sure, if it were going to be on Ground Zero, that would be a problem, but it's not, and so there should be no problem. Society simply continues to disgust me in every way possible. I don't have a problem with it, and neither should anyone else. If they want a nation where everyone is a practicing Christian, then they should leave and make their own country.

 

Edit: Wait a sec...are the Republicans supporting having no Mosque, or is it a Republican aligned group?

[mimartin]

“Kill the Ground Zero Mosque” is a really poor choice of words bordering on hate speech.

 

Like PsastramiX wrote, it isn’t even being built at Ground Zero, I would have a problem if it was being built there, but of course that goes for any building. However, I also understand the value of the real-estate.

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Isn't there a strip club or some such thing there already?

[Totenkopf]

Edit: Wait a sec...are the Republicans supporting having no Mosque, or is it a Republican aligned group?

 

Far as I've seen anywhere, the opposition to the mosque is mainly based on proximity, not merely principle. My guess is that if it were being built in Queens, Harlem or just about anywhere else in NY not near the former WTCs, that it wouldn't be an issue, or if you really want to be cynical, one with much resonation.

[JediAthos]

A chance for me to utter one of my favorite movie quotes:

 

"A person is smart, people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."

(Tommy Lee Jones as Agent K in Men In Black)

 

It shouldn't, but it often does, amaze me how many people are gigantic hypocrites. They preach about freedom, liberty, and God and then turn around and support oppressive, closed minded ideas. The religion of Islam did not attack the United States...fundamentalists with a perverted sense of Islam attacked the United States. There is a huge difference here!

 

I don't have a problem with the proposed renovation especially since it would turn a derelict building into something much more useful. People should do some research before they speak or better yet if all that is going to come out of their mouths is bigoted, ignorant ideas then I would encourage them to just not speak at all. Yes, we have freedom of speech in the United States, but imho there are far too many that abuse it.

[Tysyacha]

I am an American, and I WEEP FOR MY COUNTRY TODAY because of this ad.

 

First: America is NOT a Christian nation. America is a nation which allows FREEDOM OF RELIGION, no matter WHAT religion you do (or do not) profess.

 

Second: The majority of Muslims love PEACE and are PEACEFUL people. NOT every single Muslim attacked us on 9/11. Only FUNDAMENTALIST MUSLIM TERRORISTS did. To most Muslims, the terrorists are wrongdoers, not heroes.

 

Third: The people who want to build the mosque want to build a place to PRAY AND WORSHIP, not a place to engage in acts of violence, debauchery, and hate.

 

Fourth: As has been said, the mosque will NOT ACTUALLY BE AT GROUND ZERO.

 

Fifth: Aren't the creators and promoters of this ad being hateful, racist, xenophobic, and UN-CHRISTIAN when they trumpet its dark message?

 

:facepalm:

[Sabretooth]

Bet they wouldn't have had a problem with building the headquarters of an arms manufacturer there.

[Tysyacha]

^^^^^^^^^^

 

This.

[Revan 411]

I would have to agree with almost everyone else here. The fact that some people have a problem with it just goes to show you that they are hypercritical, and ignorant fools. And before anybody asks, I do condemn Al-Qaeda's attacks on the World Trade Center, and I do feel sympathy for the victims of the families who did die in 9/11. However, this doesn't give the opposition party an excuse to start posting xenophobic advertisements on the internet, and on the streets. Remember, two wrongs don't make a right.

 

What these people can't understand is that only a minority of the Islamic Population attacked the U.S on 9/11. The majority are peaceful, caring people who pray everyday, donate 2.5 percent of their income to charity, and want nothing more then cooperation, friendship, and peace.

 

Keep in mind that I'm not a Muslim, nor am I a Christian, or a Jew (even though I may have Jewish ancestry.) I'm an Agnostic, who would defend any ethnic group of people from ignorant, and racist comments.

[mimartin]

What these people can't understand is that only a minority of the Islamic Population attacked the U.S on 9/11.

Most of these people do understand that. Their intention is to play upon the hatred, ignorance and bigotry of others to further their political goals. The fact that it isn’t at ground zero or that a majority of Muslims are not the enemy isn’t the point of the video. The entire point is inciting these feelings to get votes for their party. At the same time the political party can hid behind the fact that The National Republican Trust is a political action committee and not affiliated with the Republican Party. Really hypocritical when you consider they portray all Muslims as our enemy despite the fact that only a few Muslim extremist were behind the attacks on America.

 

Of course, Republicans never were really good at going after Al-Qaeda, which can be seen by our attacking Iraq instead of using our resources ferreting out Osama bin Laden.

[Q]

Yeah, we should try to spam them with cruise missiles again.

[Totenkopf]

Yeah, we should try to spam them with cruise missiles again.

 

Hey, who knows, maybe we'll get lucky and destroy something besides an alleged pill factory or a bunch of rocks.

[mimartin]

Yeah, we should try to spam them with cruise missiles again.

Still closer than attacking the wrong country in the opposite direction and more conservative too both in the terms of lives and money, not that those in power care anything about the lives under thier command beyond giving them lip service.

[Darth Avlectus]

@ OP I'm not really opposed to it. A bit detached and decidedly indifferent perhaps. The only gripe I would have is if anyone got preferential treatment over the others and it weren't an equal opportunity, but there's not enough info here to say anything about that.

 

Far as I've seen anywhere, the opposition to the mosque is mainly based on proximity, not merely principle.

I know. Shame they didn't clarify that, either.

 

I'd like to see a community center someplace where they all could come together based upon their common values and beliefs and hard work like earlier Americans. Like sprockets of a wheel. Doesn't seem like Dems have done much to this end. It's we the people that'll have to do something since the 2 party system is broken.

[mimartin]

Don’t know why anyone would want to build there.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

[Lord of Hunger]

I do have a problem with this.

 

It's not that the majority of Muslims are extremist, it's that the Muslim extremists are Muslim. The Mosque would very much be empowering for their cause as much as it would be empowering for moderate Muslims.

 

Think about it for a moment. The goal of the Muslim extremists is to bring about a global caliphate of Islam.

 

It doesn't really matter if moderate Muslims are opposed to this, because if we actually had moderate Muslims opposing Muslim extremists then Muslim extremists would be less of a problem, no?

 

And yeah, saying that something supported by the Republicans is racist or bigoted gets really old, folks. I swear, anything they say at this point gets a racist label in the same way that anything the Democrats say is labeled as socialism. No offense, but I really find this labeling childish.

[urluckyday]

If we lose our most basic rights after traumatic experiences, what good are those rights anyway? They are free to practice whatever they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else and their mosque follows along with all of the zoning laws (which appears to be the case).

 

Go ahead, let 'em build...the extremists can call it a victory against America if they want...but hey, they can talk all they want when they have American troops at their doorstep in Afghanistan taking it to 'em everyday.

 

Remember, people, this is America. It's not just free for one specific group just because we're cautious of the other group(s).

[Ctrl Alt Del]

It's not that the majority of Muslims are extremist, it's that the Muslim extremists are Muslim. The Mosque would very much be empowering for their cause as much as it would be empowering for moderate Muslims.

How so? Like it's some sort of trophy for what they accomplished there? Elucidate for a while here: isn't that the very same kind of labeling you criticize afterwards, regarding Republicans?

 

It doesn't really matter if moderate Muslims are opposed to this, because if we actually had moderate Muslims opposing Muslim extremists then Muslim extremists would be less of a problem, no?

So you have a good portion of NATO fighting said extremists and they're still a nonstate power to be reckoned with. How does the action of isolated moderate muslims gonna end the problem single-handedly?

 

And besides, how can you make such an assertion? How do you know muslims aren't doing what they can on their end?

[JediAthos]

I do have a problem with this.

 

It's not that the majority of Muslims are extremist, it's that the Muslim extremists are Muslim. The Mosque would very much be empowering for their cause as much as it would be empowering for moderate Muslims.

 

Think about it for a moment. The goal of the Muslim extremists is to bring about a global caliphate of Islam.

 

It doesn't really matter if moderate Muslims are opposed to this, because if we actually had moderate Muslims opposing Muslim extremists then Muslim extremists would be less of a problem, no?

 

And yeah, saying that something supported by the Republicans is racist or bigoted gets really old, folks. I swear, anything they say at this point gets a racist label in the same way that anything the Democrats say is labeled as socialism. No offense, but I really find this labeling childish.

 

First, moderate Muslims are opposed to extremists at least as far as the one's that I've met in any regard. So I'm not sure exactly what you mean...if you're talking about taking up arms, Islam is a peaceful religion and true Muslims would not kill in its name. If you're talking about politically...extremists cannot be reasoned with.

 

How exactly would this building further terrorist goals? There are mosques all over the United States. If you're simply talking about the location then I suppose I see what you're saying even if I don't agree with it.

 

I will agree in partial with the labeling thing...but at the same time in my opinion if the shoe fits....

[Lord of Hunger]

If we lose our most basic rights after traumatic experiences, what good are those rights anyway? They are free to practice whatever they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else and their mosque follows along with all of the zoning laws (which appears to be the case).

 

Go ahead, let 'em build...the extremists can call it a victory against America if they want...but hey, they can talk all they want when they have American troops at their doorstep in Afghanistan taking it to 'em everyday.

 

Remember, people, this is America. It's not just free for one specific group just because we're cautious of the other group(s).

Freedom is one of many things America is built upon, and no one value should be held as a holy grail. Their mosque building is fine for them and doesn't harm anyone in the US directly. I have no problem with Muslims celebrating their faith, I even support them in that regard. But in this particular case it will empower Muslim extremists to see a mosque built near a site of their destructive act.

How so? Like it's some sort of trophy for what they accomplished there? Elucidate for a while here: isn't that the very same kind of labeling you criticize afterwards, regarding Republicans?

It is not a label, it is their stated goal. They have deliberately said that their goal is to destroy American ideals that they consider heresy in their faith and establish a global caliphate. The bombing of the twin towers was an act towards that goal. To establish a mosque there would be empowering for those reasons.

So you have a good portion of NATO fighting said extremists and they're still a nonstate power to be reckoned with. How does the action of isolated moderate muslims gonna end the problem single-handedly?

Moderate Muslims standing up in their community and saying no would isolate the extremists and thus diminish their standing. It would put them at risk of death, but it would be a step forward.

And besides, how can you make such an assertion? How do you know muslims aren't doing what they can on their end?

Because if they were Muslim extremists would not be as much of a problem as they are.

First, moderate Muslims are opposed to extremists at least as far as the one's that I've met in any regard. So I'm not sure exactly what you mean...if you're talking about taking up arms, Islam is a peaceful religion and true Muslims would not kill in its name. If you're talking about politically...extremists cannot be reasoned with.

Islam does seem to at least permit its followers to protect the integrity of the faith. I rarely hear about any civil protests over Muslim extremism, just US and Israeli flag burning. In other words, I have yet to be convinced that there is any considerable effort on the part of the moderates as a whole. Individually, I don't doubt it.

How exactly would this building further terrorist goals? There are mosques all over the United States. If you're simply talking about the location then I suppose I see what you're saying even if I don't agree with it.

 

I will agree in partial with the labeling thing...but at the same time in my opinion if the shoe fits....

It is purely that particular location. If in a few years after a new tower has been fully built, then I would be willing to reevaluate. However, this is far too soon.

[Ctrl Alt Del]

It is not a label, it is their stated goal. They have deliberately said that their goal is to destroy American ideals that they consider heresy in their faith and establish a global caliphate. The bombing of the twin towers was an act towards that goal. To establish a mosque there would be empowering for those reasons.

I mean you're lumping all the muslims in one sack and calling them extremists.

 

Moderate Muslims standing up in their community and saying no would isolate the extremists and thus diminish their standing. It would put them at risk of death, but it would be a step forward.

Kind of hard to do when they are at gunpoint. Or when the State does not exist or reach a certain places and all that passes for law, social and healthcare are those extrimists. Too much to ask for, say, a tribal community which has ony known war against the same targets the extremists claim to fight against.

 

So:

Because if they were Muslim extremists would not be as much of a problem as they are.

Dunno how you reached that conclusion.

[jrrtoken]

Freedom is one of many things America is built upon, and no one value should be held as a holy grail. Their mosque building is fine for them and doesn't harm anyone in the US directly. I have no problem with Muslims celebrating their faith, I even support them in that regard. But in this particular case it will empower Muslim extremists to see a mosque built near a site of their destructive act.

Conversely, the prohibition of the construction of the mosque would serve as an example of perceived Western oppression and upheaval of Islam. Propaganda is propaganda, regardless of the reason, and in this case, it wouldn't be incredibly inaccurate, although highly embellished.

It is not a label, it is their stated goal. They have deliberately said that their goal is to destroy American ideals that they consider heresy in their faith and establish a global caliphate. The bombing of the twin towers was an act towards that goal. To establish a mosque there would be empowering for those reasons.

That's too general; al-Qaeda's present aim is to rid the Muslim world of Western influence, of any form. Whether that means the direct upheaval of the West itself, and the propagation of Islam thereafter, is something entirely different. Right now, al-Qaeda's motive are molded as a defensive one; world domination isn't exactly an explicit goal. I suppose that Hamas and Hezbollah could also be lumped into the same, villainous cubby, no?

 

Secondly, would it not be unreasonable to say that this controversy is all rooted in coincidental real estate, and not idealistic capital? Even if the construction is where it is for a specific reason, would it not be a better way to turn a new leaf than to do so at the figurehead of all misunderstanding of Islam? It's not too different than establishing St. Peter's Basilica over a Roman necropolis, or the reestablishment of the then-polytheist Kaa'ba as a site of worship to God.