The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
So About This Cordoba House https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3701 |
Page 1 of 13 |
Author: | Rodahn [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | So About This Cordoba House |
(What's a Cordoba House, you may ask? Check it out.) I sense great amounts of fail if its construction passes. Now, before I continue, I just want to make it clear that I am all for peaceful and fruitful foreign relations, as well as tolerance of other cultures, but seriously . . . a Muslim heritage center two blocks from Ground Zero NYC? Not only would that construction site have to be guarded 24/7, but once/if it finally is completed, round-the-clock security would have to continue. I mean, I'm not saying that its proposers are disingenuous in wanting to promote understanding and good relations, but I can easily see where many would interpret it as "rubbing salt in the wound." And you think someone with a chip on their shoulder the size of 09/11 won't try some violent move against it, creating (potentially) more deaths. And thus the cycle continues. Anyway, I see its proposed purpose as good, just its choice of location to be very bad. |
Author: | Uncle Fester [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Well that shrine to Emperor Hirohito at Pearl Harbor went over so well... I am more upset that nothing has been done with ground zero. it is maddening. |
Author: | Elmarnieh [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Turn it back into a business district. |
Author: | Monte [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Why is an Islamic cultural center rubbing salt in the wound? Are you trying to argue that all of Islam was responsible for the terror attacks on 9-11? Did any Americans who were also Muslims get killed on that day? Were the Muslim victims on that day any different than any of the other New Yorkers? There are over 3,000 Muslims serving on active duty in our armed forces. I suppose they should have less rights under the first amendment? Anyone who thinks this is rubbing salt in the wounds is just painting all of Islam with an extremist brush. Here is Jefferey Goldberg on the subject - Quote: The Cordoba Initiative, which is headed by an imam named Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an enemy of al Qaeda, no less than Rudolph Giuliani and the Anti-Defamation League are enemies of al Qaeda. Bin Laden would sooner dispatch a truck bomb to destroy the Cordoba Initiative's proposed community center than he would attack the ADL, for the simple reason that Osama's most dire enemies are Muslims. And Micheal Bloomberg's speech - Quote: "On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of first responders heroically rushed to the scene and saved tens of thousands of lives. More than 400 of those first responders did not make it out alive. In rushing into those burning buildings, not one of them asked, 'What God do you pray to?' (Bloomberg's voice cracks here a little as he gets choked up.) 'What beliefs do you hold?'
"The attack was an act of war, and our first responders defended not only our city, but our country and our constitution. We do not honor their lives by denying the very constitutional rights they died protecting. We honor their lives by defending those rights and the freedoms that the terrorists attacked. |
Author: | Rodahn [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Me personally? No. I said I can see where some might think that. Of course I know that not all Muslims are terrorists. However Joe/Jane Average NYer (or especially those personally affected by 09/11) might not feel that way. If I personally were in NY and saw this, I would have no problems or hard feelings, but I think many would and thus think it is a bad idea. |
Author: | Wwen [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I don't see a problem with it. I have a bigger problem with all the bullshit that's gone into the shrine or whatever they've wasted money failing to build at the site. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Monte wrote: Why is an Islamic cultural center rubbing salt in the wound? Are you trying to argue that all of Islam was responsible for the terror attacks on 9-11? Did any Americans who were also Muslims get killed on that day? Were the Muslim victims on that day any different than any of the other New Yorkers? There are over 3,000 Muslims serving on active duty in our armed forces. I suppose they should have less rights under the first amendment? Anyone who thinks this is rubbing salt in the wounds is just painting all of Islam with an extremist brush. Here is Jefferey Goldberg on the subject - Quote: The Cordoba Initiative, which is headed by an imam named Feisal Abdul Rauf, is an enemy of al Qaeda, no less than Rudolph Giuliani and the Anti-Defamation League are enemies of al Qaeda. Bin Laden would sooner dispatch a truck bomb to destroy the Cordoba Initiative's proposed community center than he would attack the ADL, for the simple reason that Osama's most dire enemies are Muslims. And Micheal Bloomberg's speech - Quote: "On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of first responders heroically rushed to the scene and saved tens of thousands of lives. More than 400 of those first responders did not make it out alive. In rushing into those burning buildings, not one of them asked, 'What God do you pray to?' (Bloomberg's voice cracks here a little as he gets choked up.) 'What beliefs do you hold?' "The attack was an act of war, and our first responders defended not only our city, but our country and our constitution. We do not honor their lives by denying the very constitutional rights they died protecting. We honor their lives by defending those rights and the freedoms that the terrorists attacked. Because among the many muslims that were supportive of the 9/11 attacks, this looks like a victory. Islam has a long history of taking over sites that are significant to non-muslims, then building mosques there and claiming them as moslem holy sites. The Hagia Sophia and Temple Mount are the two most egregarious examples. Why exactly is a mosque needed at that particuar area? Would anyone build a church their? I doubt it. This is getting defended only by people who secretly want it to happen as an insult to America. |
Author: | Monte [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
So, we should be infringing on our citizens rights because people who already hate us will like this? It doesn't matter why it's needed, although it's more of a community center than a mosque. Why is any church needed? And who gets to say which ones are and are not needed? And why should this religious group be treated any differently? Any way you slice it, opposition this is about painting all Muslims as extremists. Micheal Bloomberg has the right of it. |
Author: | Rynar [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Why is it, do you think, that no other religions wanted to attempt to build any sort of worship centers there? |
Author: | Taskiss [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I didn't have an opinion before, but monte came out in favor of it, so it's gotta be **** up USA hatin' **** ... so now I'm against it. It makes me a good person to oppose Monte.* *Ok, so I'm the anti-Monte. Just for this post though, as opposed to the REAL Monte who thinks he is a good person 'cause he is anti-USA. |
Author: | Rorinthas [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
There are some questions about his quotes, concerning religious tolerance, forcing Sharia law on Americans, wether or not america deserved 9/11 attacks, and refusal to condemn terrorist groups like Hamas For summary see link snippet Quote: BRADLEY (Ed 60 minutes): Are — are — are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?
Imam ABDUL RAUF: I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened, but the United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened. BRADLEY: OK. You say that we’re an accessory? Imam ABDUL RAUF: Yes. BRADLEY: How? Imam ABDUL RAUF: Because we have been an accessory to a lot of — of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, it — in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA. |
Author: | Micheal [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:46 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
For the record, while I'm not in full agreement with Monte, I see no problem with the Mosque going in. People have freedom to worship, and if they have the money to build the mosque I see no reason why it should not happen. I also do not believe those that participated in the 9/11 attack were representative of mainstream Islam, they were extremists, they were stupid, confused, and easily misled. Hell, the night before the attack they were out boozing it up and hiring hookers, not good Hajj men in the least. While I can see good that can come from this, I can also see the negative reactions and possible evil reactions as put forth by the posters here. It is a controversial topic, and the motives of the builders may not be as innocent as they say. They could be trying to set a world stage for American anti-Islamic behavior. Still, let them build, see where it goes. Hopefully, the intentions are as peaceful as the builders state. |
Author: | Taskiss [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Micheal wrote: For the record, while I'm not in full agreement with Monte, I see no problem with the Mosque going in. I saw an interesting parallel somewhere, at some time in the past...."I'll welcome a mosque in NY when a church is welcome in Mecca". I'm neither here nor there on this topic, I just find the back and forth interesting. From a random assertion on the internet (large grains of salt required) its illegal to build a church in Mecca. |
Author: | Nitefox [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Might as well build a statue of Hitler at Arlington then...don't want to offend any Germans. Godwins! |
Author: | Nitefox [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: So About This Cordoba House |
Author: | Ladas [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Monte wrote: So, we should be infringing on our citizens rights because people who already hate us will like this? I wonder if the rich in this country ask this question. |
Author: | Micheal [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Nitefox wrote: Might as well build a statue of Hitler at Arlington then...don't want to offend any Germans. Godwins! Different level of offense, by a few factors. We aren't building the mosque, the people who will worship there are building it. How far exactly off ground zero could a mosque be built and not offend someone? Do citizens in America have the right to freedom of religion? |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Monte wrote: So, we should be infringing on our citizens rights because people who already hate us will like this? It infringes their rights to not let them build a mosque on that particular spot? Amazing. Quote: It doesn't matter why it's needed, although it's more of a community center than a mosque. Why is any church needed? And who gets to say which ones are and are not needed? And why should this religious group be treated any differently? No one said anything about it not being needed; the point is that it does not need to be right there. There's no reasona church should be there either. Quote: Any way you slice it, opposition this is about painting all Muslims as extremists. Micheal Bloomberg has the right of it. No, any way you slice it, that's a load of bullshit. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:35 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Micheal wrote: Nitefox wrote: Might as well build a statue of Hitler at Arlington then...don't want to offend any Germans. Godwins! Different level of offense, by a few factors. We aren't building the mosque, the people who will worship there are building it. How far exactly off ground zero could a mosque be built and not offend someone? Do citizens in America have the right to freedom of religion? They do, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with freedom of religion. Someone "being offended" has nothing to do with it. It's about not letting extremist muslims use the building as a reason to claim victory. It doesn't matter if the particular muslims that want to build it aren't extremists; that will not stop it being used for propaganda anyhow. Either the muslims that want to build it aren't aware of this, in which case they're naive; or they do and aren't as moderate as they'd like to claim. Freedom of religion does not entitle you to build a house of worship anywhere you damn well please. Maybe we ought to put a Crystal Cathedral right on the Mall in D.C. I mean, we can't infringe people's freedom of religion, right? I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that NYC already has a fairly high concentration of mosques compared to the national average. I don't think muslims are lacking places to worship in major cities. |
Author: | darksiege [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
Monte wrote: So, we should be infringing on our citizens rights because people who already hate us will like this? I have seen others (myself included) ask you this very same question when it comes to taking money from others and giving it to others who did not earn it themselves, you once again prove that your hypocrisy knows no bounds. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:45 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
darksiege wrote: Monte wrote: So, we should be infringing on our citizens rights because people who already hate us will like this? I have seen others (myself included) ask you this very same question when it comes to taking money from others and giving it to others who did not earn it themselves, you once again prove that your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Remember, this is the same guy that thought Christian radio stations should be forced to pay for airtime for everyone else's religious message. |
Author: | FarSky [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
I hate this idea. I really do. And any self-respecting, decent Muslim should have the decency to oppose this, for the shame and tarnishment that this mosque's placement brings. That said, what is the good reason to disallow it? Something articulable, something based in law. If that cannot be provided, then it should pass (though ideally, there would be such an outcry from within the Muslim community itself that the builders would be forced to reconsider it themselves). By the way, the "more a community center than a mosque" line is hilarious. |
Author: | Diamondeye [ Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: |
FarSky wrote: I hate this idea. I really do. And any self-respecting, decent Muslim should have the decency to oppose this, for the shame and tarnishment that this mosque's placement brings. That said, what is the good reason to disallow it? Something articulable, something based in law. If that cannot be provided, then it should pass (though ideally, there would be such an outcry from within the Muslim community itself that the builders would be forced to reconsider it themselves). By the way, the "more a community center than a mosque" line is hilarious. That's actually an excellent point, and one I haven't seen anyone else make. |
Author: | darksiege [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 12:14 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Diamondeye wrote: Remember, this is the same guy that thought Christian radio stations should be forced to pay for airtime for everyone else's religious message. Yes; however, that is douchebaggery... I am talking about hypocrisy right now. Big difference. This one has less letters. |
Author: | Wwen [ Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:22 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: So About This Cordoba House |
Nitefox wrote: I'm sure all Muslims agree with this guy in another country. Just like all Christians in the US agree with the Pope. Why would a "self-respecting Muslim" feel a mosque brings shame and tarnishment? (New word!) |
Page 1 of 13 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |