FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Muslims want to build mosque at "Ground Zero"





paul_indo
Quote:
NY Post: “Ground Zero mosque team lacking funds amid bookkeeping chaos!”
May 16, 2010, 4:45 pm

Dreams by a Muslim group to build a mosque near Ground Zero may not match its means.

The ambitious and immediately controversial proposal to create the $100 million religious and cultural center does not seem to be backed by any cash.

The American Society for Muslim Advancement, which proposed the center, has assets of less than $1 million, according to its most recent audited financial statement.

A sister organization, the Cordoba Initiative, listed assets of less than $20,000 in 2008. Its tax filings do not disclose at least $60,000 in private contributions, a Post analysis found, raising questions about where the money went.

Deep-pocketed benefactors who have supported the groups in the past include the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal’s Kingdom Foundation, the government of Qatar and the World Economic Forum. But some of the foundations have already backed away from the mosque, which is to be called Cordoba House.

The driving forces behind the project, Feisal Abdul Rauf — a usually media-savvy imam — and his wife, Daisy Khan, have been tight-lipped on financing.

They have said in brief statements that fund-raising has not started, (SNIP) Opponents are suspicious about who will foot the bill.

“I’d like to know who the hell is funding it,” said Bill Doyle, a leading advocate for families of those killed on 9/11. “There’s no question in my mind that somehow the rich Saudis are going to be approached.”

Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy in Phoenix, “I don’t believe that there are any foreign interests that would be helpful,” he said.

The building was purchased in July for $4.85 million by a group of companies tied to real estate developer Sharif El-Gamal. Gamal, who did not return calls seeking comment, presented plans for the mosque to a Community Board 1 committee last month, along with Rauf and Khan.

Gamal, on his Twitter page, said he presented plans to Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer’s office and other city leaders.

“We will make this project happen!” he tweeted on March 24 after meeting with an Islamic doctors group. (snip)

Rauf, 61, who was born in Kuwait and raised in Malaysia, earned degrees in physics from Columbia University and Stevens Institute of Technology. He later became the imam of Masjid al Farah, a mosque in TriBeCa.

Khan, 51, who was born in Kashmir, India, spent much of her career as an interior architect.

The couple owns an Upper West Side apartment and homes in North Bergen, NJ, and Malaysia. Rauf favors Armani and Brioni suits, luxury cars — he was considering a Mercedes E550 sedan — and fine silk and antique prayer rugs, according to Forbes.com.

Rauf and Khan founded the American Society for Muslim Advancement in 1997. The organization sponsors conferences on topics such as women’s rights, and presents cultural programs and interfaith initiatives.

In 2004, Rauf and Khan created the Cordoba Initiative with a similar mission of uniting cultures.

The groups list supporters that include the Ford Foundation, Carnegie Corporation and Danny Kaye & Sylvia Fine Foundation.

But the Ford Foundation said the charity indirectly supported the Society for Muslim Advancement in 2006 with a travel stipend, and will not pay to build houses of worship. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund also said it does not fund construction.

Federal tax forms for the Cordoba Initiative show the group’s donations dwindled to zero in 2008 from a high of $80,250 in 2005. But the forms don’t tell the full story.

The Deak Family Foundation, a Westchester County-based charity, gave $30,000 to the Cordoba Initiative in 2008, according to the foundation’s tax filings. That donation was not recorded on Cordoba’s filings.

Another charity, the William & Mary Greve Foundation, gave Cordoba $32,000 in 2007, which the group did not record on its tax filings that year.

John Bennett, a former mayor of Aspen, Colo., who headed the Cordoba Initiative from 2005 to 2008, said he could not explain the discrepancies and directed questions to Rauf and Khan.

The Cordoba Initiative said it received “expert tax advice and is in compliance with all tax laws.”

The Koran clan: Key players in the plan to build a $100M Islamic religious center

Daisy Khan
* Wife of Feisal Abdul Rauf
* Executive director and co-founder of the American Society for Muslim Advancement; director of the Cordoba Initiative.
* Member of an educational advisory group to the National Sept. 11 Memorial and Museum.
* Born in India.

Feisal Abdul Rauf
* Imam of the Masjid al Farah mosque in TriBeCa.
* Author of “What’s Right With Islam Is What’s Right With America.”
* Born in Kuwait; educated in England, Egypt and Malaysia. Holds a bachelor’s degree from Columbia University and a master’s degree in plasma physics from Stevens Institute of Technology.
* Owns three homes, luxury cars, favors Armani suits.

Sharif El-Gamal
* CEO of Soho Properties. Primary investor in the $4.8 million purchase of 45 Park Place, address for proposed mosque.
* Three companies involved in the purchase of the building are tied to Gamal or to Soho Properties.
* Soho Properties spent $45.7 million for a 12-story Chelsea office building in 2009.

Rauf, Khan are founders of:

American Society for Muslim Advancement
* Nonprofit behind the proposed mosque. Founded in 1997 to “elevate the discourse on Islam and foster environments in which Muslims thrive.”
* Offices in Manhattan and North Bergen, NJ.
* Assets of less than $1M.

Cordoba Initiative
* Another nonprofit behind the mosque proposal. Founded in 2004 to promote positive interaction between the Muslim world and the West.
* Offices in Manhattan and Malaysia.
* Assets of $18,255 at the end of 2008.


You have to be kidding.

Just saw this, I can't believe they would even think of it.

When Saudi Arabia allow a church to be built next to Masjid al Haram then USA should consider this.
deanhills
Well, New York is not Saudi Arabia, and I think it would be great for the sake of making peace, a symbolic gesture to allow that centre to go ahead. Not all Muslims are terrorists, in fact, the Muslim extremists are a very small percentage of the total Muslim people in the world. Terrorism is also completely against the Muslim faith.
jwellsy
This same group also wants to set up court system of Sharia Law for Muslims within the US judicial system.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,593329,00.html
deanhills
jwellsy wrote:
This same group also wants to set up court system of Sharia Law for Muslims within the US judicial system.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,593329,00.html
I thought that was already in existence on an informal basis, i.e. various cultural communities having their own set rules in which they govern their own communities over and above the common law. Including the Catholic Church, etc. etc. Hopefully, the Iman does not literally mean that we should have multitudes of courts of laws serving different communities. Sounds a bit impractical. Maybe he meant that there are some good aspects in the laws of religion that can be used, and where there is a difference between the religion and the common law, provided of course it does not break the rules of common law, that the religion should be allowed to take care of its own. Still, I think that is not new. It has been in existence for a long while.
Jinx
Oh, H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks, NO!

To build a Mosque on a site where 3,000 people were killed at the hands of extremist Muslims would be like letting the killers dance on the graves of their victims.

That would be a travesty and a dishonor to the memories of those who died on that day.

You cannot deny that the killers were Muslims promoting the aims of extremist Islam - by building a Mosque on that site America would essentially be saying "Ok, you win. Go ahead and keep killing us and we will roll over and become a Muslim nation... see it only took 3000 lives and you get a mosque. Imagine what you could get if you blew up a football stadium, or nuked Denver."

You can't give in to bullies, not ever! The more you give, the more they will try to take.
handfleisch
Yeah, let foreign-born jingoist Rupert Murdoch (owner of NY Post and FOX) push your buttons and get you all riled up. Getting info from the NY Post is like getting fed at McDonalds -- malnourishment of the mind. (It's not "at" ground zero, it's near it, btw.)

Try finding a balanced report. Try thinking about freedom of religion in the USA. Trying listening to 9/11 survivors who support the mosque:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/ground-mosque-plan-stirs-controversy/story?id=10670631&page=2
Quote:
But Donna Marsh O'Connor, who lost her daughter Vanessa on 9/11, questioned why "a center dedicated to peace and understanding should be built anywhere but at Ground Zero." She represents the support group September Eleventh Families for Peaceful Tomorrows, which, she said, counts 250 families of victims as members.

"I will not speak for everyone in our group but, as an organization, we stand for this center and this mosque," she said. "The mosque and center should be built. It's important to the future of America. It does honor to my daughter that in this place of hell on earth, a place for peace and love be established."


Read the ABC article. That's what a news report looks like when it's not total reactionary, yellow journalism. I swear, you should be embarrassed about behaving like a puppet for Rupert Murdoch and the right wing yahoos.
Bikerman
Jinx wrote:
That would be a travesty and a dishonor to the memories of those who died on that day.

You cannot deny that the killers were Muslims promoting the aims of extremist Islam - by building a Mosque on that site America would essentially be saying "Ok, you win. Go ahead and keep killing us and we will roll over and become a Muslim nation... see it only took 3000 lives and you get a mosque. Imagine what you could get if you blew up a football stadium, or nuked Denver."

OK, let's break this down.
Firstly there are double standards at work here. I presume you wouldn't wish to characterise Christians as terrorist killers, yet you seem to be doing that to Muslims. How many Muslims are there in the US? Well we don't know that since figures on religion are not, apparently, kept. Somewhere between 1.5 million and 6 million is the range. Have these Muslims proved a threat? Have they carried out atrocities in the US? Not to my knowledge.
Will you oppose the building of a Christian Church on the grounds that several extremists have committed 8 murders, 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings, against abortion doctors? OK - not 3000 dead to be sure, but I'll bet the families feel just the same as the families of 9/11 victims.
You can't deny that these Christians were promoting the goals of extremist Christianity, so surely allowing Christians to build churches is an insult to the victims and their families?

The fact is that the mosque was proposed by Muslim civil leaders in New York as a symbol of solidarity. They were anxious to show their abhorrence for the attacks and to try and build bridges.
It may be too soon, and they may have misjudged the underlying feeling, but to frame the debate as you have - generalising about muslims as if the US Muslim population were just terrorists waiting to strike, is neither accurate nor particularly useful.
You should also remember that the Muslims actually own the land and could have built the mosque without asking. In fact they consulted widely and were approved by the local community board - ie the people who actually live there - the people with the most important opinions in the matter. One of them summed it up, i think, admirably:
Quote:
"Denying them the ability to build a mosque… would be like London denying the Roman Catholic Church the opportunity to build a church during the years of the IRA bombings."
Spot on.
Jinx
I wasn't generalizing about all Muslims. I specifically said extremist I'm well aware that most of the Muslims in the world are peaceful. But it's the extremists who will see the building of a mosque on the site of the World Trade Center as a validation of what they are doing. If they want to build it anywhere else I would have no problem with it.

And I would have a problem with a Christian church being built on the site of a terrorist act perpetrated by extremist Christians.

They are killing to promote their religious views.

It doesn't matter which flavor of Islam is building the Mosque, the message the bad guys will get is "Kill Americans, get more mosques."
Bikerman
Jinx wrote:
I wasn't generalizing about all Muslims. I specifically said extremist I'm well aware that most of the Muslims in the world are peaceful. But it's the extremists who will see the building of a mosque on the site of the World Trade Center as a validation of what they are doing. If they want to build it anywhere else I would have no problem with it.
Why do you care what a few hundred idiots think? That is simply giving them exactly what they want - your attention and the ability to influence your decisions. Al-Queda will see ANYTHING as validation. If you refuse it then that is even better material for them - the western infidels once again victimise Muslims. They will lap it up.
Seriously, it is either right to build it or it isn't. The views of terrorists should not figure in that, unless you are now saying that terrorists define your sense of right and wrong, which I don't believe you are.
Quote:
And I would have a problem with a Christian church being built on the site of a terrorist act perpetrated by extremist Christians.
In that case you need to tear down just about all the Churches in Europe and many in the rest of the world. Just the crusades alone will probably 'do' for all the Churches in the middle east, and the inquisition and witch burning takes care of the churches here and in most of mainland Europe. Then the current catholic position on condoms is akin to terrorism and has probably been responsible for way more than 3000 deaths (I don't just mean the ban on using them, I mean the fact that RC Priests AND Bishops have repeatedly stated that condoms are absolutely no protection and they can even GIVE you aids. That means we better tear down all the African churches just to be safe...
Quote:
They are killing to promote their religious views. p
No, Al Queda are killing to promote a socio-political agenda which is much more than religion. They are extreme Islamists which means they believe that everything - state, judiciary, education, political legislature - it should all be run under Islamic law. Religion is too narrow a word in the way we normally use it.
Quote:
It doesn't matter which flavor of Islam is building the Mosque, the message the bad guys will get is "Kill Americans, get more mosques."
But this is silly. Do you seriously think that ANYONE will believe for a moment that a mosque in NY represents some reward for a bunch of terrorists? They may be deluded but they are not entirely psychotic. It is far more likely that the reverse would be true - millions of normal muslims would see it as a positive step and one which they would support to draw cultures together. That is why the American Muslims want to build it - they are quite clear in their position.
I suppose then, next we have to look at the synagogues - now there IS a can of worms...
LimpFish
Bikerman wrote:
Jinx wrote:
That would be a travesty and a dishonor to the memories of those who died on that day.

You cannot deny that the killers were Muslims promoting the aims of extremist Islam - by building a Mosque on that site America would essentially be saying "Ok, you win. Go ahead and keep killing us and we will roll over and become a Muslim nation... see it only took 3000 lives and you get a mosque. Imagine what you could get if you blew up a football stadium, or nuked Denver."

OK, let's break this down.
Firstly there are double standards at work here. I presume you wouldn't wish to characterise Christians as terrorist killers, yet you seem to be doing that to Muslims. How many Muslims are there in the US? Well we don't know that since figures on religion are not, apparently, kept. Somewhere between 1.5 million and 6 million is the range. Have these Muslims proved a threat? Have they carried out atrocities in the US? Not to my knowledge.
Will you oppose the building of a Christian Church on the grounds that several extremists have committed 8 murders, 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings, against abortion doctors? OK - not 3000 dead to be sure, but I'll bet the families feel just the same as the families of 9/11 victims.
You can't deny that these Christians were promoting the goals of extremist Christianity, so surely allowing Christians to build churches is an insult to the victims and their families?

The fact is that the mosque was proposed by Muslim civil leaders in New York as a symbol of solidarity. They were anxious to show their abhorrence for the attacks and to try and build bridges.
It may be too soon, and they may have misjudged the underlying feeling, but to frame the debate as you have - generalising about muslims as if the US Muslim population were just terrorists waiting to strike, is neither accurate nor particularly useful.
You should also remember that the Muslims actually own the land and could have built the mosque without asking. In fact they consulted widely and were approved by the local community board - ie the people who actually live there - the people with the most important opinions in the matter. One of them summed it up, i think, admirably:
Quote:
"Denying them the ability to build a mosque… would be like London denying the Roman Catholic Church the opportunity to build a church during the years of the IRA bombings."
Spot on.


While I agree with you in a way for sure. You have to agree that it is a big difference between 3000 kills by those few muslims (1.5 to 6 million), and 8 murders by the... what could it be, 100-200 million christians?
Bikerman
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.
jwellsy
When I hear or read about what the motives are to build it, I can't help but recall their teachings that it is justified to lie and break contracts with infidels if it's for the purpose of protecting Islam. They are stating these motives to infidels.
Bikerman
jwellsy wrote:
When I hear or read about what the motives are to build it, I can't help but recall their teachings that it is justified to lie and break contracts with infidels if it's for the purpose of protecting Islam. They are stating these motives to infidels.

So these American muslims, who say they hate terrorism and have no terrorist connections are in fact plotting to build a mosque for some nasty reason whilst at the same time asking permission when they own the land and could have built in anyway without permission.

Do you realise how silly and how racist you sound?
jwellsy
Well that personal attack sounds like rule 11 of Rules for Radicals.
Quote:
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

http://vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html
Bikerman
jwellsy wrote:
Well that personal attack sounds like rule 11 of Rules for Radicals.
Quote:
Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

http://vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html

It wasn't an attack - it was a genuine attempt to get you to look again at your posting before too many other people see it and think you ARE what I only suggest you look like, from that posting.
If you want to let it stand then fine, please yourself.

PS - you have completely misunderstood your rulebook if you think this is what it is talking about. The rules for radicals is a set of techniques to force change from the powerful without having power yourself. I already have the power if I wished to exercise it (I don't) so I don't need to resort to the tactics outlines in the pamphlet.
paul_indo
This has an historical precedent. To signify victory over an opponent a mosque is built.
In Jerusalem it was built hundreds of years ago on the site of the Jewish temple.
In this case it is proposed to be built as near as possible to a "sacred" site to the American people.
It will be seen as a symbol of victory by many thousands, in fact probably millions of muslims around the world. Both terrorist and moderate.

I had already been in Indonesia for a number of years when 911 happened and I was amazed that, apart from a small number of very educated Indonesians, many people either thought it was unimportant or that America even deserved this and that as muslims had done it they must have had a good reason.

I am talking about ordinary people who would probably harm no one, but they are totally brainwashed that Islam is good and anything to support it must be ok.
I think it is important to understand that most muslims have minimal education because they live in countries like Indonesia where 75% of the population leave school at 12 or 13 years old.
At present there are eschristian church closed on a regular basis with no government opposition. the latest is taking it's case to the UN as they have not recieved any help in Indonesia. Where are all these moderate muslims who could end the problem overnight?
At home in bed and they mostly couldn't care less.

Most muslim countries are poor, even poorer than Indonesia, so they can not be expected to research and hold opinions based on a knowledge and have a balanced view. This is not their fault.
It does not mean they are bad people but it is dangerous because they are easily manipulated.
This is why all autocratic systems limit education, it enables control of the people.
Fundamental Islam is spreading and the uneducated poor are easy targets.

Why do we never see muslims protesting against the extremists, except a tiny minority of rich educated American or European muslims as someone once pointed out, but they are not even 0.1% of the worlds muslims who join these protests and hardly indicative of the general feelings throughout the muslim world.

I am not against muslims as such, my wife and most of my friends are muslim, but I am against any religion which maintains such a poor record of human rights.

eg Saudi arabia, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Iran and most other islamic countries.

yes, I know Indonesia isn't technically Islamic, but with a purported 90% muslim population and the fact that government departments are renowned for only employing muslims it might as well be.

See my post "who does the government belong to?"
LimpFish
Bikerman wrote:
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.


I never said they were american, I said they were muslims, which I believe even you have to agree to.
hunnyhiteshseth
LimpFish wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.


I never said they were american, I said they were muslims, which I believe even you have to agree to.


For that matter even muslims as followers of religion don't kill anybody. It is just the fanatic few.
deanhills
hunnyhiteshseth wrote:
LimpFish wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.


I never said they were american, I said they were muslims, which I believe even you have to agree to.


For that matter even muslims as followers of religion don't kill anybody. It is just the fanatic few.
Totally agreed. Sort of universal language. I'm really sorry it got as far as this. Can't be good for the US relationship with the rest of the Muslim world. Although hopefully the Muslims outside the US will be more understanding of the fact that not all Americans think exactly the same either. And that hopefully it is just a few making lots of noise and trying to hype others up?
liljp617
hunnyhiteshseth wrote:
LimpFish wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.


I never said they were american, I said they were muslims, which I believe even you have to agree to.


For that matter even muslims as followers of religion don't kill anybody. It is just the fanatic few.


Of course, few meaning a disturbingly large number.
hunnyhiteshseth
liljp617 wrote:
hunnyhiteshseth wrote:
LimpFish wrote:
Bikerman wrote:
You are confused. American muslims killed nobody. The terrorists were mostly Saudi, with a couple of other assorted gulf states.


I never said they were american, I said they were muslims, which I believe even you have to agree to.


For that matter even muslims as followers of religion don't kill anybody. It is just the fanatic few.


Of course, few meaning a disturbingly large number.


In that case, number of fanatic christians would be very disturbingly large number!
Nameless
The furor, ignorance and hatedom over this incident would be almost certainly be enough for me to lose faith in humanity if I hadn't already done so multiple times by now. Just a few of the replies in this thread are enough that my face is stinging from all the palm it's getting. This is inane.

Hey, I have an idea! Let's ban the running of pubs everywhere that a drunken fight has broken out, because otherwise we're only encouraging that evil drinking culture that teaches people to abuse and murder.

Oh WAIT. That's not a good analogy at all - it might actually have the slightest hint of positive social change as a logical consequence instead of promoting idiotic discrimination worthy of the crusades themselves. Whoops!

...

ARGH. Darn it, people, grow up end rant.
deanhills
Good posting Nameless and am dead curious what your thoughts are about this. What would your solution be? I would like to see it as an opportunity for people to make peace with one another. The fight is supposedly to be with extremists who are non-residents of the United States, and now it would seem that US citizens are turning on one another almost to the point of racism. Totally illogical. Those extremists outside the US must think they have scored a few points in this that they had not calculated on when they flew into Twin Towers in 2001.
LimpFish
Nameless wrote:
The furor, ignorance and hatedom over this incident would be almost certainly be enough for me to lose faith in humanity if I hadn't already done so multiple times by now. Just a few of the replies in this thread are enough that my face is stinging from all the palm it's getting. This is inane.

Hey, I have an idea! Let's ban the running of pubs everywhere that a drunken fight has broken out, because otherwise we're only encouraging that evil drinking culture that teaches people to abuse and murder.

Oh WAIT. That's not a good analogy at all - it might actually have the slightest hint of positive social change as a logical consequence instead of promoting idiotic discrimination worthy of the crusades themselves. Whoops!

...

ARGH. Darn it, people, grow up end rant.


Way to have hubris and believe you have the objectively right opinion, while totally unaware of the fact that you are just as subjective as everybody else.

A better analogy would be if we should not try to avoid that people drink too much, even though drinking in itself is not illegal? The consequences sure are (assault, murder, rape, etc).

Get off your high horses man.
deanhills
Now this is an interesting story and I thought I should post it here as it belongs with this thread. A New Jersey Car Dealer offered to donate a new car to a Pastor Jones of Florida if he would give up on burning the Quran:
Quote:
Jones had threatened to burn the Muslim holy book on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks over plans to build an Islamic center and mosque near where terrorists brought down the World Trade Center nine years ago. Muslims revere the book as the word of God and view its destruction as sacrilege.

His plans drew opposition across the world. President Barack Obama appealed to him on television, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates called him personally. Gen. David Petraeus, head of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, said carrying out the plan would have endangered American troops.

To the greatest surprise of the Car Dealership, Pastor Jones did respond. And undertook not to burn the Quran, as a sacrifice because he wanted to donate the car to an organization that helps abused Muslim women. So he is doing it for an altruistic reason? Amazing how good initiatives can rub off on the good sides of people. Great tactic? Sounds like a real savvy car dealership as well ..... Smile

Source: Yahoo!News
LimpFish
deanhills wrote:
Now this is an interesting story and I thought I should post it here as it belongs with this thread. A New Jersey Car Dealer offered to donate a new car to a Pastor Jones of Florida if he would give up on burning the Quran:
Quote:
Jones had threatened to burn the Muslim holy book on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks over plans to build an Islamic center and mosque near where terrorists brought down the World Trade Center nine years ago. Muslims revere the book as the word of God and view its destruction as sacrilege.

His plans drew opposition across the world. President Barack Obama appealed to him on television, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates called him personally. Gen. David Petraeus, head of the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, said carrying out the plan would have endangered American troops.

To the greatest surprise of the Car Dealership, Pastor Jones did respond. And undertook not to burn the Quran, as a sacrifice because he wanted to donate the car to an organization that helps abused Muslim women. So he is doing it for an altruistic reason? Amazing how good initiatives can rub off on the good sides of people. Great tactic? Sounds like a real savvy car dealership as well ..... Smile

Source: Yahoo!News


I did not know this. That was a good outcome I think. No qurans burnt, and abused muslim women get help. God knows they need it.
mugundhan
Jinx wrote:
Oh, H-E-Double-Hockey-Sticks, NO!

To build a Mosque on a site where 3,000 people were killed at the hands of extremist Muslims would be like letting the killers dance on the graves of their victims.

That would be a travesty and a dishonor to the memories of those who died on that day.

You cannot deny that the killers were Muslims promoting the aims of extremist Islam - by building a Mosque on that site America would essentially be saying "Ok, you win. Go ahead and keep killing us and we will roll over and become a Muslim nation... see it only took 3000 lives and you get a mosque. Imagine what you could get if you blew up a football stadium, or nuked Denver."

You can't give in to bullies, not ever! The more you give, the more they will try to take.

dnt target particular religon they dnt do some person belongs to islam did that
silverdown
Well there ups and downs about this idea.... plus since before it was cleaned up they had engeerings desigining a new set of towers..... at least that i what i heard..... repear for 2021? Rolling Eyes
deanhills
silverdown wrote:
Well there ups and downs about this idea.... plus since before it was cleaned up they had engeerings desigining a new set of towers..... at least that i what i heard..... repear for 2021? Rolling Eyes
That would be quite nice. I miss those towers, the NY skyline just does not look complete without them. At least I know when I see them in a movie that the movie predates 2001. Smile
Deathwing
Depends how it is spun. While some undoubtedly see the idea of a mosque at the site of a truly awful act of violence by muslim extremists as an affront to the victims of the attack, there is also the symbolic overtures that by allowing it to be built, it is an understanding between the US and government and more moderate mainstream islam that they will not allow the extremists to divide people because of faith.

It is not condoning an act of violence, but it is showing the world and Islam that the American government and people understand that Islam as a whole did not want or condone the attack, and does send a powerful message of unity. It would give the two fingers to those extremist views, both muslim and non-muslim, who sought to create that divide during and after the 9/11 attacks
handfleisch
Deathwing wrote:
Depends how it is spun. While some undoubtedly see the idea of a mosque at the site of a truly awful act of violence by muslim extremists as an affront to the victims of the attack, there is also the symbolic overtures that by allowing it to be built, it is an understanding between the US and government and more moderate mainstream islam that they will not allow the extremists to divide people because of faith.

It is not condoning an act of violence, but it is showing the world and Islam that the American government and people understand that Islam as a whole did not want or condone the attack, and does send a powerful message of unity. It would give the two fingers to those extremist views, both muslim and non-muslim, who sought to create that divide during and after the 9/11 attacks

Unfortunately it was mainly spun by reactionaries, the Christian Right who uses these things to get their followers to donate, and reactionary politicians who use these things to distract people from other issues. This mosque had nothing to do with "ground zero", it's not at ground zero, but was seized on by politicians and zealots in order to inflame the public.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
Deathwing wrote:
Depends how it is spun. While some undoubtedly see the idea of a mosque at the site of a truly awful act of violence by muslim extremists as an affront to the victims of the attack, there is also the symbolic overtures that by allowing it to be built, it is an understanding between the US and government and more moderate mainstream islam that they will not allow the extremists to divide people because of faith.

It is not condoning an act of violence, but it is showing the world and Islam that the American government and people understand that Islam as a whole did not want or condone the attack, and does send a powerful message of unity. It would give the two fingers to those extremist views, both muslim and non-muslim, who sought to create that divide during and after the 9/11 attacks

Unfortunately it was mainly spun by reactionaries, the Christian Right who uses these things to get their followers to donate, and reactionary politicians who use these things to distract people from other issues. This mosque had nothing to do with "ground zero", it's not at ground zero, but was seized on by politicians and zealots in order to inflame the public.
For a place like New York, this is really sad, as this reaction probably will be remembered for being religiously intolerant and narrow minded. When awful things like 9/11 happens, people of different religions are supposed to stick together, not turn on one another. I'm almost certain there must have been muslims among those who had perished as well. Would be interesting if they could construct a Disney Style World Emporium of "Churches" of every kind there is, including mosques, synagogues, cathedrals, non-theist places of gatherings, etc. They can then call it the Ground Zero Emporium of Commemoration. Or something like that.
handfleisch
deanhills wrote:
For a place like New York, this is really sad, as this reaction probably will be remembered for being religiously intolerant and narrow minded. When awful things like 9/11 happens, people of different religions are supposed to stick together, not turn on one another. I'm almost certain there must have been muslims among those who had perished as well. Would be interesting if they could construct a Disney Style World Emporium of "Churches" of every kind there is, including mosques, synagogues, cathedrals, non-theist places of gatherings, etc. They can then call it the Ground Zero Emporium of Commemoration. Or something like that.

That's a really good idea. There are interfaith centers around and one in NYC.
Related topics
A tribute to 9/11 Victims..
Money for education or war.
Justification for War in Iraq
MUDs
Thrash Metal
Immigrant March
September 11 plotter Moussaoui, should he be executed?
Freedom Tower/World Trade Center
Megaman Phoenix
Emirates work on first zero-carbon city
Black Tea Party Protesters
Burn a Quran day.
U.S. Burns Bibles in Afghanistan
Is El Qaeda still a force to be reckoned with?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.