Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ground Zero Mosque


Karlis
 Share

Shold the mosque be approved? Or not approved?  

87 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the building of a mosque be approved?



Recommended Posts

Why don't U build a center for all religions?

Please. I'm sure if you have the money, you can do that as well. But then why don't you have anything to say about YMCA's?? (Young Mens Christian Association). YWCA's? Shriners? Mitzpah? Jewish orgs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 636
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ninjadude

    61

  • Agent X

    39

  • Mainpoint

    51

  • Leah G.

    43

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Hi Ninja -- I'm somewhat interested in your statement here, that, "Muslims are not terrorists".

This thread revolves around the 'Ground Zero' issue, so I'm asking you if you agree that every single one of the people involved in those attacks was Muslim? If all of those attackers were Muslims, then those terrorists were Muslims,obviously.

That said; not all Muslims are terrorists, *but* it would not be far off the truth to say that most terrorists working against the Western World today *are* Muslims.

precisely. And we're not talking about terrorism so much. We're talking about American citizens practicing their religion. Let me put it this way, do you consider all Priests to be pedofiles since all the priests who molested children are and there are a lot of them? Should we not allow Catholics to have an churches because a lot of priests are pedofiles?

Ninja, you forgot to mention that the Muslim agenda is to bring sharia law into the USA.

right. How could I forget something so incredibly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted No, there should not be a mosque. Now here is why I voted no, church and state are SEPERATE. The world trade centers was NOT a religious building, therefore it should not be replaced with one, WTC stood for the state, not for the church. Furthmore, when I saw the tradecenters fall on Sept. 11 2001 days after the event Bush along with other members, newscasters and a billion other people stated that they PROMISED to build a memorial. A religious dwelling IS NOT a memorial for 911 victims. They promised that they would build a memorial for WTC, but they did not...that is what disturbs me the most, then to do this on top...it is just plain insulting.

And not because I hate any religious group, it is because church and state are suppose to be seperate..but not whenever it seems to fit their needs, which is obviously wrong on so many levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that is how matters now stand between you and Aquatus, Ninja. Can you see how you subtly branded Aquatus as an islamaphobe?

I did no such thing. And besides that would be against UM rules. I do however believe that a lot of the hysteria over this issue is based in bigotry. I have no idea if that's the case with Aquatus1. And was attempting to find out. But no, I did not imply or subtly imply any such thing about Aquatus1. If he thinks that, he is mistaken. People have been called worse and it continues on the UM political forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That in no way proves that the majority of the population in Battery Park City are Muslims, which was your claim.

Point me to where I said anything about Battery Park City? There is anecdotal evidence that there is a significant and growing muslim group of people that live and work in and around the WTC area. It's the same in your local town. The local Baptist church is filling to the brim and they decide they need to expand and nearby they find an abandoned parcel of land, buy it and make it into a Baptist community center with a chapel. Well maybe not. Most Christian denominations are in decline....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://rawstory.com/...eath-confessed/

This is what they do in their country and what shariah law is about. The same shariah law the guy in charge of building the mosque want the US to be compliant to.

First that's a dead link. Second Alex jones is a poor source. Third that's just untrue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First that's a dead link. Second Alex jones is a poor source. Third that's just untrue.

RAWSTORY IS UNDERGOING DATABASE PROBLEMS AT THE MOMENT. BE BACK SHORTLY!

I found this when I went to the raw story site so try later to read it. I've been following this story on talk radio and I've read some other articles so I don't doubt that it's true. Just because you don't want to accept it doesn't mean it's not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree but that's ok. In a multicultural society, "manners" is a nebulous concept. What is "good" manners for you or your region of the country or even part of the NYC may not be what is "good" manners for the WTC neighborhood. Which is largely islamic.

The project is for an Islamic neighborhood. I've previously posted about this. The WTC is dead center in that neighborhood.

Point me to where I said anything about Battery Park City? There is anecdotal evidence that there is a significant and growing muslim group of people that live and work in and around the WTC area. It's the same in your local town. The local Baptist church is filling to the brim and they decide they need to expand and nearby they find an abandoned parcel of land, buy it and make it into a Baptist community center with a chapel. Well maybe not. Most Christian denominations are in decline....

http://my.newyork.cbslocal.com/battery-park-city-manhattan-ny/tags/Ground%20Zero%20Mosque

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_Park_City

I will reiterate....the area in which the WTC stood is called Battery Park City. This entire thread is about Battery Park City.

You are deflecting...I ask you to prove that the majority of the people that live in that area are Islamic. Not anecdotal evidence, but real evidence, as you claimed it as a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being in NYC, you will see a lot of different groups of people in that area. If you want to judge how big a certain religious population is there, you need to count out all the different religious buildings of different types, in order to understand how they all compare. Not just cherrypick that there happen to be three(?) Mosques in the area already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.thejakart...nfession/390874

Another source

http://rawstory.com/...eath-confessed/

Is working again

This is what they do in their country and what shariah law is about. The same shariah law the guy in charge of building the mosque want the US to be compliant to.

Edited by Hatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ninjadude, I think Aquatus has given up in sheer frustration to make you understand how you have implied that he is an islamaphobe; ie., a bigot.

In this post one of Aquatus' sentences was: "They are not even objecting to the existence of the cultural center".

Now that is a neutral and sensible statement, Ninja. However, *this is where* you took a subtle swipe at Aquatus in your next post, when you replied as follows

Your reply to Aquatus includes this excerpt:

Aquatus then posted:

And you articulated pure innocence on your part, and you ignored what you yourself had written to Aquatus:

Aquatus replied to you as follows:

Your reply was:

And that is how matters now stand between you and Aquatus, Ninja. Can you see how you subtly branded Aquatus as an islamaphobe?

Karlis

It was hardly an isolated incident.

meaning that there is no delination. And therefore, it's whatever "people" get all hysterical about. Again how are people supposed to know where they can and can't build to avoid emotional over-reactions? Without saying so directly, I can assume you'd prefer them out of the country?

Not a lot of gray area or subtlety there.

You would have to be a pretty cold-hearted individual to call a grieving mother irrational or bigoted because she doesn't want her son's killers at the funeral. Regardless of whether the accusation is correct or not, it comes down to a question of manners, not politics.

I'm sorry but you're not seriously saying that those practicing Islam in America are a grieving mothers killers?! Because that's what you're implying. And the funeral happened in 2001. Now you'd have something, if for instance, AL QAEDA was building a mosque or headquarters near the WTC. But then, they are a illegal terriorist group. Islam is not. Shirley you're not saying American citizens who are in America and are muslim are terrorists? Because that would be wrong on so many levels. I would expect more from you.

The above type of cowardly and dishonest tactics soured this thread for me.

Edited by aquatus1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted No, there should not be a mosque. Now here is why I voted no, church and state are SEPERATE. The world trade centers was NOT a religious building, therefore it should not be replaced with one, WTC stood for the state, not for the church. Furthmore, when I saw the tradecenters fall on Sept. 11 2001 days after the event Bush along with other members, newscasters and a billion other people stated that they PROMISED to build a memorial. A religious dwelling IS NOT a memorial for 911 victims. They promised that they would build a memorial for WTC, but they did not...that is what disturbs me the most, then to do this on top...it is just plain insulting.And not because I hate any religious group, it is because church and state are suppose to be seperate..but not whenever it seems to fit their needs, which is obviously wrong on so many levels.

Did you even read any of the previous threads? The mosque is NOT being built at Ground Zero! It's two blocks away! Aren't there plans to have a reflecting pool as a memorial at the actual site? Two blocks away is NOT Ground Zero!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://my.newyork.cb...20Zero%20Mosque

http://en.wikipedia....ttery_Park_City

I will reiterate....the area in which the WTC stood is called Battery Park City. This entire thread is about Battery Park City.

You are deflecting...I ask you to prove that the majority of the people that live in that area are Islamic. Not anecdotal evidence, but real evidence, as you claimed it as a fact.

Not really. Battery Park city is just part of the area "near" the WTC. It does NOT ecompass the entire area. See below.

190-livi.jpg

But no matter how offensive their presence may be to some people, Muslims have always been a part of lower Manhattan's past. In fact, Islam in New York began near Ground Zero. From an historical perspective, there could hardly be a better place for a mosque.

One of the first Arab-American enclaves in New York City was located on Washington St. in lower Manhattan - the very area in which the World Trade Center was later built. Founded by Arabic-speaking Christians and Muslims from Ottoman Syria in the 1880s, it was called Little Syria.

The heart of Little Syria was full of outdoor cafes where non-Arab visitors sometimes gawked at men smoking hookahs and trading gossip about the Ottoman Empire. In a 1903 article, the New York Times called the neighborhood "quaint," noting the "uniform politeness" of its inhabitants.

Lower Manhattan is also the final resting place of Muslims and other Africans, often slaves, who were forcibly resettled in New York when it was still New Amsterdam. The African Burial Ground, discovered in 1991, is six blocks away from the proposed Muslim community center. Scholars continue to debate the religious identity of the hundreds buried there, but the fact that some of the dead wore shrouds and were interred with strings of blue beads, frequently used as Islamic talismans, suggests Muslim were among the enslaved people who helped build Manhattan into a bustling city.

Read more: http://www.nydailyne...l#ixzz0wXToUdeX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what they do in their country and what shariah law is about. The same shariah law the guy in charge of building the mosque want the US to be compliant to.

No it's what Iran does. Iran is not where all muslims live. They live in many countries. Where do you get the idea that Iran is the center of Islam?

An no, that is not what the Cordoba initiative is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it's what Iran does. Iran is not where all muslims live. They live in many countries. Where do you get the idea that Iran is the center of Islam?

An no, that is not what the Cordoba initiative is about.

You're right, they do live in many countries. I didn't say Iran was the center of islam. The cordoba initiative is suspected and the founder has said he wants America to be sharia compliant. Please stop putting words down that I did not say and do some research and prove it to yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a lot of gray area or subtlety there.

The above type of cowardly and dishonest tactics soured this thread for me.

The correct response to something you disagree with is to say "no" and explain why. Something you curiously refuse to do on this topic. Girlish responses like "take that back" are beneath you. I have read your posts in other places on UM, and they are well thought out and rational and I and others hold them in very high regard. I had hopes that your participation in this topic while mostly opposite of my belief would prove instructive and enlightening. In any discourse, if a statement is made that is incorrect, and you want to respond. Please do. Asking you a question, even a leading one, is in no way cowardly or dishonest. And for the life of me, I can't understand why you would respond this way. Discourse is how we learn about our world and ourselves. Something you of all people would understand. Whining about it just leaves the reader curious as to true motivations. In political forums, posters beliefs can be so wild-eyed as to nearly drive you insane or just plain completely against your beliefs. Beliefs are what make us who we are. One can emotionally respond (which most people frown upon) or one can post a rebuttal. I don't have all the answers and I still read even those posts that make me want to rip my display off. If you're fishing for an apology for a perceived slight, I am sorry. Politics can be offensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. Battery Park city is just part of the area "near" the WTC. It does NOT ecompass the entire area. See below.

190-livi.jpg

Read more: http://www.nydailyne...l#ixzz0wXToUdeX

And as you pointed out, the area where the mosque is planned is two blocks away from there...in Battery Park City.

Very nice history lesson. It still does not negate that you have failed to prove that the majority of the people living in that area are Muslim today.

I can completely understand why the most reasonable of people grow weary of responding to you, as I am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as you pointed out, the area where the mosque is planned is two blocks away from there...in Battery Park City.

Very nice history lesson. It still does not negate that you have failed to prove that the majority of the people living in that area are Muslim today.

I can completely understand why the most reasonable of people grow weary of responding to you, as I am.

He's exhausting... sorry ninjadude but you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's exhausting... sorry ninjadude but you are.

I've asked one simple question and I can't get a straight answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would the religious extremists who destroyed the Twin Towers consent to a Christian or Jewish worshipping place to be built near a Muslim holy place ( hypothetically? ) I think building a Mosque is a moral victory for American values, although I think many of the politicians voicing opinions are just trying to antagonize the opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The correct response to something you disagree with is to say "no" and explain why. Something you curiously refuse to do on this topic. Girlish responses like "take that back" are beneath you. I have read your posts in other places on UM, and they are well thought out and rational and I and others hold them in very high regard. I had hopes that your participation in this topic while mostly opposite of my belief would prove instructive and enlightening. In any discourse, if a statement is made that is incorrect, and you want to respond. Please do. Asking you a question, even a leading one, is in no way cowardly or dishonest. And for the life of me, I can't understand why you would respond this way. Discourse is how we learn about our world and ourselves. Something you of all people would understand. Whining about it just leaves the reader curious as to true motivations. In political forums, posters beliefs can be so wild-eyed as to nearly drive you insane or just plain completely against your beliefs. Beliefs are what make us who we are. One can emotionally respond (which most people frown upon) or one can post a rebuttal. I don't have all the answers and I still read even those posts that make me want to rip my display off. If you're fishing for an apology for a perceived slight, I am sorry. Politics can be offensive.

You jump to conclusions and even misread what's written, on accident or intentional is anyone's guess. "A grieving mother's killers"? Come on, clearly there was never any killing of a grieving mother, it was the child she was grieving over who died, in that hypothetical. Plus, jumping to unspoken conclusions about preferring an entire faith out of the country is poor tradecraft worthy of those idiot pundits on MSNBC or FoxNews, not coming out of someone on here - despite how many people here do that, I don't think I do, but if you can find evidence of it from me, I'll eat crow on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me try to explain it in another way. Native Americans don't celebrate Columbus Day. They don't want a monument of Columbus anywhere near any of their reservations. Because of that one man, they feel it is an afront to them. Because of him, a large portion of them were wiped out. I gaurantee, that most of the people in favor of this mosque, completely understand why the Native Americans feel the way they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The correct response to something you disagree with is to say "no" and explain why.

I agree. However, that has nothing to do with what you are doing. You are taking peoples comments and twisting them around, then you are adding your own embellishments, then you are accusing people of arguing your embellishments.

Do you really think you are fooling anyone? These are grade school tactics.

Something you curiously refuse to do on this topic.

What is curious is why you would claim that you are seriously asking a question, completely missing (or ignoring) the response, innocently claim ignorance, and somehow forget that in a discussion forum, the words are there for everyone to read.

Aquatus:Now you are getting insulting. Ninjadude, I'm going to ask you to take that last line back, or I will have to ask the other mods to take a look. I am not going to allow you to accuse me of bigotry just to advance your argument.

And no, to pretend that there should be a delineation here is as ridiculous as pretending that there should be a delectation in any other emotional and spiritual issue. How you tell what the limits are is the same way we are telling here. You try and see what the reactions are. In this case, the reaction was fine when it was just a cultural center. The reaction was not fine when they chose to include a mosque. That was the limit.

As you can see, not only did I clearly point out when you had insulted me, I also proceeded to explain exactly why I disagreed with your statement. You are quite clearly in the wrong.

Girlish responses like "take that back" are beneath you.
I

While snide and sly remarks and strawmen are apparently not beneath yours. As for what is beneath me, be assured, if you insulted me to my face, you would receive a request to either retract your insult or, as I did here, I would mark you as a dishonest debater. Of course, I can't help but wonder if you would insult me, were we face to face.

have read your posts in other places on UM, and they are well thought out and rational and I and others hold them in very high regard.

I haven't found yours to be particularly bad or particularly good. I did find them to be honest, however I have been very surprised at your behaviour on this thread. If it where towards one person alone, I might think it was merely a personal disagreement, but to see you employ it on multiple people makes it a tactic that you have, unfortunately, chosen to adopt.

I had hopes that your participation in this topic while mostly opposite of my belief would prove instructive and enlightening.

I doubt that. I have no doubts that you believe that, or that you have convinced yourself of it, but I suspect that the truth is more likely that you share the same mindset as the imam of this mosque. To you, this is a political issue, and any human concerns need not apply. Because you closed your mind to any arguments of that kind, you would never have learned anything.

In any discourse, if a statement is made that is incorrect, and you want to respond. Please do. Asking you a question, even a leading one, is in no way cowardly or dishonest. And for the life of me, I can't understand why you would respond this way. Discourse is how we learn about our world and ourselves. Something you of all people would understand. Whining about it just leaves the reader curious as to true motivations.

I don't think the members here are anywhere near as naive as you are treating them. In all cases, my position is simple: you have engaged in cowardly and dishonest tactics not just against myself, but against others, and I am not going to take formal action, because of a conflict of interest. I am, therefore, leaving this to the other mods. If they believe that I am in the wrong, then they will inform me. I trust them to do so. You, I do not.

Politics can be offensive.

Which is why I stay away from them. Too bad that you cannot see outside of your political paradigm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (IP: Staff) ·

I'm going to step in here to try and usher the thread back on topic however I echo many of the sentiments posted above, Ninjadude this isn't the first time someone has expressed concern over you misrepresenting what's been said or putting words in someone's else's mouth and I feel the comments made over the last two pages by other members speak for themselves.

Now lets get this discussion back on track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me try to explain it in another way. Native Americans don't celebrate Columbus Day. They don't want a monument of Columbus anywhere near any of their reservations. Because of that one man, they feel it is an afront to them. Because of him, a large portion of them were wiped out. I gaurantee, that most of the people in favor of this mosque, completely understand why the Native Americans feel the way they do.

I agree. Putting up a statue of Bin Laden at One World Trade Center would be indefensible.

Unless you're making the disgusting suggestion that a mosque is a monument to Bin Laden, I'm not sure what other point your analogy is supposed to make. Because I can assure you, Native Americans actually do allow Christian (i.e. the religion of the guy they despise) churches on reservations. Presumably they don't feel the entire religion is defined by one *******.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.