"Ground Zero Mosque", Idiotic debate Options

[thefunkyredcaboose]

Anyone else think this whole debate is as asinine as I do? It isn't at Ground Zero and it isn't a Mosque.

Americans...

[sh4rpz]

I read about this a few months back. Can I just ask quickly if the Mosque being built at ground zero, or not? What is the factual info about the site and where it is etc?

Edit: Just read that it is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero. Anyone can confirm this? http://abcnews.go.com/WN/president-obama-s...ory?id=11401964

This post has been edited by sh4rpz: Aug 23 2010, 6:51 am

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

I read about this a few months back. Can I just ask quickly if the Mosque being built at ground zero, or not? What is the factual info about the site and where it is etc?

Edit: Just read that it is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero. Anyone can confirm this? http://abcnews.go.com/WN/president-obama-s...ory?id=11401964

That's about right. Though in terms of city blocks, two of them are nothing, especially when you consider how much square footage each of the Twin Towers took up. Also, the building in question was damaged in the 9/11 attacks as well. So to many, yes, it is considered part of Ground Zero.

Here's my view on this whole thing. Do they have a legal right to build the thing? Yes, they do. But if there were a single shred of truth to their claims of wanting to build bridges with the non-Muslim community, they would have listened to the outcry and moved the location. All they are doing now is ripping open a wound that is not close to healed and pouring salt and vinegar on it.

Maybe people would feel differently if the city wasn't so damn far behind on rebuilding the area, including having the memorials built. But as it stands right now, there's going to be a 15 story mosque (along with other amenities) that will overlook the giant hole where the towers once stood.

I worked just across the river from the towers, a scant 5 miles as the crow flies. I watched them burn and could smell the smoke for some time afterward when the winds were right. So yeah, people who casually dismiss this piss me the fuck off.

I still remember the helpless feeling of trying to contact everyone I knew who could possibly be in the area, dealing with overloaded cell phone systems, scouring news reports. Trying to find some way to help. Not even being able to give blood because they just couldn't accommodate any more donors.

So, I ask that you tread carefully here folks.

[Sakhmet2]

That's about right. Though in terms of city blocks, two of them are nothing, especially when you consider how much square footage each of the Twin Towers took up. Also, the building in question was damaged in the 9/11 attacks as well. So to many, yes, it is considered part of Ground Zero.
Here's my view on this whole thing. Do they have a legal right to build the thing? Yes, they do. But if there were a single shred of truth to their claims of wanting to build bridges with the non-Muslim community, they would have listened to the outcry and moved the location. All they are doing now is ripping open a wound that is not close to healed and pouring salt and vinegar on it.
Maybe people would feel differently if the city wasn't so damn far behind on rebuilding the area, including having the memorials built. But as it stands right now, there's going to be a 15 story mosque (along with other amenities) that will overlook the giant hole where the towers once stood.
I worked just across the river from the towers, a scant 5 miles as the crow flies. I watched them burn and could smell the smoke for some time afterward when the winds were right. So yeah, people who casually dismiss this piss me the fuck off.
I still remember the helpless feeling of trying to contact everyone I knew who could possibly be in the area, dealing with overloaded cell phone systems, scouring news reports. Trying to find some way to help. Not even being able to give blood because they just couldn't accommodate any more donors.
So, I ask that you tread carefully here folks.

I am not casually dismissing this at all. I think the distortion of reality and hypocrisy for political purposes - whores and fries are okay within 2 blocks of the site, but no community centres please - is a real issue. Muslims died in that attack. So did Christians, Jews, and probably representatives of all the major religions.

I remember that day really well too. My best friend lived in lower Manhattan when the attacks went down. I couldn't get in touch with him for a week . His family were frantic. We tried to drive to the city to look for him, but couldn't get through. He was sick for a long time because of asthma brought on by the ashes.

Thanks for the info Sakhmet2.
I come from an Islamic background, and I can tell you that my 1st thoughts when I read about the proposed building and the site, was that it would just bring about a series of problems based on misinterpretation and misunderstanding.

You would find a supporter is this columnist: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Mi...0303/story.html

I totally agree with you that the need for another mosque in the area - or church or synagogue, for that matter - is very questionable. NYC is full of places of worship. However, this centre was supposedly multi-cultural.

This post has been edited by Sakhmet2: Aug 23 2010, 7:47 am

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

I am not casually dismissing this at all. I think the distortion of reality and hypocrisy for political purposes - whores and fries are okay within 2 blocks of the site, but no community centres please - is a real issue. Muslims died in that attack. So did Christians, Jews, and probably representatives of all the major religions.

I remember that day really well too. My best friend lived in lower Manhattan when the attacks went down. I couldn't get in touch with him for a week . His family were frantic. We tried to drive to the city to look for him, but couldn't get through. He was sick for a long time because of asthma brought on by the ashes.

Whose political purposes? It sure as heck isn't one side over the other. Not when you've got Harry Reid, Democratic Senate Majority Leader, breaking ranks with the President over the issue.

The Republican party sure as heck isn't in lockstep on this either. Many agree that they have the legal right to build the thing. That still doesn't make it a smart move.

And what the fuck does whores and fries have to do with this? Fuck the Guardian and their cutesy fucking article.

The issue is the words they use for their intent stand in direct contradiction to the effect the place is having before it is even built.

[Sakhmet2]

Whose political purposes? It sure as heck isn't one side over the other. Not when you've got Harry Reid, Democratic Senate Majority Leader, breaking ranks with the President over the issue.

The Republican party sure as heck isn't in lockstep on this either. Many agree that they have the legal right to build the thing. That still doesn't make it a smart move.

As Pat Buchanan said, the political opportunism of individual politicans like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin.

The opportunism of certain groups of citizens to promote hatred and xenophobia.

As various commentators have noted, the opportunism of the media, including the New York Times. I read a column that noted the NY Times has not wasted any energy clarifying matters or reporting the facts because they've been so busy following the debate. They and other media outlets on all sides of the political spectrum have mostly just been basking in the increased traffic flow to their sites.

And what the fuck does whores and fries have to do with this? Fuck the Guardian and their cutesy fucking article

Whores and fries have a lot to do with it. It's all about hypocrisy. If people really think it's a sacred place, shouldn't they be campaigning to get rid of the less savory elements, including those fast food joints I wouldn't want my loved ones buried under, or adjacent to, a Burger King or a strip club. On the other hand, how many people know that building actually considered for construction directly over the site of Ground Zero was a mall. Maybe at some point people should have decided/should decide that all buildings damaged in the 9/11 attacks could not be used for any construction which was not strictly a memorial.

The issue is the words they use for their intent stand in direct contradiction to the effect the place is having before it is even built.

This is true. However, as I noted above, the site was partly chosen by some reality show guy. He "steered a developer" towards the site of the old Burlington Coat Factory. So how much input did the guy planning the actual centre have?

This post has been edited by Sakhmet2: Aug 23 2010, 8:05 am

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

As Pat Buchanan said, the political opportunism of individual politicans like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin.

Pat Buchanan is a religious extremist himself. Do you really want to be putting a lot of stock in what he says? Did it ever occur to you that his words are simply......ya know......political opportunism?

The opportunism of certain groups of citizens to promote hatred and xenophobia.

As various commentators have noted, the opportunism of the media, including the New York Times. I read a column that noted the NY Times has not wasted any energy clarifying matters or reporting the facts because they've been so busy following the debate. They and other media outlets on all sides of the political spectrum have mostly just been basking in the increased traffic flow to their sites.

Maureen Dowd, as liberal a NY Times columnist as there is, actually was pining for Dubya to weigh in on this. I nearly pissed myself when I read that.

Whores and fries have a lot to do with it. It's all about hypocrisy. If people really think it's a sacred place, shouldn't they be campaigning to get rid of the less savory elements, including those fast food joints I wouldn't want my loved ones buried under, or adjacent to, a Burger King or a strip club. On the other hand, how many people know that building actually considered for construction directly over the site of Ground Zero was a mall. Maybe at some point people should have decided/should decide that all buildings damaged in the 9/11 attacks could not be used for any construction which was not strictly a memorial.

If there are still whores in the area, then Mayor Bloomberg has been slacking in following his predecessor's example. Because say what you want about Rudy Guiliani, but he sure did a hell of a lot to clean up the streets on NYC. As for a burger joint, this is still a capitalist country and Burger King is still considered a slice of Americana. Your point on that is a non-starter.

And there have been quite a few plans bandied about regarding the site. A lot of them received major flak locally. Hell, the debate went on for years as to what would be an appropriate memorial.

This is true. However, as I noted above, the site was partly chosen by some reality show guy. He "steered a developer" towards the site of the old Burlington Coat Factory. So how much input did the guy planning the actual centre have?

Are you seriously suggesting that they're locked into that location and that location only? If not, your last statement lacks a point.

[Sakhmet2]

Pat Buchanan is a religious extremist himself. Do you really want to be putting a lot of stock in what he says? Did it ever occur to you that his words are simply......ya know......political opportunism?

Just because a pot calls a kettle black doesn't mean the kettle's not black.

Maureen Dowd, as liberal a NY Times columnist as there is, actually was pining for Dubya to weigh in on this. I nearly pissed myself when I read that.

Surely no one thinks she said that because she honestly values his opinion? It would have been great column-fodder, in the unlikely event they ran out of stuff to misrepresent.

If there are still whores in the area, then Mayor Bloomberg has been slacking in following his predecessor's example. Because say what you want about Rudy Guiliani, but he sure did a hell of a lot to clean up the streets on NYC. As for a burger joint, this is still a capitalist country and Burger King is still considered a slice of Americana. Your point on that is a non-starter.

The references are to some kind of escort club: legal but not appropriate.
And your point about "a slice of Americana" is a not only a non-starter, it's fuels the other side's arguments.

And there have been quite a few plans bandied about regarding the site. A lot of them received major flak locally. Hell, the debate went on for years as to what would be an appropriate memorial.
Are you seriously suggesting that they're locked into that location and that location only? If not, your last statement lacks a point.

Glad to see they don't go with over-rated no-talent Libeskind. His stuff is never buildable.

Are you seriously suggesting that they're locked into that location and that location only? If not, your last statement lacks a point.

You are twisting my argument so as not to reply to it. I never said they were locked into anything. I said that the site was not chosen specifically by the Muslim group buiding the mosque.

[ItchyTriggerFinger]

Just because a pot calls a kettle black doesn't mean the kettle's not black.

Hey, you're the one calling motives into question here. And I guarantee you Pat Buchanan has his own motives for taking this stand.

Surely no one thinks she said that because she honestly values his opinion? It would have been great column-fodder, in the unlikely event they ran out of stuff to misrepresent.

Oh hell no. Dowd detests all things Dubya. The fact that she could bring herself to even type it is amazing. And just goes to show how screwed up this thing is.

The references are to some kind of escort club: legal but not appropriate.
And your point about "a slice of Americana" is a not only a non-starter, it's fuels the other side's arguments.

And if they were building a new escort club, I'd agree with you.

You are twisting my argument so as not to reply to it. I never said they were locked into anything. I said that the site was not chosen specifically by the Muslim group buiding the mosque.

But they're still planning on building it anyway, even with knowing what they know now.

I'm out for a while. Having lunch with old co-workers. Be back later.