|
|
Post by Mahnarch on Aug 24, 2010 12:25:58 GMT -5
Wow. That's a lot of reading....
[I've been here for about 3 hours, now]
There are no peaceful Islamists. That's like saying "Peaceful White Supremacist" or "Moderate Democrat".
-I was beaten on the Pearl Harbor thing.
-ACLU was a good thing in the past but, in the last few decades they've become obsolete - just like the UAW or other unions since we now have OSHA.
-This Mosque (which it is) is only being built there to rub our faces in it. That's why the Imam won't even consider moving it to another location.
-In Arabia, non-Muslims can't even enter a Mosque because "their infidel feet will contaminate the land" (which means no basketball for Possum when he goes to visit his friends at the Mosque).
-What if Nazis wanted to build a memorial on Long Island where their troupe of spies were apprehended during double-ya double-ya two? [bespitzeln]
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Aug 24, 2010 12:39:14 GMT -5
I can't see that as a good thing no matter how open minded I try to be. I just can't see this as right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bartleby, the Scrivener on Aug 24, 2010 15:35:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Jersey on Aug 24, 2010 18:58:38 GMT -5
"Robert Schlesinger is opinion editor at U.S. News and World Report, a liberal blogger on Thomas Jefferson Street and the Huffington Post, and writes a biweekly column for U.S. News." No other comment necessary. |
|
|
|
Post by Bartleby, the Scrivener on Aug 24, 2010 20:54:43 GMT -5
I really don't think it matters. There is a little commentary but that doesn't constitute ignoring what he says. If you don't agree with him, fine; I'll take out all the BS as this is the only part I think should be read anyway.
"The plans are for it to have fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court), a 500-seat auditorium, a restaurant and a cooking school, exhibition space, a library, art studios, a 9/11 memorial...and childcare facilities... And it's also going to house a mosque."
It is also just going to look like a typical building of lower Manhattan. Which again, is why I feel the victory mosque theory is bogus. If you walked past not knowing any better you would not assume this building was an Islamic F-U to Americans. It is a reasonable to understand that this could offend some people that is why I think they should just forget it as 9/11 is still a very touchy subject. But, as Americans they have a right to build it and I'm not going to try and stop them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jersey on Aug 25, 2010 19:37:03 GMT -5
I won't repond to Possum directly, but here is an article from me that details the argument from the other side. "Having proclaimed themselves "healers" of the 9/11 breach, the developers have opened a new wound that threatens to further isolate Muslims. Even if one charitably assumes they were caught off guard by the opponents, their hard-hearted determination to press on raises serious suspicions about their motives." "The project's co-founder, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, a State Department envoy traveling in the Gulf region, went so far as to say 'The fact we are getting this kind of attention is a sign of success.' " "Still, it's only a twist on a common theme for supporters -- we have to show the world what fine folk Americans are, or else. You know, hit us, we'll apologize and hand you the keys to our house just to prove how nice we are, or else the world won't like us." "By digging in, they are passing up a chance to build the very bridge they claimed they wanted while reinforcing the darkest concerns about why they picked this site." www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/08/25/michael-goodwin-ground-zero-mosque-bloomberg-ramadan-dinner-paterson-dolan/ |
|
|
|
Post by Classicblast on Aug 27, 2010 0:16:34 GMT -5
Obviously I don't condone a passenger stabbing a taxi driver for just being a Muslim any more than I would the other way around. I don't think it's good taste or a good decision to build this facility Mosque or whatever they might call it at that location.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Aug 27, 2010 7:34:04 GMT -5
They have as much right to put a cultural centre a couple blocks away from Ground Zero as Jews do to put a synagogue near a bank, or Catholics do to put a church near an elementary school.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Aug 27, 2010 13:19:33 GMT -5
You might say that Slayzie but Catholic crusaders did not raid an elementary school a few blocks away from where they're building a church. Jewish radicals did not bomb a bank across the street from where they intend to build a Synagogue. Muslim terrorists did bomb the towers a few blocks from where the Mosque is going up. There is a difference.
|
|
Kimm
Moderator 
Posts: 2,993
|
Post by Kimm on Aug 28, 2010 18:17:25 GMT -5
There is a big difference. That was a type of crusade. The target was against the United States but they also hit the pentagon, and its believed the other plane re hijacked by passengers was headed for either the White House or the Capital.
Sometimes rights are violated by a vile act.
|
|
|
|
Post by Demona on Aug 28, 2010 19:58:23 GMT -5
Omfg, Slayzie always butts into topics about things he wouldn't understand because he's not freaking from here! They have a right to have a center. For the reasons listed it would be a bad idea in that f*cking spot. END OF.  |
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Aug 30, 2010 13:41:11 GMT -5
It's a good point that outside the USA the impact of the tragic event is somewhat watered down. Not fully I know but enough that it might be harder for those out of the country to see how we feel.
I was on a double shift and we were called to a line up and told that a plane hit the tower and the pentagon and another plane crashed. The parent company may dispatch workers if asked to by the government and that may be us.
That did not happen but we were made aware that it could.
I had the job of explaining this to Jason who at that time was only 4. Then to think there's conspiracy theorists, people saying that the war is unnecessary and that a Muslim mosque a few blocks away is fine just doesn't set right with me at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Aug 31, 2010 16:04:52 GMT -5
Omfg, Slayzie always butts into topics about things he wouldn't understand because he's not freaking from here! They have a right to have a center. For the reasons listed it would be a bad idea in that f*cking spot. END OF. I don't understand why I have to be from the USA to answer a simple question of human rights. The United States constitution provides the right of freedom of religion to all its citizens. This means that Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, and everyone else are allowed to follow their beliefs, worship their god/s, and so on. I don't see anything in there about freedom of religion being retracted if they want to worship near a site where someone associated with them did something bad. I understand that it may concern some people, but that doesn't change the fact that they have every right to go ahead with this. And, just for the record,  |
|
|
|
Post by Bartleby, the Scrivener on Aug 31, 2010 19:11:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Jersey on Aug 31, 2010 21:09:20 GMT -5
I've posted the same argument over and over. Yet, it goes right the heads of the members that support the mosque and just don't want to listen.
I'm very, very tired of saying the same thing over and over. This isn't about freedom of religion. Yes, this is America and they have the right to build where they want.
But the issue is the location and the fact that it seems to have to go there without any other possibly of recourse or alternative. Add to that their insistence of putting it there, along with them refusing to budge when offered alternatives, including taxpayer funded ones. This, to me, puts up a red flag. it's a problem because they seem to insist on it going in that specific location, no matter what.
They are being incendiary. They are provoking anger. And they are doing it on purpose. You can't tell me that the opposite is true, because one Muslim cab driver was already stabbed and a Mosque project down south was already burned. The strength of American pride and memory is being seriously tested, and its not something I feel will go too well. I believe in America wholeheartedly, but someone will give in somewhere. That's what I fear the most. And that's what they want.
Liberals can constantly hammer away at the idea that people opposed to the mosque are restricting religious freedom, when it isn't about that. They have been asked, over and over and over again, to please move the mosque elsewhere. Remember, they aren't being told to move it, they are being asked. Not because Americans don't like Muslims and feel they shouldn't be allowed to build, but that they should be considerate enough to respect the memory of 9/11, the families that lost loved ones, and the brave men and women that died trying to save those who were in peril.
And they refuse. I could care less where they build the mosque. If I was against the mosque being constructed, period, I would have said so. But I don't care that it's constructed. I just don't want it there, as does the majority of the rest of the country. But they don't have the consideration to move it. By digging their heels in and refusing, they are raising ire and making people wonder the eternal question. Why? Why won't they move it?
But it's ok. I can say the same thing over and over again and I'll be ignored and/or passed over by some. But my argument and point of view are plain to those who are open, and I'm sure it also puts it down for those who would like to argue their point, but don't quite know how to put it in words.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slayzie on Sept 1, 2010 9:52:19 GMT -5
Did you ever entertain the thought that maybe they lost loved ones in the September 11th attacks? The passengers on those planes and the workers in those towers were not exclusively white evangelical Christians. Plenty of people from all kinds of religious and ethnic backgrounds lost their lives that day.
And based on what I've read, I understand the planned cultural centre includes a memorial to that tragic event. If they were building it to gloat, why would they honour the victims of the incident you claim they're celebrating?
As for "why won't they move it", why should they? They have done nothing wrong, and the knee-jerk reactions of uptight fascists are not going to change that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil on Sept 1, 2010 15:23:46 GMT -5
'Freedom or religion,' Possum? This from a guy who doesn't believe in religion at all.
Ok I'm putting you on a little bit. I get what you're saying your freedom is not to believe at all.
Slayer I don't think anybody assumes that Muslims were not killed in the 9/11 attacks. As a matter of fact, the hijackers died in the raid. So there are some right there.
I think if a Nazi camp was placed across from a synagogue that might be considered bad taste too.
Perhaps the current leaders of the Nazi camp weren't even born at the time of the original Nazi invasions and had nothing to do with it. Its still not very appropriate.
Does the Ku Klux Klan have the right to rally during Louis Farrakhan's march? Why not elect David Duke President?
See, once you've crossed certain lines you lose some of your rights and freedoms.
Ex convicts are ineligible for some jobs under that guideline too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jersey on Sept 1, 2010 20:38:36 GMT -5
The passengers on those planes and the workers in those towers were not exclusively white evangelical Christians. Plenty of people from all kinds of religious and ethnic backgrounds lost their lives that day. You're treading on the ground of calling me a racist. Why don't you just go ahead and do it? It's what liberals do best. The reason why I'm asking you to do it is because it might prove to me that you're thinking only in terms of race only. Besides, I've never even mentioned anywhere in this topic whatsoever the racial or religious makeup of the victims. Only the victims themselves, and the holy war their murderers are waging on America. And based on what I've read, I understand the planned cultural centre includes a memorial to that tragic event. If they were building it to gloat, why would they honour the victims of the incident you claim they're celebrating? According to the opinion (somewhere in the 70s in percentage) of the majority of American pollsters, they would be truly honoring the victims of 9/11 by moving it elsewhere. But by digging their heels in and refusing to move it upon request by the public (NOT DEMAND), it makes it look like something quite the contrary. And that, to me, suggests an ulterior motive. As for "why won't they move it", why should they?  I think that picture exemplifies the reason. Most Americans believe the mosque is offensive to the memory of what happened that day, and that feeling of offense was only deepened upon their refusal to move the location by request. It causes suspicion about what their true motives might be, along with the controversial moves and statements the man behind the project has made and done. You can hurl the same argument at me over and over again, and you will only get the same response over and over again until it sticks. It isn't about because of their religion. It isn't because they are being told to do it. that would be fascist, communist, socialist, whatever. It's because they refuse to move it upon request. That is the problem. I can hit you over the head with the same argument time after time, but I might just be wasting it in the end. But that's fine with me, because I don't give up. They have done nothing wrong, and the knee-jerk reactions of uptight fascists are not going to change that. What they are doing wrong is not the construction of the mosque. It is refusing to move it at the request of 9/11 families. And by the way, you should look up the real meaning of fascism and familiarize yourself with the fact that all fascist governments that have ever existed have been arms of left wing liberalism and Marxism. The Nazi party, built on total government control, mass extermination, and political suppression was left wing, not right wing as liberals like to believe. Call it shifting the blame. They make it an art. So direct your accusations of "fascist suppressor, fascist suppressor!" at the proper group please. They didn't call it National Socialist German Worker's Party because it wanted limited government and responsible fiscal decisions. |
|
