One New Yorker's perspective on the "Ground Zero mosque"

[likearock 2]

When George W. Bush addressed Congress 9 days after 9/11, he said:

Quote

I also want to speak tonight directly to Muslims throughout the world. We respect your faith. It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans, and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends. Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah. The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself. The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends.

Strong words but smart ones since it is obvious to anyone that the vast majority of Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11 and were just as horrified by it as the rest of the world.

But words are just words and actions will always speak louder, especially in situations where it's easy to pay lip service to a certain ideal.

We say that we can separate Islamic terrorism from the religion at large but do our actions support that? We have been given a chance to act on those words by allowing a moderate Islamic mosque to open near Ground Zero. What a great opportunity for us to show the Islamic world that, in spite of the terrible aftermath of that day, we do not hold them accountable for it. To show we recognize that Osama bin Laden has not succeeded in "hijacking Islam itself".

Instead, we hear our so-called "leaders" comparing the mosque to the Nazis putting signs next to the holocaust museum or the Japanese establishing memorials at Pearl Harbor. Those comparisons only make sense if we believe that Islam, not al Qaeda, attacked us on 9/11. In fact, those comparisons only feed the false narrative that Osama bin Laden has hijacked the rest of Islam.

Don't think that OBL isn't closely watching this story develop and will pounce on it for his own ends. There's nothing he'd like better than to be able to tell the Muslim world, "Look at that - American blames Islam for 9/11." Make no mistake about it, if the mosque isn't built because we can't separate Islam from al Qaeda, that is a significant victory for al Qaeda.

[Shotgun 1]

There is a proposed mosque in my area (Temecula, CA - pretty far away from Ground Zero), and it is being protested too. Seems to be mostly Christians and Republicans, saying that a mosque in our area will make us a hub for Islamic extremism, and that the Muslims are trying to shut Christianity down - stuff like that.

Sounds to me like people are just using the "Ground Zero" factor as an excuse to protest the NY mosque and get national attention for it. A lot of the people protesting would probably be against it anyway, but this way they can sound like they're not "anti-Muslim," just "anti-Muslim-near-Ground-Zero" (which sounds a little less intolerant).

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Seems to be mostly Christians and Republicans.

How can you tell? are they required to have it tattooed on their foreheads?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[marks2065 0]

Quote

When George W. Bush addressed Congress 9 days after 9/11, he said:

Quote

I also want to speak tonight directly to Muslims throughout the world. We respect your faith. It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans, and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends. Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah. The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself. The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends.

Strong words but smart ones since it is obvious to anyone that the vast majority of Muslims had nothing to do with 9/11 and were just as horrified by it as the rest of the world.

But words are just words and actions will always speak louder, especially in situations where it's easy to pay lip service to a certain ideal.

We say that we can separate Islamic terrorism from the religion at large but do our actions support that? We have been given a chance to act on those words by allowing a moderate Islamic mosque to open near Ground Zero. What a great opportunity for us to show the Islamic world that, in spite of the terrible aftermath of that day, we do not hold them accountable for it. To show we recognize that Osama bin Laden has not succeeded in "hijacking Islam itself".

Instead, we hear our so-called "leaders" comparing the mosque to the Nazis putting signs next to the holocaust museum or the Japanese establishing memorials at Pearl Harbor. Those comparisons only make sense if we believe that Islam, not al Qaeda, attacked us on 9/11. In fact, those comparisons only feed the false narrative that Osama bin Laden has hijacked the rest of Islam.

Don't think that OBL isn't closely watching this story develop and will pounce on it for his own ends. There's nothing he'd like better than to be able to tell the Muslim world, "Look at that - American blames Islam for 9/11." Make no mistake about it, if the mosque isn't built because we can't separate Islam from al Qaeda, that is a significant victory for al Qaeda.

what nobody seems to want to look into (and I don't know all the facts) is that rebuilding the catholic church that was destroyed in 911 has been blocked by the city of new york. maybe if some factsa of this come out I would understand the issue more but at this point I would have to say there seems to be something fishy going on.

[normiss 800]

Greek Orthodox.
Not Catholic.

It's on Port Authority owned land and is part of the grand plans for the entire site.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Seems to be mostly Christians and Republicans.

How can you tell?

Because dogs don't meow.

[champu 1]

Quote

What a great opportunity for us to show the Islamic world that, in spite of the terrible aftermath of that day, we do not hold them accountable for it.

Agreed.

[freethefly 6]

There are several Shinto Temples very near Pearl Harbor. Perhaps, all those who oppose American Muslims exercising their rights as American citizens should, also oppose the American Japanese for exercising their rights. I do, however find it to be in bad taste, but this is America and to deny rights to one specific group would mean that rights could be denied to any and all Americans. Which we do already for certain Americans. I do not have to like what some people do, I only have to respect their right to do what they do as long as it brings no harm to others.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Greek Orthodox.
Not Catholic.

It's on Port Authority owned land and is part of the grand plans for the entire site.

sorry on the type of religion. What was discussed on a show was that this church had been there for a hundred years and was denied because of how high the building was going to be. like I said I don't have most of the details except but a 100 year old church not getting a zoning permit to rebuild but a Mosque that may have some of the radical people like those that caused 911 gets the ok? something is fishy.

[shropshire 0]

Quote

There are several Shinto Temples very near Pearl Harbor. Perhaps, all those who oppose American Muslims exercising their rights as American citizens should, also oppose the American Japanese for exercising their rights. I do, however find it to be in bad taste, but this is America and to deny rights to one specific group would mean that rights could be denied to any and all Americans. Which we do already for certain Americans. I do not have to like what some people do, I only have to respect their right to do what they do as long as it brings no harm to others.

What do you find in bad taste and why?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

Seems to be mostly Christians and Republicans.

How can you tell? are they required to have it tattooed on their foreheads?

The tattoos are not required yet, but if the Muslims get their way....

From the news I have read about it, it is usually reported as people from the local Christian churches and some Republican groups that are doing the protesting.

[normiss 800]

As much as I regret having to use a Faux News link - it's the most info I could find and it seems the church itself is the issue.
Port Authority has it seems given them permission to rebuild. They want a different location though. Between that issue and the other property desired being owned by the NY/NJ Port Authority I think this debate could go on for years while the planned Mosque is on privately owned property.

Church

Nothing fishy here.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

What do you find in bad taste and why?

The Mosque being so near the site. I do, however respect their right to build it there. In the long (or short) run, I may change how I feel about its location. The Shinto Temples at Pearl Harbor are a good thing and were very interesting to visit. I hope that over time the Mosque near the WTC site will prove the same.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Quote

Greek Orthodox.
Not Catholic.

It's on Port Authority owned land and is part of the grand plans for the entire site.

sorry on the type of religion. What was discussed on a show was that this church had been there for a hundred years and was denied because of how high the building was going to be. like I said I don't have most of the details except but a 100 year old church not getting a zoning permit to rebuild but a Mosque that may have some of the radical people like those that caused 911 gets the ok? something is fishy.

Well first, the church, unlike the mosque, is genuinely at ground zero. That's going to complicate things.

Second, look it up before jumping to conclusions.

From an NYT article: Last July, the Port Authority and the Greek Orthodox Church announced a tentative plan to rebuild the church just east of its original site, at Liberty and Greenwich Streets. The authority agreed to provide the church with land for a 24,000-square-foot house of worship, far larger than the original, and $20 million. Since the church would be built in a park over the bomb-screening center, the authority also agreed to pay up to $40 million for a blast-proof platform and foundation.

In recent negotiations, the authority cut the size of the church slightly and told church officials that its dome could not rise higher than the trade center memorial. The church, in turn, wanted the right to review plans for both the garage with the bomb-screening center and the park, something the authority was unwilling to provide. More important, authority officials said, the church wanted the $20 million up front, rather than in stages. Officials said they feared that the church, which has raised about $2 million for its new building, would come back to the authority for more.



From FoxNews: Arey was referring to the address, about 100 yards away from the original site, where the government earlier proposed relocating the church. The Port Authority and the church announced a deal in July 2008 under which the Port Authority would grant land and up to $20 million to help rebuild the church -- in addition, the authority was willing to pay up to $40 million to construct a bomb-proof platform underneath.

Within a year, the deal fell through and talks ended -- apparently for good, according to the Port Authority.

The archdiocese and Port Authority now offer sharply conflicting accounts of where things went wrong. The Port Authority has previously claimed the church was making additional demands -- like wanting the $20 million up front and wanting to review plans for the surrounding area. They say the church can still proceed on its own if it wishes.

"The church continues to have the right to rebuild at their original site, and we will pay fair market value for the underground space beneath that building," a spokesperson with the Port Authority told Fox News.


The two situations are quite obviously non-comparable.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,991]

>but a Mosque that may have some of the radical people like those that
>caused 911 gets the ok?

Would you be OK with a church that may have some of the priests who molested kids being built near a playground or school?

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Second, look it up before jumping to conclusions.

Jakee...duuuuuuuuuuude AS IF


That is just so not gonna happen

[marks2065 0]

Quote

>but a Mosque that may have some of the radical people like those that
>caused 911 gets the ok?

Would you be OK with a church that may have some of the priests who molested kids being built near a playground or school?

yes as long as the priests are sent to jail if guilty. (just like any child molester would be)

[marks2065 0]

Quote

In recent negotiations, the authority cut the size of the church slightly and told church officials that its dome could not rise higher than the trade center memorial. The church, in turn, wanted the right to review plans for both the garage with the bomb-screening center and the park, something the authority was unwilling to provide.

there seems to be some issues that the church wants to work out but the port authority doesn't seem to want to work them out. why not the backing of the mayor and the president on this? these are the things that make me wonder what is going on.

[billvon 2,991]

>>Would you be OK with a church that may have some of the priests who
>>molested kids being built near a playground or school?

>yes as long as the priests are sent to jail if guilty.

Cool. So as long as the people responsible for 9/11 go to jail, then there's no problem with a mosque near the WTC site.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

if the mosque isn't built because we can't separate Islam from al Qaeda, that is a significant victory for al Qaeda.

I agree. Unfortunately just like we have ignorant people in Islam we have them in the US as well.

I believe if you separate, and segregate people it will only bring exactly that. The people will feel there is a general lack of trust, and it will bread hate and misunderstanding for all.


Not to mention it is unconstitutional.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 2,991]

>there seems to be some issues that the church wants to work out but
>the port authority doesn't seem to want to work them out.

Right - the church wants to move AND wants all the money up front, and now sounds like they want more money than they did originally. How much money should they be allowed to take from New Yorker's wallets?

>why not the backing of the mayor and the president on this?

Because then you would crucify him for wasting money.

[Darius11 12]

Quote

What do you find in bad taste and why?

I think the root is some still think Islam = Terrorist even if they are not aware of it. Otherwise there is no reason to think its in bad taste.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

there seems to be some issues that the church wants to work out but the port authority doesn't seem to want to work them out.

According to the church. Not according to the Port Authority. They were putting up $60M of public money to help get the church rebuilt. Not really comparable to anything that's happening with the mosque, is it?

Let's also consider, what actually has been rebuilt at Ground Zero? The whole project seems to be a bureaucratic nightmare, it's hardly as if the church has been singled out for problems and delays!

So what's more likely, the church and the Port Authority can't agree on the church's precise place and funding structure as part of an enormous and delayed public/private construction project, or there's an anti-christian, pro-muslim conspiracy reaching from the President of the USA to the Mayor of NYC to the management at the Port Authority?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Quote

What do you find in bad taste and why?

I think the root is some still think Islam = Terrorist even if they are not aware of it. Otherwise there is no reason to think its in bad taste.

I do not think that Islam equals terrorist any more than I think Catholic equals child molester.

I do not at all oppose the Mosque being built near the site. I do support their right as Americans to do so. So, "bad taste" was the wrong phrase to use. The use of "somewhat insensitive" may have been more appropriate to use in context to what I was saying.

It is not my call nor is it anyone's call on what they build on their property.

I do know a fair number of Muslims and find them to be no different than myself. I am no more a terrorist than they are. You are right that some do equate Islam with terrorism.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[regulator 0]

Quote

Quote

Seems to be mostly Christians and Republicans.

How can you tell? are they required to have it tattooed on their foreheads?

Kinda reminds me of one of the last scenes of Inglorious Basterds....