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

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Tarek_Fatah

How bad can this guy be?

Feisal Rauf is the guy I was looking up and there was a ton of dirt on him but all the links are disappearing. He's the guy the government is sending over seas and the brains behind the mosque. I'm done, it's getting to spooky.

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

Feisal Rauf is the guy I was looking up and there was a ton of dirt on him but all the links are disappearing. He's the guy the government is sending over seas and the brains behind the mosque. I'm done, it's getting to spooky.

one sec

in your post 2 pages back you also mentioned this person.

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

Edited by The Silver Thong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You had mentioned earlier in a post as an addendum about cathedral in muslim country. That point is moot as USA is not a country that has an official state religion.

No I did not claim they were American christians..I simply noted - Christian... thats it.. and you never really addressed it ...you skipped to going on about housing...why? I have no idea.. but hey LOL

so it seems you would like laws to be applicable to you in a way different than they should be applicable to people that are different from you

Meaning what exactly? For the love of donuts.. when I gave my real opinions on this topic at hand..I claimed my opinion/ thoughts were - Undeciided... and now being undecided is a bad thing.... if I had of suggest - YES.. people would find an issue with it...If I had of said NO... people would have an issue with it... and so I say - UNDECIDED and STILL I get flack LMAO too funny...

Edited by Beckys_Mom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feisal Rauf is the guy I was looking up and there was a ton of dirt on him but all the links are disappearing. He's the guy the government is sending over seas and the brains behind the mosque. I'm done, it's getting to spooky.

It's depressing that people are letting the country fall into this muck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it would be impossible to stop the bin Laden family from buying that real estate if they wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meaning what exactly? For the love of donuts.. when I gave my real opinions on this topic at hand..I claimed my opinion/ thoughts were - Undeciided... and now being undecided is a bad thing.... if I had of suggest - YES.. people would find an issue with it...If I had of said NO... people would have an issue with it... and so I say - UNDECIDED and STILL I get flack LMAO too funny...

Isnt that the point of these forums to have issues with other people opinions :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if it would be impossible to stop the bin Laden family from buying that real estate if they wanted to.

I doubt anybody would, after all the bin Ladens and the Bush were (are?) very close friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case we should allow Satanists to build temples to Satan.

And it should be forbidden because of?

Who cares what imaginary friend they want to talk to in a room?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it should be forbidden because of?

Who cares what imaginary friend they want to talk to in a room?

It isn't the imaginary friend thing that's the problem. The problem is the politicians who manipulate the imaginary friends' fan club into thinking that the imaginary friend supports their cause...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't the imaginary friend thing that's the problem. The problem is the politicians who manipulate the imaginary friends' fan club into thinking that the imaginary friend supports their cause...

Yep, as I said before: the .... (fill in as needed) riling up the uninformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it should be forbidden because of?

Who cares what imaginary friend they want to talk to in a room?

It's odd, I actually respect LaVey and many of his views. Does it make me a satanist no not at all as satanists themselves don't even believe in Satan lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it should be forbidden because of?

They worship the wrong religion, of course. The only religion that should be allowed is Islam. Christianity, according to some, is a religion of bigotry and prejudice while Islam is allegedly a religion of peace.

In seriousness, the point is Satanism is a religion, and people would never allow it to build public temples. Which makes the arguments for "tolerance and respect" moot because it is entirely hypocritical.

That's also Satanophobia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They worship the wrong religion, of course. The only religion that should be allowed is Islam. Christianity, according to some, is a religion of bigotry and prejudice while Islam is allegedly a religion of peace.

In seriousness, the point is Satanism is a religion, and people would never allow it to build public temples. Which makes the arguments for "tolerance and respect" moot because it is entirely hypocritical.

That's also Satanophobia.

You do know that satanists don't worship any god right. They worship themselves. There god is themselves not the guy with the horns. They don't believe in the devil at all.

See this is where ignorance plays a big factor in what people think. Look up the satanist bible or there "ten" commandments before you kneejerk.

Sorry lets stay on topic. My bad.

Edited by The Silver Thong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They worship the wrong religion, of course. The only religion that should be allowed is Islam. Christianity, according to some, is a religion of bigotry and prejudice while Islam is allegedly a religion of peace.

In seriousness, the point is Satanism is a religion, and people would never allow it to build public temples. Which makes the arguments for "tolerance and respect" moot because it is entirely hypocritical.

That's also Satanophobia.

I see, so you are to decide which one is the "right" and which one is the "wrong" way to communicate with your imaginary friend(s)... that is how this mess started as far as I recall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, that's entirely wrong. But to get into that discussion would go off topic.

And yes, I have actually read the Satanist book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see, so you are to decide which one is the "right" and which one is the "wrong" way to communicate with your imaginary friend(s)... that is how this mess started as far as I recall.

Sure, because my god backs me and not you.

When your god backs you you are entirely right no matter what.

And that is the entire point to the mosque, and why it's thumbing its nose to NY and the people who died in 911.

And that's why I'll oppose the building of that mosque. It may be legal, but sometimes doing the legal thing is not doing the right thing.

Sometimes doing the right thing is doing what the people want, and most people do not want that mosque to be built.

You see, tolerance works both ways. If you want to be tolerated, sometimes you have to give a little to get a little. I see no giving here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, that's entirely wrong. But to get into that discussion would go off topic.

And yes, I have actually read the Satanist book.

And your argument over Islam is what again, the wrong religion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, because my god backs me and not you.

When your god backs you you are entirely right no matter what.

And that is the entire point to the mosque, and why it's thumbing its nose to NY and the people who died in 911.

And that's why I'll oppose the building of that mosque. It may be legal, but sometimes doing the legal thing is not doing the right thing.

Sometimes doing the right thing is doing what the people want, and most people do not want that mosque to be built.

You see, tolerance works both ways. If you want to be tolerated, sometimes you have to give a little to get a little. I see no giving here.

There "thumbing" there nose as some say may be a direct result of western "activity" in there back yard. What is this thread doing right now. Thumbing there nose at Islam. It's a tit for tat as I see it looking in as opposed to looking out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In seriousness, the point is Satanism is a religion, and people would never allow it to build public temples. Which makes the arguments for "tolerance and respect" moot because it is entirely hypocritical.

That's also Satanophobia.

Well, no, people can build temples to Satan. The fact that they can IS a demonstration of the real point of religious freedom that some on here tty to pervert in defense of the Give America The Finger Mosque (GATFM). What would be a proper issue is where they could build such a temple. Just like with freedom of speech, "time, place, and manner" restrictions are allowable. You could easily come up with fair standards that would prevent the temple from locating where it would be aggressively offensive to the community as a whole. We do it with obscenity regulations-- you don't see Hustler centerfolds on billboards. That's completely different from banning something outright. Really tho, it should be the community not the govt that deals with these assaults. Don't get the law involved-- especially as uncivil as the law is today. It is up to the PEOPLE of NYC, and the US in general, to act. Peaceably. Businesses should decline doing with business with the mosque. Community groups can picket and protest and make the environment extremely uncomfortable for the socially unacceptable without resorting to violence OR to the law. Sell pork barbecue and beer right outside. Put a pork rendering plant nearby. Conduct baptisms and bar mitzvahs right outside the door (or whatever the legal "zone" is). Remember that SOCIETY decides what it does and does not accept. Stop relying on govt for everything. Just because they are LEGALLY allowed to do something does not mean that the PEOPLE cannot let them know it is not welcome or acceptable. THEY are certainly not hesitating to act aggressively. If they didn't know how offensive this was to begin with, they sure do now.

Edited by venqax
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, no, people can build temples to Satan. The fact that they can IS a demonstration of the real point of religious freedom that some on here tty to pervert in defense of the Give America The Finger Mosque (GATFM). What would be a proper issue is where they could build such a temple. Just like with freedom of speech, "time, place, and manner" restrictions are allowable. You could easily come up with fair standards that would prevent the temple from locating where it would be aggressively offensive to the community as a whole. We do it with obscenity regulations-- you don't see Hustler centerfolds on billboards. That's completely different from banning something outright. Really tho, it should be the community not the govt that deals with these assaults. Don't get the law involved-- especially as uncivil as the law is today. It is up to the PEOPLE of NYC, and the US in general, to act. Peaceably. Businesses should decline doing with business with the mosque. Community groups can picket and protest and make the environment extremely uncomfortable for the socially unacceptable without resorting to violence OR to the law. Sell pork barbecue and beer right outside. Put a pork rendering plant nearby. Conduct baptisms and bar mitzvahs right outside the door (or whatever the legal "zone" is). Remember that SOCIETY decides what it does and does not accept. Stop relying on govt for everything. Just because they are LEGALLY allowed to do something does not mean that the PEOPLE cannot let them know it is not welcome or acceptable. THEY are certainly not hesitating to act aggressively. If they didn't know how offensive this was to begin with, they sure do now.

I actually agree with some of this. The law is the law but people can still express there views on it. As you said one could sell pork sausages from a vendor cart right in front. It would be there prerogative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, because my god backs me and not you.

When your god backs you you are entirely right no matter what.

And that is the entire point to the mosque, and why it's thumbing its nose to NY and the people who died in 911.

And that's why I'll oppose the building of that mosque. It may be legal, but sometimes doing the legal thing is not doing the right thing.

Sometimes doing the right thing is doing what the people want, and most people do not want that mosque to be built.

You see, tolerance works both ways. If you want to be tolerated, sometimes you have to give a little to get a little. I see no giving here.

And you see, because of that attitude the risk of a new attack will diminish. Naturally the ideals the US of A stood for since the Revolution will be sacrificed, but who cares if we are converted into one of a number of banana republics that deface the earth.

And freedom is always the freedom of the minority, not the dictate of the majority...regardless if they claim to be a free country or not.

As for giving a little, it goes both ways. You don't want to give ... they don't want to give. And if they do they have just demonstrated to be bigger than you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They share the same religion and ideology.

Aquatus1, hope you remember this answer. According to that I can hold you responsible for the genocide in Bosnia since the purpotrators where white, christians, anit muslim ideology, europeans. many came from USA and Canada (reminds me on Khadr but he is muslim and those were christans so rules are different),Australia.....name the rest that fits.

I personaly have no opinion about the mosque. It is nice to have one but the place is questionable for some so visdom is missed on both sides here.

However, one should not forgett that in 9/11 not only christians died but also muslims who were working there ( no not the terrorists ), innocent people like the rest of the victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They share the same religion and ideology.

Aquatus1, hope you remember this answer. According to that I can hold you responsible for the genocide in Bosnia since the purpotrators where white, christians, anit muslim ideology, europeans.many came from USA and Canada (reminds me on Khadr but he is muslim and those were christans so rules are different),Australia.....name the rest that fits.

Well, it would seem rather odd to many people, being that I am not white, Christian, anti-Muslim, or European. But then, that isn't really important, is it? After all, as I have said from the beginning, the reasons are largely irrelevant, the same way that the reason why my hypothetical man ran over the mother's child is irrelevant. That he was drunk, sleeping, careless, religious, or crazy doesn't really matter to the mother. All that matter is that he killed her child and she doesn't want him at the funeral. I had nothing to do with the genocide in Bosnia, nor do I meet any of the criteria that you outlined, however it would still be in extremely poor taste for me to show up at your...whatever the equivalent of a funeral would be. Indeed, you would even be justified at hiring police to keep me out, in that my presence would likely result in a disruption of what would otherwise be a peaceful and sacred (assuming that you could claim a personal or significant relationship to the genocide) event.

The law isn't a concrete line carved into stone. It makes allowance for people's feelings, and it protects more than the physical laws and property.

I personaly have no opinion about the mosque. It is nice to have one but the place is questionable for some so visdom is missed on both sides here.

However, one should not forgett that in 9/11 not only christians died but also muslims who were working there ( no not the terrorists ), innocent people like the rest of the victims.

I don't think anyone has. This isn't an objection on behalf of the victims. It's an objection on behalf of the living. They are the ones who are nursing the sore wound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They share the same religion and ideology.

I personaly have no opinion about the mosque. It is nice to have one but the place is questionable for some so visdom is missed on both sides here.

However, one should not forgett that in 9/11 not only christians died but also muslims who were working there ( no not the terrorists ), innocent people like the rest of the victims.

The difference being the Muslims that died would be considered Islamic martyrs the rest were victims right?

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.