Mosque Moves Forward, Yet Church in Limbo by Mark Impomeni

haffajappa

South of Seattle wrote:

blackredyellow wrote:

edit -
Forgive me prfctlefts if you've answered this already, but I've read most of these repetitive threads on this issue and haven't seen it, but where exactly is your geographical cut off where it would be ok to build the mosque? I'm just curious, your only disagreement seems to be with the location of it, where would you be ok putting it?

Probably Kabul

haffajappa

I'm not sure what the big deal is either.
We're doing renovations at our shop, and its a fucking bitch trying to get the right permits in order!

Sounds like they got a pretty sweet deal, 20 mil and a bomb proof floor...
They turned it down, there's no comparison to the big fuss about the muslim centre..

Just sounds like building code beurocracy to me, nothing we all don't have to go through.

cajunkiwi

prfctlefts wrote:

Ok for like the 100th time. FOWLLOW^THE^BOUNCING^BALL... No one is saying they dont' have a right to build it there. It's the location... It's not like there are'nt any Mosque in Manhattan. I think most at least I would if it were like 1/2 a mile from groun zero would be fine with it.. Even the govenor of NY offered them land to build somewhere else and he was going to give them the land. Hasn't the thought crossed anybody's mind as far as why this emam want's to build this mosque/community center right there. Why not somewhere else. I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way.. IMHO i feel that he is trying to provoke people and I think a lot of people are clearly forgetting the tragedy of 911 and how many people are still grieving.. Alsoi I feel that we have been more tolerant than anybody when it comes muslims.
Just look at that highschool in Dearborn where they are having football practice from 1:00 am to 4:00 am to cater to the Muslim players because it's ramadan .Muslims are not allowed to eat or drink during the day for the 30 days of Ramadan. I mean you could look at it like it's a way to hot during the day becuase of record heat in Michigan,but give me a break. You think they would do this for any other religion ? I wouldn't bet on it. If they have then I would love to hear about it.

I'm not even giving you a bouncing ball to follow - I'm going to number this response:

1. What makes half a mile from Ground Zero less sacred than two blocks from Ground Zero?
2. Why does the Imam want to build it where he is planning on building it? Are you aware that the center will contain a 9/11 memorial to ALL victims of the terrorist attacks? Are you also aware that the building is currently the site of a weekly Muslim prayer group?
3. You say a lot of people are "clearly forgetting the tragedy of 911 (sic) and how many people are still grieving" - I posted something in the other thread that was started on this topic, but you did not respond to my question, so I will ask it again: how do you balance the wishes of the anti-Cordoba 9/11 families with those of the 9/11 families who are in favor of it? There is an organization of 9/11 families who are fully in favor of building the center right where it is proposed - do their opinions not count in this discussion?
4. How do the anti-mosque protests around America (not referring to the NYC building, but proposed mosques in Tennessee, Wisconsin, and California) support your statement that "...we have been more tolerant than anybody when it comes muslims (sic)."
5. You said you wouldn't bet that any other religion gets any special religion-based breaks - do you consider the fact that BYU (a Mormon school) gets allowances from the NCAA to not play on Sundays, therefore making all of its opponents schedule differently when playing them, different to a high school practicing at night for one month out of every year?

And two bonus questions:
6. What is a bigger insult to grieving 9/11 families: A) the fact that representatives of the same religion that produced the 9/11 terrorists want to build a community center two blocks from the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the fact that within that same radius you have numerous people hawking 9/11-related products trying to make money off the disaster, or C) the fact that nine years after the attacks, Ground Zero is still a hole in the ground and nothing has been rebuilt?
7. Lastly - on behalf of the people in America who don't think Muslim = terrorist, how much longer should Lower Manhattan be subjected to different rules than the rest of the country when it comes to construction? Will you still have a problem with Muslims setting up shop there in 2020? 2030? At what point are people going to get on with their lives and accept that while 9/11 was a tragedy, it can't be used as an excuse to persecute an entire religion forever?

gimmesometruth27

'Ground Zero Mosque' Imam Helped FBI With Counterterrorism Efforts

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/685071

In March 2003, federal officials were being criticized for disrespecting the rights of Arab-Americans in their efforts to crack down on domestic security threats in the post-9/11 environment. Hoping to calm the growing tempers, FBI officials in New York hosted a forum on ways to deal with Muslim and Arab-Americans without exacerbating social tensions. The bureau wanted to provide agents with "a clear picture," said Kevin Donovan, director of the FBI's New York office.

Brought in to speak that morning -- at the office building located just blocks from Ground Zero -- was one of the city's most respected Muslim voices: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. The imam offered what was for him a familiar sermon to those in attendance. "Islamic extremism for the majority of Muslims is an oxymoron," he said. "It is a fundamental contradiction in terms."

It was, by contemporaneous news accounts, a successful lecture.

Flash forward six-and-a-half years, and Feisal Abdul Rauf occupies a far different place in the political consciousness. The imam behind a controversial proposal to build an Islamic cultural center near those same FBI offices has been called "a radical Muslim," a "militant Islamist" and, simply, the "enemy" by conservative critics. His Cordoba House project, meanwhile, has been framed as a conduit for Hamas to funnel money to domestic terrorist operations.

For those who actually know or have worked with the imam, the descriptions are frighteningly -- indeed, depressingly -- unhinged from reality. The Feisal Abdul Rauf they know, spent the past decade fighting against the very same cultural divisiveness and religious-based paranoia that currently surrounds him.

"Imam Feisal has participated at the Aspen Institute in Muslim-Christian-Jewish working groups looking at ways to promote greater religious tolerance," Walter Isaacson, head of The Aspen Institute told the Huffington Post. "He has consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism, and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam. Some of this work was done under the auspices of his own group, the Cordoba Initiative. I liked his book, and I participated in some of the meetings in 2004 or so. This is why I find it a shame that his good work is being undermined by this inflamed dispute. He is the type of leader we should be celebrating in America, not undermining."

A longtime Muslim presence in New York City, Feisal Abdul Rauf has been a participant in the geopolitical debate about Islamic-Western relations well before 9/11. In 1997, he founded the American Society for Muslim Advancement to promote a more positive integration of Muslims into American society. His efforts and profile rose dramatically after the attacks when, in need of a calm voice to explain why greater Islam was not a force bent on terrorism, he became a go-to quote for journalists on the beat.

"We have to be very much more vocal about protecting human rights and planting the seeds of democratic regimes throughout the Arab and Muslim world," he told Katie Couric, then with NBC, during an interview in October 2001.

Along the way, he rubbed elbows with or was embraced by a host of mainstream political figures, including several in the Republican Party. John Bennett, the man who preceded Isaacson as president of the Aspen Institute, was impressed enough by the imam's message that he became a co-founder of his Cordoba Initiative, which seeks to promote cross-cultural engagement through a variety of initiatives including, most recently, the center in downtown Manhattan.

In November 2004, Feisal Abdul Rauf participated in a lengthy discussion on religion and government with, among others, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. In May 2006, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright placed the imam among a host of luminaries who inspired her book, "The Mighty and the Almighty." As the New York Times reported at the time:

She mentioned Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, the two Democratic presidents in whose administrations she served; King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and King Abdullah II of Jordan; Vaclav Havel and Tony Blair. She organized discussions with Senator Sam Brownback, Republican of Kansas, a conservative Catholic.
''The epitome of this,'' she said, was ''a totally fascinating, interesting discussion'' with Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, a New York Sufi leader and author; Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism; and Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Albright eventually collaborated with Feisal Abdul Rauf and others on more substantive political projects. In September 2008, the two, along with a number of other foreign policy heavyweights (including Richard Armitage and Dennis Ross) signed a report claiming that the war on terror had been inadequate in actually improving U.S. security. No less a figure than Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the ranking minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, embraced the findings.

"The Project's report offers a thoughtful analysis of the current state of America's relations with the Muslim world and constructive recommendations on how we can approach this pressing concern in a bipartisan framework," said the senator.

Not that the imam has been without controversy. The most famous quote circulated by critics came when he talked to the Australian press in March 2004.

"The Islamic method of waging war is not to kill innocent civilians," he said. "But it was Christians in World War II who bombed innocent civilians in Dresden and dropped the nuclear bomb on Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets."

Then there is the interview he gave to CBS's "60 Minutes" shortly after the 9/11 attacks occurred. "I wouldn't say that the United States deserved what happened," he said by way of explaining the attacks. "But the United States' policies were an accessory to the crime that happened."

More often than not, he's pushed his audience to grapple with uncomfortable analogies in his efforts to contextualize Islamic radicalism, such as when he argued that the Ku Klux Klan was, likewise, drawn from a form of extreme religiosity.

Those statements, in the end, were not enough to convince the Bush administration that he was a militant. Feisal Abdul Rauf was dispatched on speaking tours by the past State Department on multiple occasions to help promote tolerance and religious diversity in the Arab and Muslim world. In 2007, he went to Morocco, the UAE, Qatar and Egypt on such missions, a State Department official confirmed to the Huffington Post.

In February 2006, meanwhile, he took part in a U.S.-Islamic World Forum in Doha, Qatar with Undersecretary of State Karen Hughes, a close adviser to President Bush. Months later, Feisal Abdul Rauf wrote favorably about his meeting with Hughes, noting that he wanted to further the discussion with other members of the administration.

The Huffington Post reached out to both Albright and Hughes for comment. Perhaps reflecting the political sensitivities of the situation, neither responded. Hughes' aide explained that the former Bush aide was "tied up with client travel and unable to give interviews at this time."

TriumphantAngel

prfctlefts wrote:

I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way

ugh.

even Buddhist.

nice work.

drop the 'radical'. how about just 'christians' period?

Cosmo

TriumphantAngel wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way

ugh.

even Buddhist.

nice work.

drop the 'radical'. how about just 'christians' period?

...
Radical Buddhists...I wonder if he means those violent buddhist monks in the Kung Fu movies of the 70s... because those guys were pretty violent bad-asses.
...
Same must go for those radical passivists Jehovah's Witnesses... with their violent handing out of 'The Watchtower' pamphlets.

haffajappa

Cosmo wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way

ugh.

even Buddhist.

nice work.

drop the 'radical'. how about just 'christians' period?

...
Radical Buddhists...I wonder if he means those violent buddhist monks in the Kung Fu movies of the 70s... because those guys were pretty violent bad-asses.
...
Same must go for those radical passivists Jehovah's Witnesses... with their violent handing out of 'The Watchtower' pamphlets.

Hahahaha this all made me laugh
Nothing like suicide bombing to find your zen!

81

people still grieving 9 years later....they really need to get on with their lives. yeah, don't forget, but damn.....live a little.

if they have a lease or own it, who (should) give a rats ass where they build. this is america? right? freedoms and all? right?

fuck

WaveCameCrashin

cajunkiwi wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

Ok for like the 100th time. FOWLLOW^THE^BOUNCING^BALL... No one is saying they dont' have a right to build it there. It's the location... It's not like there are'nt any Mosque in Manhattan. I think most at least I would if it were like 1/2 a mile from groun zero would be fine with it.. Even the govenor of NY offered them land to build somewhere else and he was going to give them the land. Hasn't the thought crossed anybody's mind as far as why this emam want's to build this mosque/community center right there. Why not somewhere else. I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way.. IMHO i feel that he is trying to provoke people and I think a lot of people are clearly forgetting the tragedy of 911 and how many people are still grieving.. Alsoi I feel that we have been more tolerant than anybody when it comes muslims.
Just look at that highschool in Dearborn where they are having football practice from 1:00 am to 4:00 am to cater to the Muslim players because it's ramadan .Muslims are not allowed to eat or drink during the day for the 30 days of Ramadan. I mean you could look at it like it's a way to hot during the day becuase of record heat in Michigan,but give me a break. You think they would do this for any other religion ? I wouldn't bet on it. If they have then I would love to hear about it.

I'm not even giving you a bouncing ball to follow - I'm going to number this response:

1. What makes half a mile from Ground Zero less sacred than two blocks from Ground Zero?
2. Why does the Imam want to build it where he is planning on building it? Are you aware that the center will contain a 9/11 memorial to ALL victims of the terrorist attacks? Are you also aware that the building is currently the site of a weekly Muslim prayer group?
3. You say a lot of people are "clearly forgetting the tragedy of 911 (sic) and how many people are still grieving" - I posted something in the other thread that was started on this topic, but you did not respond to my question, so I will ask it again: how do you balance the wishes of the anti-Cordoba 9/11 families with those of the 9/11 families who are in favor of it? There is an organization of 9/11 families who are fully in favor of building the center right where it is proposed - do their opinions not count in this discussion?
4. How do the anti-mosque protests around America (not referring to the NYC building, but proposed mosques in Tennessee, Wisconsin, and California) support your statement that "...we have been more tolerant than anybody when it comes muslims (sic)."
5. You said you wouldn't bet that any other religion gets any special religion-based breaks - do you consider the fact that BYU (a Mormon school) gets allowances from the NCAA to not play on Sundays, therefore making all of its opponents schedule differently when playing them, different to a high school practicing at night for one month out of every year?

And two bonus questions:
6. What is a bigger insult to grieving 9/11 families: A) the fact that representatives of the same religion that produced the 9/11 terrorists want to build a community center two blocks from the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the fact that within that same radius you have numerous people hawking 9/11-related products trying to make money off the disaster, or C) the fact that nine years after the attacks, Ground Zero is still a hole in the ground and nothing has been rebuilt?
7. Lastly - on behalf of the people in America who don't think Muslim = terrorist, how much longer should Lower Manhattan be subjected to different rules than the rest of the country when it comes to construction? Will you still have a problem with Muslims setting up shop there in 2020? 2030? At what point are people going to get on with their lives and accept that while 9/11 was a tragedy, it can't be used as an excuse to persecute an entire religion forever?

I. I said a 1/2 mile Is fine with me. Why don't you ask the famalies that are against it and see what they say

2. No I was not aware of that....

3. Yes their opinions count..

4. I think in most cases we have,but your always going to have people like that,I have no problem with any mosqe being built,just not 2 blocks from ground zero.

5. Really?? Didnt know that either

6.I don't like the fact of people selling that kind of stuff in order to make a buck, unless of course the money is going to the families,but it's probably not..

7.Nobody is trying to persecute an entire religion. That's where you and everybody on this bored who are in favor of this cant seem to grasp.. and what different set of rules are you referring to ?

WaveCameCrashin

81 wrote:

people still grieving 9 years later....they really need to get on with their lives. yeah, don't forget, but damn.....live a little.

if they have a lease or own it, who (should) give a rats ass where they build. this is america? right? freedoms and all? right?

fuck

are'nt you Mr. sensitive :roll:

WaveCameCrashin

Cosmo wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

It's not that you don't know anything about the constituion,it goes bak to the whole idea of living and breathing. Is your car loan living and breathing ?
Words have meanings not interpretations..
The Constitution is a set of rules, and like any other set of rules, it is meant to be strict and uncompromising. Of course, the Constitution can be modified through the amendment process, but once ratified, any amendment becomes like the rest of the Constitution: rigid.

...
You seriously need to go back to your High School Government class... and pay attention this time.
The reason WHY there is an Amendment process is to CHANGE the Constitution to fit changing times. In 1776, the British Army could take over your property to quarter their troops. This is why the 3rd Amendment prohibits this... it was very important to the landowners of 1776 who drafted the Constitution.
...
And like someone else asked... really? A Car Loan?
Work on your metaphors, too.

really ?? no shit.. :roll: :roll: I was referring to it as living and breathing as you libs like to think as it is. and like I said" If thats the case than it's dead ".

gimmesometruth27

prfctlefts wrote:

I have no problem with any mosqe being built,just not 2 blocks from ground zero.

you are completely contradicting yourself in this sentence.

this reminds me of Rick James saying:

"i never did things just to do them. i never ground my muddy feet all over eddie murphy's couch like its something to do. i got a little more sense than that.........yeah i remember grinding my feet all over eddie murphy's couch."

pjfan021

people all over this country do things that others don't like...tough shit. People need to get over this already. it's 2 blocks away from the towers. 2 blocks. you can't even see it from where the towers were. Just because you don't think it's exactly appropriate does not negate these people's rights...so say you don't like it, fine. But for anyone to make any radical claims of terrorist funding and thumbing their noses at us just stop already! I don't like the fact that dumbasses all over the us get to own guns...but look at that. they have a constitutional right to. This entire country was founded on the principle of people able to practice their religion freely...so don't throw anymore obama is pissing on the constitution talk around here. just go look in the fucking mirror.

_

Assuming everyone is by now aware that this is really a community center, one small component of which will be a mosque... would people support the (Muslim) community center without a mosque?

gimmesometruth27

scb wrote:

Assuming everyone is by now aware that this is really a community center, one small component of which will be a mosque... would people support the (Muslim) community center without a mosque?

i doubt it. i would.

_

Here's something else I hope someone can explain to me: I keep hearing all this outrage (fueled, of course, by half-truths and conservative spin) about this community center being built in the same neighborhood as "ground zero," and people are saying shit like, "Don't they remember that day... what happened there... all the people who died??" Uh, yeah actually, we all remember very clearly what happened that day. But what is the connection between what happened that day and this community center?? :? I don't think I've seen a clear link in this part of the argument. Just because some people think it's disrespectful doesn't make it true, no matter how many people may (or may not) feel that way. So where is the concrete link?? WHAT EXACTLY makes it disrespectful, or whatever?

puremagic

prfctlefts wrote:

Ok for like the 100th time. FOWLLOW^THE^BOUNCING^BALL... No one is saying they dont' have a right to build it there. It's the location... It's not like there are'nt any Mosque in Manhattan. I think most at least I would if it were like 1/2 a mile from groun zero would be fine with it.. Even the govenor of NY offered them land to build somewhere else and he was going to give them the land. Hasn't the thought crossed anybody's mind as far as why this emam want's to build this mosque/community center right there. Why not somewhere else. I mean look if it were radical christians or Jehovah's witnesse's or even Buddhist I would feel the same way.. IMHO i feel that he is trying to provoke people and I think a lot of people are clearly forgetting the tragedy of 911 and how many people are still grieving.. Alsoi I feel that we have been more tolerant than anybody when it comes muslims.
Just look at that highschool in Dearborn where they are having football practice from 1:00 am to 4:00 am to cater to the Muslim players because it's ramadan .Muslims are not allowed to eat or drink during the day for the 30 days of Ramadan. I mean you could look at it like it's a way to hot during the day becuase of record heat in Michigan,but give me a break. You think they would do this for any other religion ? I wouldn't bet on it. If they have then I would love to hear about it.

For the 100th time, apparently, it’s not about the ‘location’ with you; it’s all about keeping the hate alive. If it’s not about hate, what’s the point in asking them to move 1 or 2 blocks, what’s the point about a Michigan school?

The fact that this terrorist site has been turned into a mythical ‘hollow ground’ issue by people like you, when first responders and workers are still being deny benefits from NYC is a joke.

You seem to forget that people from different religious backgrounds died when those planes were crashed into those buildings.

How do you think the Iraqi people feel about Fortress America? I guess tolerance goes both ways.

81

prfctlefts wrote:

81 wrote:

people still grieving 9 years later....they really need to get on with their lives. yeah, don't forget, but damn.....live a little.

if they have a lease or own it, who (should) give a rats ass where they build. this is america? right? freedoms and all? right?

fuck

are'nt you Mr. sensitive :roll:

i'm sorry if i hurt your feelings. :?

but lets be honest, if you (not we) ban this mosque, shouldn't you ban every mosque in the united states because they are too close to ground zero. i mean really, what is the difference between 2640 feet and 2640 miles. it's just some arbritary number that you (they) came up with.

once again, i say this is america and america is suppose to be about freedom of choice, religion, etc., and as long as my right does not encroach on your rights, than shouldn't be a problem. right?

maybe i missed the part about you having a right to a muslim free zone

was that sensitive enough for you, because, i'm not really a sensitive guy.

cajunkiwi

prfctlefts wrote:

cajunkiwi wrote:

7. Lastly - on behalf of the people in America who don't think Muslim = terrorist, how much longer should Lower Manhattan be subjected to different rules than the rest of the country when it comes to construction? Will you still have a problem with Muslims setting up shop there in 2020? 2030? At what point are people going to get on with their lives and accept that while 9/11 was a tragedy, it can't be used as an excuse to persecute an entire religion forever?

7.Nobody is trying to persecute an entire religion. That's where you and everybody on this bored who are in favor of this cant seem to grasp.. and what different set of rules are you referring to ?

I didn't mean actual rules in the legal sense, per se - I should've been clearer about that.

What I meant was this: you, and other opponents of Park 51, don't want the building to go up as close to Ground Zero as it is currently proposed. Your reasoning is, from what I can tell, that it is still too close to 9/11 and the terrorist attacks are still a sore point to some people in NYC.

My question was, in your opinion how much time needs to pass before it's no longer a sore point and people can just get on with their lives? How much longer will the Muslim community have to wait before they can erect a building like Park 51 without people complaining that it's too close to Ground Zero and too soon after 9/11?

The reason people on this board, and around the country/world, say it's a religion being persecuted is simple: the Muslim religion didn't commit the 9/11 attacks. Opponents of Park 51 want the entire center moved to another location, and the message that sends is that they don't want Muslims that close to Ground Zero. Why don't they want Muslims that close to Ground Zero? Because the 9/11 attackers were Muslims. In effect, that's holding the entire religion responsible for the actions of a fringe group of assholes. Opponents of Park 51 are asking the Muslim community to move their community center all because of the actions of a few members of that community.

The thing I can't wrap my head around is this: if opponents of Park 51 truly have no problems with Muslims, honestly don't hold Muslims accountable for 9/11, and understand that the terrorist attacks were caused by a fringe movement that isn't representative of the religion as a whole, then why are they so passionately against the idea of Muslims being in that area?

The analogy about the Catholic church being used on AMT is an accurate one, I believe. This is akin to if one of your children was sodomized by a Catholic priest. If a Catholic church was going to be built at the end of your street, would you accept that the priest was not representative of the church as a whole, or would you hold the entire religion accountable and say they cannot build their church so close to where your son was sodomized?

Cosmo

prfctlefts wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

It's not that you don't know anything about the constituion,it goes bak to the whole idea of living and breathing. Is your car loan living and breathing ?
Words have meanings not interpretations..
The Constitution is a set of rules, and like any other set of rules, it is meant to be strict and uncompromising. Of course, the Constitution can be modified through the amendment process, but once ratified, any amendment becomes like the rest of the Constitution: rigid.

...
You seriously need to go back to your High School Government class... and pay attention this time.
The reason WHY there is an Amendment process is to CHANGE the Constitution to fit changing times. In 1776, the British Army could take over your property to quarter their troops. This is why the 3rd Amendment prohibits this... it was very important to the landowners of 1776 who drafted the Constitution.
...
And like someone else asked... really? A Car Loan?
Work on your metaphors, too.

really ?? no shit.. :roll: :roll: I was referring to it as living and breathing as you libs like to think as it is. and like I said" If thats the case than it's dead ".

...
Sorry... fail. Go back to High School... do not pass GO... do not collect $200.00.
Living, breathing is how our Founding Fathers drafted it... so, in your eyes, they must have been 'Libs'.
They understood the laws they were drafting were vague and open to interpretation to our courts, regarding the law making process. That is WHY the amendment process was put into place... so Amercians 200 years later would not have to adhere to rigid, outdated laws.
You want an example of a Rigid set of laws? The Ten Commandments. There are no interpretations there because they come from the mouth of God.