I admit that I have not followed the story very closely and I have no relatives that were connected to the events on Sep 11th. Additionally I have no religious preference whatsoever. Background story for those who havn't heard of it at all...There is a large building two blocks from Ground Zero which was aquired to be used as a mosque for the study and practice of Islam among other things that I havn't followed well. They claim they will teach moderate Islam in the mosque and be peaceful.

However, there has since been a large protest which has turned almost violent with emotions running high. Many people disapprove the buildings being built because they consider Ground Zero "hallowed ground". Those that support the moque indicate they are able to build this mosque reguardless thanks to the Constitution.

I believe that the thought of sterotyping an entire religion of over one billion people because there's so much blood spilled over that particular religion lately is a crime against humanity. And I know about the blood being spilled...I went to Afghanistan with my NATO partners and watched as many NATO lives were lost trying to help that country turn things around for themselves. The Taliban have used strict Shiria Law in the past to enstil control over the population while maintaing a presence of justification in the name of God. This law is used by opposers of the mosque to indicate how violent Islam is.

Why would Americans join other countries in trying to help an Islamic country break free of Shiria law only to persecute the entire religion and use it as a tool against them. I can't bring my rage onto this page that I feel when I see those people marching around New York saying how evil that mosque is because the practice that will take place in it. There are tons of Islamic people living in the United States, how the hell many Shiria courts have you seen in USA folks? Get a freaking clue.

Then I read about these (I wish I could swear on here) talking about "we're going to bombard the mosque if it's built". What the hell? We are going to use terrorist...that's right TERRORISTIC methods as well? Has New York just shown us the forfront of what's to come? Has there been a shift in the world? Is there now seriously reverse terrorism.

Barrack Obama is getting plaster because he said that the organizers have the right to build the mosque there but he wouldn't comment on how wise that is. I say it is none of anyone's business how wise anything is. If they want to build 5 mosques there they should. Islam is not the threat radicals controling middle eastern countries using Islam is the threat. I believe if the USA continues to make it so hard for Islamics to live in their country we are only fertilizing the hate and making it easier for the bad guys to win. What that comes down to is more home bred terrorists.

In any case I'm sure this forum will be a fun place to discuss this and see all the different veiws clash togeather. Let us know what you think.

Personally I thinks this is just, for lack of a better way to describe it, a way of twisting the dagger in the wound. People (especially in New York) are still trying to get past the great tragedy they faced, and this is just ridiculous. I don't mean to sound like a racist but when I first heard this story I went from tolerant to supremacist in nothing flat. It was almost the same scenario in my town, there was a plot of land at the corner of 2 major roads which sat there for 8 years, saying the "project" was under development. Literally the day after the towers fell construction started full boar on the place, which to the surprise of many of my friends and neighbors turned out to be a Mosque, not a community center but a full temple and everything. And just like what is happening in NY now there literally was a huge riot in the streets to the point that not only were the police and SWAT called in but was on the verge of having the National Guard called in (I was called up and ordered to report to the nearest post in full combat dress and gear i.e M16, 1911, tear gas, riot shield, and gas mask).

People are just too one sided and tunnel visioned to accept it at this point in time and I have to agree with them, the world and especially the battle between politics and religon are far too volatile right now, we are literally sitting on a powder keg and if this event doesn't light the fire that sets it off I don't know what

I think it should be built because 1. It's the community's decision, nobody outside the community should even have a say, but more importantly is 2. It's their constitutional right.

As I see it, there are four scenarios (there are more, but I'll stick with four for sake of argument):

1. Mosque does not get built and no one gets hurt.
2. Mosque does not get built and someone gets hurt.
3. Mosque gets built and no one gets hurt.
4. Mosque gets built and someone gets hurt.

Looking at number one, we see it is a relatively safe bet so not building it and not running the risk of having it vandalized, bombarded, etc. Looking at number two, we see there is a possibility that it may upset someone enough to drive them to violence and blow something up or what have you. This may have unintended consequences as it would most likely put more sanctions on the people of New York, increase racial profiling, and give birth to "The Patriot Act 2.0." Looking at number three, we can see this would probably upset a lot of people, but would not really hurt anyone. Looking at number four, we can see that the building, its occupants, and its supporters may become targets for those the construction of said building upset. This may lead to vandalism, bombardment, picketing, boycotting, etc.

Now, this is where it comes down to the nitty-gritty. How is one to weigh human life versus a building? Most Americans think human life is the ultimate sacrifice, penalty, etc. I'm not sure about the whole idea of Jihad, but, as I recall, there is something in there about martyrs and seventy-two virgins. I know of nothing like this in Christianity, which is probably the predominant religion in the USA, but that is not to say that a non-Muslim won't blow himself up or go on a shooting spree.

Essentially, the situation is a Catch-22 between a rock and a hard place. Either way, it seems likely someone is going to get hurt, whichever decision is made.

As for their "Constitutional Right," look at the First Amendment:



The above says nothing about zoning laws or buildings of worship. As long as the building can be built somewhere else, I do not see it as an infringement on the First Amendment. If, let's say, there was a law in New York state that said no mosques could be built, that would be an infringement. But, I am going to assume the area is zoned for that type of building and they are in compliance with all other bylaws governing buildings in the city of New York.


NB: I'm going to make a comment here, as well. I blame the media, the government, as well as the American populace and its ignorance. Firstly, the media because it is controlled by money and political bias because of that money. Secondly, the government because they think their fallacious ideologies make things better when, in fact, they only make them worse and their corruption in general. And finally, the American people and their ignorance because they fear nearly everything for no good reason, refuse to learn about their country and why and how it was founded, have continued to vote in idiotic politicians on promises they never intended to deliver, continue to gladly give away their rights and freedoms for the illusion of security, for being lazy and pointing their fingers at someone to blame (yes, I know, I'm a hypocrite) instead of doing something about it, allowing the corruption to continue, etc, etc, etc, etc.

-End Rant-

They can build or not build, but either choice may bear dire consequences.

As a total outsider looking in....

I totally understand that the people who have distain have a right to be angry..

I also believe that it's possible that this could be a godsend if the mosque will allow non-muslim to enter.. to educate..

We're in a world to get down to basics again ... Love thy neighbour and all that stuff..

50 years ago we had a global problem with skin colour - oh look!! no problem today unless you're an idiot...

It's got to be a conditional build if it's going to work...

Devil's Advocate: "What conditions would those be, Gaza?"

I'll only say what I believe to myself LT - I'm not trying to make a debate ... just a personal statement on what I think...

If you want to tell me to stay out of the discussion - thats fine - but I don't think I'll listen...

What's wrong with a habitual condition on who enters a building..??

If a Muslim, Shi-ite, Ba'ath, Hindu, Buddhist or Jew walked into a Sunday Service that I happened to be attending.. Would the piano stop playing..??

I think not - come one - come all...

"I suppose that in the land of the free, people are free to build a mosque” - Len Day

a lot and a lot of American Muslims are natives, so you've the same right as you have! and as you're an American citizen i think you know the united states constitution!

this is the first Amendment of the Constitution:

as you know the first ten Amendments collectively are commonly known as the Bill of Rights.

Well! the Constitution says that it's okey. So! I see that they have all the right to build a mosque whenever and wherever they want.

+ the president Obama defends right to build this mosque : Obama defends right to build mosque near 911 site

LOL: so what Americans wants from Americans ???????




Islam is Violant ???




Still there's Barbarianism and ignorance !!!

+ do you know that there's also Muslim Victims of September 11th Attack ?

read this and get a clue: Muslim Victims of September 11th Attack

peace,

I meant no disrespect, I was merely asking for clarification on the conditions of the mosque being built, in your opinion. Am I correct that you would only allow the mosque to be built on the condition all may enter and be educated?

It's obviously only a dream-fart - it's just how I'd like to see it..

The building to be built by Americans - to be entered by all and to have some kind of memorium and education for all..

I'm assuming that would be difficult..

Hey - I'm British and not an architect - but that's how I see it working...

Wow great debate going on. I for one think it should be built. People need to learn and teach tolerance.

A good quote from Crash Override "we are literally sitting on a powder keg and if this event doesn't light the fire that sets it off I don't know what". It made me think of Israel and how much blood has been shed in that country in the name of the holy land. Sacred ground almost sounds like our very own holy land. I agree that building the mosque at this time isn't the most friendly decision.

I am also shocked to hear about that mosque that jumped up after the buildings fell and having to call in the National Guard. However tolerance is definatly a good word for this situation. We need to tolerate everyone's actions so long as they are not infringing on other's right to the pursuit of happieness. In this case the entirety of anger derived from the situation is because it's going to be a mosque. If it were a church no one would care. This hate can only breed hate. Muslim countries will only veiw the United States as on a war against Islam...more fuel for their fire.

Honestly ^^^ makes a good point I think that the best solution that would be a win for both sides woul be if they just built it somewhere else, I'm sure that there are plenty of other places that are available for it to go, but not right next to ground zero. This way everyone is satisfied the muslim people get their cultural center and the new yorkers get their "Hallowed Ground"

It's actually not next to ground zero, it's a few blocks away. I honestly think that people opposing the mosque are being oversensitive, and while this might not be nice to say, ignorant. Personally, I'm sick of the 9/11 attacks being used as an excuse to create controversy all the time, as a country we need to get over it and move on. If the mosque is prevented from being built that's just one more freedom we as a country have lost, even if in this case it only affects one group of people, due to 9/11.

I wonder how the Islamic's would feel, if the Americans, or British were to build a church or cathedral, in the heart of Afghanistan. Near one of their trouble spots, say for example? How would they react?

It doesn't matter how they would react, we are not them. It's a pretty silly argument that we should violate the constitutional rights of someone just because another country wouldn't respect those rights.

On the contrary, I think that this does matter, Affinity. If someone throws a stone through my window, I don't automatically go round to his house and throw one through his window. The point I'm making, is basically the same. If the Mosque being built near 911 ground zero, is going to cause so much trouble, then it shouldn't be built, and the Islamic community should respect that view. I asked how they would feel, were the shoe on the other foot.

Based on my understanding of Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers and a proponent of limited government and a strict interpretation of the constitution, the mosque would be built. As for the reaction to the mosque being built, it is somewhat up in the air.

People, in general, are prone to knee-jerk reactions based on emotional attachments or oppositions to situations and subjects based on past experience and ingrained belief structures and paradigms. Until such time as logic becomes the norm (or we evolve into Vulcans ) , this will continue.

As for building a church in a Muslim country, it would probably be seen as a form of usurpation and an imposition of beliefs on a foreign culture, whereas in the United States, you really can't get away with the same argument as it is a country based on immigration and multiculturalism.

I think a lot of the opposition has to do with fact that the term "Muslim" is thrown around too much in the media and thereby trickling down to use by the general population. Had the phrase "Muslim extremist" or "Muslim terrorist" not been used so adamantly, this might have been avoided. Had the term "religious extremist" or "religious terrorist" been used, the blame on the Muslim community might have been lessened, as well. Most people have a constant and somewhat detrimental psychological habit of labeling things in order to categorize them and place blame. They want someone to blame because they feel disempowered by the events that took place nearly a decade ago and happen to keep those thoughts alive and use them as an excuse to not find a solution and move on with life.

No matter the decision, I see there being a high probability of violence in one form or another.

you had me at 2 blocks..

why don't they move it another 30 blocks down the road.. fair enough we live and move on but that's outrages and pathectic regardless of claims of 'teaching the right way'
memories mean sh*t to the people who allow this to happen.. i wonder how big the 'Cheque' is...

Down the Road.. Off You Go>>>>> █

will get to this subject at a later time god willing

That is one of the things that boggles my mind, a third of my life has passed since those attacks happened, and they only affected a very small group of people who lost loved ones. Yet everyone is clinging to the event, in what I suspect is a desperate attempt to place the blame for all the other problems they have in life on others. I could blame the media, but honestly, they aren't the problem. The media is only catering to an audience, people want to hear all the hate mongering being spouted on their favorite news stations so the news stations give it to them.

As for the violence, I think that once the mosque is built the whole controversy will die out not long after. Sure, there will always be people bringing it up in conversation, but I don't see any actual violence occurring.

I think we can all agree here that we can not blame a whole section of society with the action of a very tiny grp of radical indivuals. 9/11 was just that, an attack by a tiny grp of self proclaimed religious freedom fighters on a queste against the US. And since we agree we cant blame the entire muslim community for that, then my question about the mosque is....why should the entire muslim community then suffer the consequences by refusing them a house of worship? If you apply the principle we're discussing here today, the US would be long out of churches since the foulest domestic actions up to 9/11 were christians, McVeigh and all the ppl before that. I dont see why a mosque should be the problem, you do build em for muslims today and the future, the future everyone looks at and hopes for will be bright and preacefull. If you start by building that future fueled by intollerance the outcome wont be bright and will never be peacefull.

The vilification of Muslims and their religion is worrying and unfair.
The actions of a terrorist group being blamed on a religion because they CLAIM to be doing it in the name of Islam, doesn't make it so.

Imagine, if some group detonated a bomb killing a large number of people, then claimed it was done in the name of Catholicism.
Would people take that claim seriously and vilify Catholics?
I think not.

However, while the western world continues to wage wars and occupy Muslim countries(for dubious and selfish reasons), the terrorists attacking the west will, by default, come from a Muslim background, servicemen from the west will die in these conflicts at the hands Muslim opposition forces as a result innocent Muslims and their religion will be viewed with mistrust by the herd.

This situation is not helped by a media that uses every trick in the book to stir things up in order to create revenue for themselves.
Its a sad state of affairs

The fact that the british and american army have invaded their country not withstanding?

Isn't that what happened in Northern Ireland with Protestants and Catholics? That was very much a religious war and it was fought (and to an extent, still is) by to factions of "Christianity." So much for being Christ-like.

Yet Christianity isn't generally vilified in western society because the majority of the population belongs to it, and usually the Inquisition and the slaughter of the Templars, Merovingians, the three Crusades, witch hunts, etc. are conveniently hushed and swept under the rug so they don't look bad and if such things are brought up, they are usually excused as water under the bridge.

Wouldn't it be nice if everyone could let bygones be bygones and move on with life?

Err no it isn't what happened in Northern Ireland.
A nationalist group seeking dissolution of British sovereignty in Ireland waged a campaign on political agenda's, at no time was any violence committed claimed in the name of any god.

As to the many atrocities committed in history in the name of Christianity being hushed up I would disagree, they are regularly debated and many Tv documentaries are made, books are published every year and, from personal experience, taught in schools.

I agree it would be nice if everyone could let bygones be bygones and move on with life.

I think you hit the nail on the head with your last statement. People will think the way the tabloid editorials tell them to and people will move on only when they're no longer bombarded by the media telling them they're as bad as the terrorists if they do.

So you're saying "the Troubles" had absolutely nothing to do with Catholics and Protestants? Many of my Irish friends will say otherwise.

no i'm saying god didn't enter into it, in N.I. political views were dictated by which side of the community you came from.
catholics, in general, nationalist
protestants, unionists.
it was in reality more tribal than religious.

To put it simply: They wanted Home Rule, as opposed to Rule, based on English Law. They were opposed to the Monarchy Ruling Ireland, and fought to keep the British Government out.

Michael Collins

Michael CollinsBorn: 16-Oct-1890
Birthplace: Clonakilty, County Cork, Ireland
Died: 22-Aug-1922
Location of death: Beal-na-Blath, Cork, Ireland
Cause of death: Assassination
Remains: Buried, Glasnevin Cemetery, Dublin, Ireland

Gender: Male
Religion: Roman Catholic
Race or Ethnicity: White
Sexual orientation: Matter of Dispute
Occupation: Activist

Nationality: Ireland
Executive summary: Irish Nationalist, spymaster

Irish Nationalist activist and military leader, after work in London as a civil servant he was elected to UK parliament in 1918 for South Cork, but his party, Sinn Féin, refused to take their seats. He managed guerrilla warfare against England during the Anglo-Irish War (1919–21), to great success. Collins also directed the intelligence operations of the IRA. In 1920, a £10,000 bounty for his capture or death, making him the most wanted man by the British establishment. After a truce was brought in 1921, he was among those who negotiated the partition of Ireland, an act which he considered his own "death warrant." He was assassinated soon thereafter.



He was also, as it so happens.....My great Uncle, on my Mother side.

islam is not a violent religion, people use its name to commit terrible acts, as happens in other religions, am i being cynical or is this a political decision

just as a side note, in bolton in england there are over 5000 religious dwellings most of which are mosques (its very easy to get this statis) is it anything to do with excemption from council tax. i am not being racist but another example of religion being used for gain

As far as Irish Nationalism - Republicanism and Unionism goes... It's not a clear divide ....

Living in the country in question for over 35 years - I can safely say that all Political parties and participants always have something to say... We all have freedom of choice and it seems that over the last 40 -50 years - if you can't be heard by normal means - say it in the loudest possible means.. bombs - killings - intimidation - sectarianism..

In fact if you go back to 1916 - when Ireland became a Republic or "Free State" This so called fighting was enthused by Protestant & Roman Catholic - it was not a religious battle..

The biggest piece of bile is the "Battle of the Boyne" - July 12th 1690 - between the English King James and King William of Orange.. [HOLLAND].. The House of Orange was a Protestant nobility and adversarys of James' Roman Catholic hierachy..

Northern Ireland Unionism -in it's wisdom - decided to celebrate this every year since.. It doesn't really help - and yes I'm a Protestant.. but only by birth - I certainly don't practice..

My country is a completely different scenario to what this topic is all about - if you built a Mosque in Belfast I don't think anyone would care... In fact I'd welcome it to put a spanner in the already complex works...

So - in a nutshell... We all know religion is man-made - but use it as an excuse to get what the "elite" require..

i was brought up in a very masonic house hold in glasgow ( i dont practise) but in ulster, northern ireland or the 6 counties (which ever you prefer) i think they would ask is it a protestant or catholic mosque
i agree religion was used to control the population and the leaders seem to use it to their benefit for gain

I'll agree with that.

Thanks LT - first thing we've agreed on...

thank god, it still there is a wise minds.


I disagree with that ... not all !!!

If Religeon is not man-made, then what is it? Who first conceived it, if not man....

 

yes! is totally allowed, 

and they will not make a mosque there, it just an Islamic center will be established for an education purposes ( for the muslims, and for non-muslims

as well; to give the real peaceful face of Islam, who is distorted in the west cos of media and cos of the stupid and ignorant Behavior of some

muslims as well )

+ this Islamic center is located outside the grand zero!


and the crazy thing! is what a church in Florida ( Dove church ) will do in the comming 9/11; the will do an International day to burn the Holy Quran !!

that's very an uncivilized act !!!CNN:U.S. Church plans Quran burning event on 9/11

they should focus less on their differences, and concentrate on the similarities and common ground between American Christians and Muslims.

in doing acts like that they complicate things more than it is already!  




Do you think that you comes from nothing, and you lives this life for nothing !!! sorry! I'll not go off topic with this subject !

People have to have something to hate.

They don't have to, but it makes them feel like there problems are able to be blamed on something tangible, but more importantly: something out of their control. It's a way of placing the blame on everyone but themselves instead of changing whatever it is they think is wrong in their life. I don't blame them, or fault them, for this. If placing the blame on someone else is how they cope with their lives then so be it. The problem is when things like this mosque issue come into play, when they actually affect the lives of other people, that I think it is wrong.

Any religion is the course of all evil

Generalizations are a bad thing, especially in this sense. I could easily say that any human is the course of all evil and it would have as much merit as your statement.

Show me a religion that is good for us,if you are different they are scared of you,who creates this fear.....look around,all of us.


I believe in what I THINK IS TRUTH.....and that is peace and respect for people who believe in other things and not criticize them.

I don't think truth means what you think it means. Pick any religion, it will have done good and bad things, it will be good for some people and wrong for others. Pick anything, same thing applies. You are generalizing entire cultures and communities into a narrow view that can be applied to anything and then trying to justify it with fortune cookie statements. You say you think peace and respect for people who believe other things is "truth" yet you are disrespecting billions of people. I think you are ignoring your own philosophy.

Truth is a metaphysical abstract that most people think they know about. To most people, truth is that which is agreed upon by the masses. Sanity is also something defined by the masses. I prescribe to my own understanding of truth as some of you may have noticed.

Atrocities have also been committed in the name of "truth."

That doesn't make sense at all, truth is not some kind of abstract idea. It is something that has been verified to be correct.

Actually it can be quite difficult to define and philosophers have debated its meaning for millennia.
This could warrant a separate topic as it strays from this one quite alot.

Verified by whom and what is correct? You might want to look into metaphysics and the nature of reality.

Most people believe in the "Consensus Theory of Truth:" that which is agreed upon by the masses, or that which they are told to believe. I would consider this one to be extremely dangerous as most people are spoon-fed what to think and believe.

As I recall, there was something about the earth being flat, the earth being the center of the universe, a talking snake in a garden with a naked couple, weapons of mass destruction, leaches and having too much blood, etc, etc, etc.

Truth is a matter of perspective and belief, nothing more.

This is exactly why they don't teach philosophy in the mandatory education system: it destroys the system from the inside out.

Thank you, Kano.

you guys, you're totally OFF TOPIC

@ staypositive : you're saying big words than what you are !!!

peace,