| Author | Message | ||
     Pwnzor |
Mounting Opposition To New York Islamic Center Claiming the neighborhood where the Twin Towers once stood is sacred ground, radical conservative groups are spearheading opposition to the construction of a nearby Muslim community center, a facility that would include a swimming pool and a 9/11 memorial and be located more than two blocks from the attack site. Here are some other projects currently facing controversy: * New York—New Citibank ATM vestibule just two blocks from site of devastating financial collapse * Elizabeth, NJ—Bed, Bath, and Beyond on sacred IKEA grounds * Pearl Harbor, HI—P.F. Chang's location a reasonable cab ride away from the U.S.S. Arizona Memorial * Philadelphia—British consulate on hard-won U.S. soil * Terre Haute, IN—Frito-Lay display planned for Baesler's Market is an affront to the fact that Terre Haute was the original U.S. test market for Pringles * Culver City, CA—Comedy club built next to the site where that disaster Grown Ups was filmed * Provincetown, MA—Organic artisan cheese stand set up next to raw cashew cheese booth at farmer's market * Lakehurst, NJ—Balloon store only three miles from site of Hindenburg crash * Olathe, KS—Barnes & Noble | ||
| Whatever |
I hear Gaga is not allowed near the dog pound anymore...   | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
I also heard that Cracker Barrel has plans to open chains on MLK Drive in over 9 major cities. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Yeah it's ridiculous that we as a country still allow the narrow minded to protest things like this. It's a house of worship it is idiotic to blame the entire religion for the acts of a few. Or perhaps we should ban Catholic churches in towns that were plagued by the inquisition or maybe outlaw religion in Salem for their part in the executions of witches. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
What towns in the US were "plagued" by the inquisition? | ||
| Drkside79 |
None, but thats not the point | ||
| Drkside79 |
How about banning every church that child abuse took place in. Better? | ||
| Hootowl |
You're missing a big piece of the picture here. Muslims build mosques at the sites of major victories. They also convert churches and synagogues into mosques after such conquests. Big controversy in India right now. The birthplace of a Hindu religious figure was converted from Hindu temple to mosque hundreds of years ago, just as the Jewish temple was in Jerusalem was, and the Hindus want it back. Seems like poking a stick in the eye of the conquered if you ask me. It is this conquest mentality that is being fought against, and that is why there is opposition to the mosque. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Drkside what are some things you would implement to keep narrow minded victory mosque protesters from speaking their voice and why not go to some of the rallies yourself to silence them yourself? | ||
| Whatever |
Might be more appropriate to not build Catholic churches within 2 to 10 blocks of a grade school...  | ||
| Sifo |
http://www.theonion.com/articles/mounting-oppositi on-to-new-york-islamic-center,17956/  | ||
| Toronto_s3 |
I was watching 60 Minutes last weekend where they interviewed the iman of that New York City Mosque. That mosque is presently operating now as I am sure most of you are aware and has been for the past 12 years. So is it offensive to some Americans that a mosque is presently operating within 2 blocks of the World Trade Center site or is it offensive that that they want to buy the building in which they are currently renting and worshiping and want to rebuild a new one? I don't see why this is so controversial for some people. At this very moment muslims are praying at a mosque within two blocks of The World Trade Center site and have been for years, get over it. Of course the fact that the mosque has to come up with 120 million to buy the building which they currently rent is another overlooked topic some people seem to forget in this whole argument. Do any of you think they will be able to come up with that money? I think the odds are slim to none myself. The 60 Minutes piece then went to the Pentagon where there is a multifaith religious room at the exact site where the third plane crashed. Of course Muslims use that room to pray 3 times a day but I don't know why anybody isn't offended by that sacrilege. Shouldn't the Pentagon crash site and it's religious center be exclusive of muslims also? A general at the Pentagon was asked the question why he didn't find it offensive that muslims would pray at the exact same site where a plane hijacked by muslims crashed into the Pentagon. His response was "Because they are Americans." I would like to ask some of guys another question. What would be the appropriate distance to build a mosque away from the Twin Tower site? Four blocks, a mile, three miles? What distance is too close to the Twin Tower site. If a muslim group wanted to build on the Twin Tower site that would be offensive. Two blocks away seems fairly innocuous. | ||
| Aesquire |
it's ridiculous that we as a country still allow the narrow minded to protest things like this. Actually that's one of the things that makes us great. Now, I don't like the screw-you mosque, & I don't care if it's 2 blocks, 5 miles or in the direct path of the falling airplane parts as religious fanatics slaughtered thousands of innocent people in protest of our being free. ( it is, in fact, in that last location ) The flaming jerks who want this symbol of domination over all to be glorified in that location, to be dedicated on the anniversary of that attack, funded by people who approved of that attack, have every right IN THIS COUNTRY to do so. They are still jerks. Now, I'm not likely to take a single second of my day to protest the renovation of a building in NYC into a symbol of hatred and terror. Not my bag. I do, however, support free people having the right to so protest. If anyone brings back "the burning times", no matter if it's the Imam & his fellows desiring the screw you mosque's domination, or the people protesting his actions, I stand against that completely. I ask you which group, honestly, do YOU believe most likely to do so? | ||
| Reindog |
Pwnzor: Why did you stir up the muck?????? Toronto and Darkness: this subject has been beaten to death in another lengthy Badweb thread. If you don't understand why most Americans find the Cordoba Mosque....I mean the WTC Victory Mosque... I mean the Islamic Recreation Center offensive by now, then you either are incapable of reading or you are a troll. This issue will NOT go away just because some Bleeding Heart Liberals choose to bury their head in the sand. | ||
| Aesquire |
Toronto s3, I have no problem with someone building a church, of any religion, anywhere they want. Except. When the "church" is supposed to be a victory monument over others faiths, celebrating the slaughter of innocents, and domination of that faith over all others. That does, of course, put me in opposition of a few other structures built on this planet. Oh, well, it's not the only thing that I don't like. The fact that P.F. Chang's frozen dinners have too much sodium, now THAT's something to protest! ( oops, sorry, I forgot that was the First Lady's cause, not mine.... ) (Message edited by aesquire on October 01, 2010) | ||
| Johnnylunchbox |
Eventually someone comes out on top. | ||
| Toronto_s3 |
Reindog and Aesquire. Sorry guys I didn't realize that this issue had been discussed previously on BadWeb. I only come on the site once every couple of weeks so I guess I missed that thread. But I do think I am capable of reading Reindog. If I was capable of typing then logic would proceed that I was capable of reading but thanks for the vote of mental competency there. Also I wasn't aware that the "Cordoba Mosque" was a mosque that celebrated what happened on 9/11, the celebration of the slaughter of innocents, and would be a muslim shrine to victory and domination of that faith over all others. Thanks for making that clear to me. Although I hope you are not speaking for most American's when you say that. I was hoping that most American's would be far more rational and intelligent than what you have stated, but what do I know. I'm just looking from the outside in. Don't you think that it's quite uncanny that the Cordoba mosque would have been in operation for a decade prior to 9/11 so close to the World Trade Center where those fanatics crashed those planes. Do you think the members of the mosque were in collusion with Bin Laden the entire time? It sounds sort of outrageous to me but anything is possible I guess. What I find sort of hypocritical about the whole thing is that those of you who oppose the construction of a new mosque seem to have no issues with the operation of the current mosque at the VERY SAME SITE, TWO BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER DISASTER. If muslims have a mosque there now what does it matter if they have a new one there in the future? What gives with some of you guys? You bitch and whine about crap but you don't do squat about any of it. Don't you think you should be protesting the Cordoba mosque that is currently operating there? To oppose the proposal of a future mosque but to tolerate the operation of the current one seems pretty backhanded. How can any of you guys be so self righteous? As my last comment I would like to add that any of you who have travelled to Portugal or Spain will have certainly noticed many Catholic churches with examples of muslim architecture incorporated into them, domes and more specifically minarets. Of course Spain and Portugal were predominantly Moorish (muslim) regions from about 600AD to about 1400AD and of course the muslims there built hundreds if not thousands of mosques across what is present day Portugal and Spain. When Christian influences began to dominate in the late 1400's the Moor's converted or fled and of course, the muslim mosques were converted into Catholic churches, many of which are still in operation today. Of course, in the early 1500's, the Inquisition began which was aimed mostly at Jew's and Muslims who had overtly converted to Christianity but were thought to be practicing their faiths secretly. I wonder if any of those muslims persecuted during the Inquisition looked at the christian Catholic churches as "victory monument(s)over other faiths, celebrating the slaughter of innocents, and domination of that faith over all others" | ||
| Blake |
>>> I ask you which group, honestly, do YOU believe most likely to do so? BOOM! Toronto, Your ignorance is impressive. Islamism is no mere religion. It is totalitarianism. Wake up and educate yourself. Or learn to like sharia. | ||
| Littlebuggles |
Interesting discussion. My question main question in this discussion is regarding this term: "radical conservatives"? Doesn't make sense to me... I suppose the implication is understood, but when did conservative ideals become radical? The headline perhaps should read: "Radical Muslims plan to re-dedicate their house of worship, near the site of the Twin Towers on 9/11." Wouldn't that be more accurate? I mean it's hard to make a short, accurate, eye catching headline out of: "Radical Muslims plan to dedicate their new house of worship, near the site of the Twin Towers (built where their old house of worship was, even before the 9/11 attacks by Muslim Extremist Terrorists took place) on 9/11." But it's funny how in this world of political correctness we can point the finger at the middle conservatives that make up a large part of the US and call them extreme, or radical and it's okay (then we all sit quietly, rather than risk being labeled a radical conservative too). If we called those wishing to build their new mosque radical, well that's gonna bring all kinds of angst and hate from the liberals. And they (the liberals) can become loud, angry, rude, and mean; and usually do when called on a point like this. Good way to keep the quiet conservatives quiet, rather having the majority of the population raise their voice in their "radically conservative" discontent. I do think if the mosque has been there, well fine. But I think to dedicate it, or re-dedicate it, or dedicate the new construction etc... on 9/11 might be rather radical and perhaps looking for a fight... Those of you who think the whole thing is a bunch of noise over nothing, do you see my point, and if so, do you disagree? | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Pwnzor, I laughed my socks off, thanks. If the standards some wish to apply to Mosques & Ground Zero was applied to all religions, there wouldn't be a Church left in Belfast or any place of worship at all in Jerusalem. I see no reason why peaceful law-abiding Muslims shouldn't worship where they already have been for 12 years. As for the money, it's pocket change to the Saudi's. There's a vast difference between radical Islamist fundamentalism & the basic Muslim faith, let's not forget. The overwhelming vast majority of Muslims are the same as the overwhelming vast majority of every other religion, they just want to get on peacefully with their lives & worship in their own fashion. I agree though that it'd be insensitive to re-dedicate or whatever it is on that particular day though. No more so than the Orange Order parades through Catholic areas in Northern Ireland, to my mind. But then I'm a very tolerant person. The people who are making such a fuss about this issue, have done themselves no favours either, if they'd just shut up the whole thing would just have slipped by unnoticed & the radicals wouldn't have got the the ammunition from the publicity feeding frenzy that they were looking for & got. They can now stand back & say "You see, they say they're for freedom but they're not really" But that's the age we live in. As the late great Dave Allen used to say at the end of his shows, "Goodnight, & may your God go with you." | ||
| Slaughter |
I think it's time for the Anglicans to burn the Baptist heretics at the stake - once again for old times' sake. | ||
| Sifo |
This is the first time I've heard a claim that this building was being used as a Mosque prior to 9/11. This Imam was Imam at a nearby Mosque prior to 9/11. The have been using this building illegally for a while now as a Mosque. I didn't see the 60 Minutes thing so I can't comment on if the Imam has a new story, or if Toronto just got the story wrong. Either way it's a new revision to history. There's a vast difference between radical Islamist fundamentalism & the basic Muslim faith, let's not forget. There's a vast difference between moderate Muslims and the basic Muslim faith. The Muslim faith as it comes from Mecca is the radical form of Islam. Your claim is the equivalent of saying that the Pope doesn't represent the Catholic religion. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
What? Sorry you're wrong there, there are different forms of Islam just as there are different forms of Christianity. The pope may represent Catholics but I think you'll find a lot of opposition to saying he represents all Christians. I may not have explained my point as well as I might have, but the main point of it is that apart from the relatively few extremists most Muslims are as perfectly happy to live & let live as everybody else. I'm no theologian though, I just base my opinion on what the people I know from various faiths tell me. | ||
| Sifo |
Well not all Christians follow the Pope because not all Christians are Catholic. All practicing Catholics do follow what the Pope says though. On the other hand all practicing Muslims do face Mecca to pray. They are also supposed to make the trip to Mecca. Sure there are going to be non-practicing Muslims that don't adhere to this, just as there are Catholics that don't adhere to everything the Pope says. So I guess the argument must be that "good" Catholics follow the Pope, but "good" Muslims are extremists. I suppose the argument could also be made that only a relatively few number Christians took part in the Crusades, therefore the Crusades wasn't worth noting. Nothing to see here folks... Just move along... | ||
| Toronto_s3 |
Blah Blah Blake. Ignorant? How many time have you used that word to try and shut down posters on this board? It must be your favourite word. You should get a new one from the thesaurus because ignorant is getting a little long in the tooth. Blake do you ever have anything constructive to add to conversations on this board other than that people who don't blindly follow your neo con, right wing agenda are ignorant? I would love to know Blake what your solution to the islamic issue in America is. You believe in the constitution I assume, so I would imagine that you believe in freedom of religion practice whatever that may be. Should the United States ban Islam within it's borders Blake? I would love to know what your solution is here. You talk a bunch of crap on this board but you never offer any constructive agenda. Typical, hypocrite. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Nothing to see here folks... Just move along... To copy Court, that's an accurate statement.  | ||
| Sifo |
Toronto, Calling you ignorant on this seems to be quite accurate. Your claim "That mosque is presently operating now as I am sure most of you are aware and has been for the past 12 years." is simply wrong. In September, 2001 that building was still the Burlington Coat Factory store. From a pretty interesting article on the subject... http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2 5941
Sure doesn't sound like it was operating as a Mosque for 12 years. Someone isn't telling the truth. That's a pretty bad way to start a conversation. If it was the Imam who isn't telling the truth, then that's even worse. It would do you some good to learn a bit about how Islam has built Mosques as a symbol of conquest in the past. The name Cordoba Project wasn't selected randomly. | ||
| Aptbldr |
 | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Like it Scott.  | ||
| Reindog |
Toronto, You are consistently rude and you have lost your audience and your debating position. Badmouthing BadDad isn't going to get you anywhere, so I suggest you knock it off and go ride your Buell. |
