Islamic group to build mosque adjacent to ground zero

I tried searching the forums, but I apologize if this has already been treated in another thread (moderators, please feel free to close/merge as appropriate).

I was surprised there hasn't been much mention of the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque" here in the Backroom. Technically speaking, the mosque will be constructed two blocks away, as a 9 story building looking down on Ground Zero in Manhatten. All the same, I personally understand why people have issues with this.

Traditionally, muslims have built mosques on sites where they conquered a landmark from an enemy. For example, they built the Al Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock over the ruins of the Jewish temple in Jersulaem, so that no temple could ever be rebuilt. They converted the Basilica of Hagia Sophia (Cathedral of Holy Wisdom), what was essentially the centralized site for Eastern Orthodox Christians at the time after they conquered Constantinople in 1453 (then renamed to Istanbul). into the Ayasofa Mosque in an effort to forcibly convert the city's inhabitants to Islam.

Even the name of the group, Cordoba House, invokes images of Conquest.... Cordoba was the capital of Muslim Spain.

I know that in a free society, you cannot forbid people to practice their religious practices, and if it's a religious practice for these people (not necessarily all muslims) to build a huge "We Kicked Your Ass and This Place Is Ours Now" shrine at the site of a massacre like the 9/11 bombings, I suppose as long as they operate within the law it's technically their right.

But I ask you, let's not focus on the "Can they?" Let's focus on the "Should they?" Where does nationalism/zealotry need to take a back-seat to good taste? Would anybody have a problem if Fred Phelps opened a sister chapel on the grounds of the camp in Srebenicia and named it the "Church of the Almighty Who Gives the Heathens What They Deserve"?

It does seem unwise in what is still a belligerently Christian country.

Christians have also enjoyed dedicating to a victory over whoever they happened to be slaughtering at the time.

I forget who said it, but the ideals of the USA are to enshrine the right for others to burn the flag if they choose.

Trying to prevent something based on good taste is in the UK so perilously close to discriminating that one has to fnd a more plausible reason to be against it.

~:smoking:

Thought it was so rediculous I exptected an American to open it.

creepy detail, Dutch government, well the last one BYE, is partially funding it

edit, and of course it's a provocation, or completely stupid of course, how could anyone have a problem with it after all. In short to quote a famous movie line: they can smell your :daisy:

Quote:

---

It is also promising to include a memorial to the victims of 9/11, according to the Wall Street Journal.

---

So what's the problem?

If they were building directly on top of the building sure there might be a case, but two blocks away? I honestly don't see any issue here. And if there is an issue, how far away would you consider to be the distance at which mosques should be built? 5 blocks, 10 blocks, outside of New York altogether?

You assume that the mosque will be built for the purpose of provocation; but is that assumption correct?

Who says the muslims who'll be praying there agree with the viewpoints of the nutcases who flew planes into buildings?

***

How about looking at it from another angle?

->

The nutjobs flew planes in buildings to provoke your country. They wanted you to start hating all Muslims, because they want eternal war and conflict (or at least until all infidels are exterminated).

Instead of letting yourself be provoked to that, you ruin their plans by allowing Muslims to build a house of prayer only two blocks away from Ground Zero. America will always be a free country, no matter how many planes those nutjobs fly into your buildings. Take that, extremists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

So what's the problem?

If they were building directly on top of the building sure there might be a case, but two blocks away? I honestly don't see any issue here. And if there is an issue, how far away would you consider to be the distance at which mosques should be built? 5 blocks, 10 blocks, outside of New York altogether?

---

Odd. The Mosque has been planned for over 5 years, but the Memorial you mention was only included on Sunday evening, in advance of a critical vote by the Landmark Commission today.

Poor taste, and questionable financial backing. I haven't read much on it, just about the bickering from both sides. I don't think they are putting a minaret on it (yet), but I suppose they will do what they want. I also hope the feds to dig through the finances and bug the place. If the imams start preaching DTA and celebrating the 9/11 "martyrs", I don't imagine the NYFD will respond quickly when the place catches fire.

Can they? Yes. Should they? Probably not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

You assume that the mosque will be built for the purpose of provocation; but is that assumption correct?

Who says the muslims who'll be praying there agree with the viewpoints of the nutcases who flew planes into buildings?

***

How about looking at it from another angle?

->

The nutjobs flew planes in buildings to provoke your country. They wanted you to start hating all Muslims, because they want eternal war and conflict (or at least until all infidels are exterminated).

Instead of letting yourself be provoked to that, you ruin their plans by allowing Muslims to build a house of prayer only two blocks away from Ground Zero.

---

How about they do, kinda inconsiderate no, maybe the Germans should build a statue in Auswitz and hand out free candy, not all Germans are nazi's after all.

And look up Cordoba, they are planting a flag

You have a point by the way, NY didn't allow to be provoked, so a second one is build, incidently just there as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andres

You assume that the mosque will be built for the purpose of provocation; but is that assumption correct?

Who says the muslims who'll be praying there agree with the viewpoints of the nutcases who flew planes into buildings?

***

How about looking at it from another angle?

->

The nutjobs flew planes in buildings to provoke your country. They wanted you to start hating all Muslims, because they want eternal war and conflict (or at least until all infidels are exterminated).

Instead of letting yourself be provoked to that, you ruin their plans by allowing Muslims to build a house of prayer only two blocks away from Ground Zero. America will always be a free country, no matter how many planes those nutjobs fly into your buildings. Take that, extremists.

---

You know, you're absolutely right. I can't imagine why the Tutsi's wouldn't want to know the "real Akazu", so I'm going to open a memorial/shrine to Paul Kagame in downtown Kigali. Shouldn't be a problem, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

You know, you're absolutely right. I can't imagine why the Tutsi's wouldn't want to know the "real Akazu", so I'm going to open a memorial/shrine to Paul Kagame in downtown Kigali. Shouldn't be a problem, right?

---

Your analogy would work if they would be building a statue of Osama Bin Laden.

They don't, however. They want to build a mosque; not a shrine to celebrate the deaths of your countrymen.

Couple of thoughts: 2 blocks away is not "adjacent."

Unless I'm mistaken, there are already mosques closer than the part-time one being proposed.

Lastly, from what little I've read on the subject (which ain't a whole lot), the group that wants to build the community center/mosque is about as mellow and interfaith-friendly as muslims come. In other words, the Fred Phelps church blew up your house, so now you're angry at the Unitarians for wanting to build a YMCA. Evidence.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the spiritual leader of Masjid Al-Farah mosque in lower Manhattan, has gained a reputation in New York for his interfaith work and his progressive practice of Islam. Together with his wife Daisy Khan, Imam Feisal envisioned devotees to Islam sharing space with other communities to enjoy arts, culture and dialogue. Inspired by the struggle of other religious communities seeking acceptance in America, they set out to establish Cordoba House, named for the Spanish city where Muslims, Jews, and Christians together created one of the most fertile and creative civilizations in the world. [...]

Last week, Daisy Khan joined me for a conversation on State of Belief, my weekly radio show. She expressed concern that critics of the Islamic cultural center have deeply misunderstood its creators' intent. The center will not function primarily as a mosque; New York City is already home to more than 200 mosques. Rather, modeled on the success of religiously based establishments like YMCAs and Jewish Community Centers, the Islamic center will serve the larger community to become an institution for learning, collaborating, and sharing knowledge across faiths and cultures.

In other words, to quote Obi-wan Kenobi, These aren't the muslims you're looking for; they can go about their business.

And what's with all of the pre-1000 A.D. conquest references to the Hagia Sofia and the Dome on the Rock? Do you really, honestly think that the proposed community center/mosque is part of a triumphal Islamist statement about how they kicked ass and took names on 9/11? Seriously?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Couple of thoughts: 2 blocks away is not "adjacent."

Unless I'm mistaken, there are already mosques closer than the part-time one being proposed.

Lastly, from what little I've read on the subject (which ain't a whole lot), the group that wants to build the community center/mosque is about as mellow and interfaith-friendly as muslims come. In other words, the Fred Phelps church blew up your house, so now you're angry at the Unitarians for wanting to build a YMCA. Evidence.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the spiritual leader of Masjid Al-Farah mosque in lower Manhattan, has gained a reputation in New York for his interfaith work and his progressive practice of Islam. Together with his wife Daisy Khan, Imam Feisal envisioned devotees to Islam sharing space with other communities to enjoy arts, culture and dialogue. Inspired by the struggle of other religious communities seeking acceptance in America, they set out to establish Cordoba House, named for the Spanish city where Muslims, Jews, and Christians together created one of the most fertile and creative civilizations in the world. [...]

Last week, Daisy Khan joined me for a conversation on State of Belief, my weekly radio show. She expressed concern that critics of the Islamic cultural center have deeply misunderstood its creators' intent. The center will not function primarily as a mosque; New York City is already home to more than 200 mosques. Rather, modeled on the success of religiously based establishments like YMCAs and Jewish Community Centers, the Islamic center will serve the larger community to become an institution for learning, collaborating, and sharing knowledge across faiths and cultures.

---

Interesting perspective Lemur. The group's leader, a Sufi Imam who stated on September 20th, 2001, that American policy was as much to blame for 9/11 as anyone or anything is as interfaith-friendly as Muslims come? That's not very encouraging.

I couldn't find any mosques listed in the Googlemaps link you forwarded (thank you for it though) that were as close or closer, but it's relevant to consider when they were constructed as well.

Seriously, you really don't see this as a big finger in the eye? You really don't see this as provocative? Regardless of my views on the matter, I wouldn't establish a "counter perspective center" in the Hiroshima Peace Park, but I suppose you wouldn't have any qualms with it if I did?

While initially suspicious, all I have to do is remember the DPW ports fiasco and I'm willing to give the builders of the mosque the benefit of the doubt. I don't know that the people wanting to stop the mosque have made that strong of a case yet.

I have to say the comments that come with the linked abc-article are by and large rather disturbing... :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Seriously, you really don't see this as a big finger in the eye? You really don't see this as provocative? Regardless of my views on the matter, I wouldn't establish a "counter perspective center" in the Hiroshima Peace Park, but I suppose you wouldn't have any qualms with it if I did?

---

I'm not trying to be dense, Don, but no, I do not see this as a provocation. If a Saudi-funded wahabbist tried to build something, then we'd be on the same page. But a local, and a couple who have a reputation for being mellow and interfaith? A dude who allows his woman to speak for him in the press? Does that sound like the fundie nutjobs we're at war with?

As for your Hiroshima analogy, do you believe a Starbucks should be allowed to operate within a few blocks of the memorial park? Should Americans be allowed to proseletyze and give out christian leaflets in Japan? If not, why not?

Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, the proposed date for the grand opening is September 11, 2011.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

While initially suspicious, all I have to do is remember the DPW ports fiasco and I'm willing to give the builders of the mosque the benefit of the doubt. I don't know that the people wanting to stop the mosque have made that strong of a case yet.

---

I fail to see the linkage. I still believe it was jingoistic and paranoid to deny the Dubai Ports World harbor management deal. That had more to do with getting Charles Schumer reelected than anything.

This on the other hand is a project that aspires to build a conquerer's mosque overlooking the memorial at Ground Zero, built by a man who is on record stating that America got what it deserved, who chose to name his group after the capital of Islamic conquest of the West, Cordoba.

The main objectors to the site are islamophobes. That much is clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, the proposed date for the grand opening is September 11, 2011.

---

How obvious does one want it, the Cordoba mosque, on that date. Fall of Cordoba, bit like 1453 symbolicaly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drone

Just to throw a little more fuel on the fire, the proposed date for the grand opening is September 11, 2011.

---

Fascinating. Yeah, they don't mean any insult or provocation at all, do they...

I'm no Islmaphobe, but do believe in things like sensitivity and good taste. You can ask anybody in here, I have as much animosity towards the Westboro Baptist Church as I do for anybody. But building a mosque on a site that overlooks the ground where muslim extremists declared war on the US and killed 3000 people in the name of Jihad... that just seems in extremely poor form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beskar

The main objectors to the site are islamophobes. That much is clear.

---

Beskar, name-calling doesn't help advance this discussion even slightly. Reasonable people can feel concern about the Cordoba House. I disagree with them, but I don't think it's legit to label everyone who disagrees an "islamophobe." Radical islamists attacked this country in a very effective manner, and we've been at war with them and their proxies since. Having concerns about potential islamists is not some sort of "phobia."

Don, I'd like some linkage about the Imam before I decide that he's an anti-American nutjob. And from a respectable publication, please. Obviously WND and NRO will be screaming that he's the antichrist; let's hear from a level head.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Fascinating. Yeah, they don't mean any insult or provocation at all, do they...

---

They know perfectly well that political correctness will kick in when it willl inevitably be vandalised. Works no different in the States

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Don, I'd like some linkage about the Imam before I decide that he's an anti-American nutjob. And from a respectable publication, please. Obviously WND and NRO will be screaming that he's the antichrist; let's hear from a level head.

---

Try Google.

Your research is so poor it borders on misinformation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Try Google.

---

If you're going to do a Tribesman impersonantion, you need to use more smilies.

Here's a useful article from a respectable commentator who actually knows Feisal Abdul Rauf, which is far more than you can say of Liz Cheney or Sarah Palin:

If He Could, Bin Laden Would Bomb the Cordoba Initiative

This seems like such an obvious point, but it is apparently not obvious to the many people who oppose the Cordoba Initiative's planned mosque in lower Manhattan, so let me state it as clearly as possible: 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. This is quantitatively true, of course -- al Qaeda and its ideological affiliates have murdered thousands of Muslims -- but it is ideologically true as well: al Qaeda's goal is the purification of Islam (that is to say, its extreme understanding of Islam) and apostates pose more of a threat to Bin Laden's understanding of Islam than do infidels.

I know Feisal Abdul Rauf; I've spoken with him at a public discussion at the 96th street mosque in New York about interfaith cooperation. He represents what Bin Laden fears most: a Muslim who believes that it is possible to remain true to the values of Islam and, at the same time, to be a loyal citizen of a Western, non-Muslim country. Bin Laden wants a clash of civilizations; the opponents of the this mosque project are giving him what he wants.

Settle, please. Everything has been pretty good in this thread thus far, please keep it that way.

Well, that sounds okay to me but if the memorial looks anything like a big phallus, you will know they're lying to you... :sweatdrop:

I mean as you said, it's 2 blocks away, it's not even a mosque and uhm, apparently they already erected 200 mosques in New York to "mark their territory" so why is this center such a big deal?

Would you settle for something from Breitbart.com? :laugh4:

From the Sydney Sun-Herald, in 2004:

Quote:

---

In a move likely to cause controversy with church leaders, Imam Feisal said it was Christians who started mass attacks on civilians.

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

Imam Feisal said the bombing in Madrid had made his message more urgent. He said there was an endless supply of angry young Muslim rebels prepared to die for their cause and there was no sign of the attacks ending unless there was a fundamental change in the world.

Imam Feisal, who argues for a Western style of Islam that promotes democracy and tolerance, said there could be little progress until the US acknowledged backing dictators and the US President gave an "America Culpa" speech to the Muslim world.

---

Emphasis mine: You want peace? You admit that you're to blame, then we'll talk...

And from an interview he gave Ed Bradley, on September 20th, 2001:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imam Abdul Rauf and Ed Bradley

BRADLEY: 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.

---

EDIT: Nevermind. Posting at 2am causes me to get confused.

It's normal muslims kill eachother. America is making the same mistake Europe made, don't. The UK thought they had the formula, Sweden still can't stop dripping, Islam and the west aren't compatible how much proof do you need, they are hostiles. And I don't mean the people who were born in an Islamic country with that.