Attention: There Is Already a Mosque Near the WTC Site

reply to post by oozyism

The mosque is a political diversion used to hide the fact that there is so many jobless, the fact that American economy is at ruins, and the fact that Iran recently announced it will sell oil in any currency other than dollar.

I agree....but in many ways this will rally the Republican base to go out in vote....increases the anger a few more ticks.....turn it up to 11!!

that is why even Obama jumped in, because he knows it too, it was a good opportunity for him to divert attention from his failures, it worked didn't it?

It just gave Obama haters another reason to call him a muslim.....it may have hurt him more in the end.

Obama isn't willing to change our trade laws (even though he has said he would in the past, the votes aren't there anyway even if he wanted it done)....and pretty much NO REPUBLICANS and a a good chunk of Democrats won't touch it.

Free trade is a job destroyer.....we've been bleeding jobs for a long time now and they aren't going to come back until we we start taxing slave labor to protect our jobs and industries (what's left of them).


[edit on 17-8-2010 by David9176]

reply to post by Magnus47


The main teachings in Christianity I think should be based on the New Testment, not the Old one. Whenever there is a conflict, we should take hold onto the New Testment. That's his(Christ's) original new teachings and also the reason that the Christianity exists at all.

Even though I question their motives, I have to acknowledge that we 'do' have the freedom of religion. It is similar to the freedom of speech. They are a double-edged sword, which have pros and cons in their meaning.

Do Muslims have a right to build a Mosque somewhere in New York City? Yes, they do have a right, for as long as they are United States citizens.

----------

Since the war on terror is ending silently, without a clear victory, the tension between cultures is boiling to the surface. Muslims have historically placed mosques as a sign of victory, and they have used public relations tactics to cause division in other countries. We know this to be factual from what occurred in Jerusalem and Lebanon.

So, what do we do with that knowledge? How do we move forward without seeming prejudice?

Terrorism is an act of violence or intimidation in which someone does, so they can force people to change their lifestyle out of the fear of death or pain.

If we change our lifestyles in response to the acts of terrorism, the terrorists will have won a significant victory. Why? Their act of terrorism would have worked.

I don't like the idea behind putting this mosque too close to ground zero; however, I don't want terrorists to know that their acts of violence works.

So, we tolerate their existence. When the 9/11 site is completed in the next two years, we go down to the new site and celebrate. We gather out of defiance and resilience. We put on parades that purposefully pass the new mosque, and then ends at the 9/11 memorial site. Let them see our signs, floats, and everything else we can muster. We do it every year as a means to say, "You cannot break our will!"

Anyone can play the public relations card.

[edit on 17-8-2010 by Section31]

reply to post by Section31


I think every life form has the right to grow and flourish. It is like the freedom of speech.

But what if the life form happened to be a virus that can kill you from inside out? Are you going to let it come inside of your body one by one until it devours your whole life energy?

It may look and feel harmless when in small quantities. But when it starts to sap your blood, it will be too late.


This I say in parable. But I know what religion is and how dangerous it can be.
I warn you.

reply to post by notsoperfect


However, by denying them their right to worship where they please, aren't we just doing the same thing? We are giving up those rights that this country is founded on based on fervent beliefs. While what happened on 9/11 was a terrible tragedy, it does not change the fact that anyone including Muslims are allowed to worship where ever we want and if we deny them that right, then those behind 9/11 have already won. We will have changed our way of life and pretty much sullied the memory of those who lost their lives.

reply to post by awake_awoke


A strip bar, gambling and a potential gay bar next door...only in New York City! I don't believe in religion, but I do know any of the righteous religious denominations in my city wouldn't think of building their church among these "sinful businesses."
The use of fear really has a grip on this country. People need to focus on issues that affect them on a daily basis and stop being so gullible when the media uses issues like this to help improve their ratings.


[edit on 17-8-2010 by WeRpeons]

reply to post by Xcalibur254


Potent argument. But would you let your children fall into the Heaven's Gate knowing what we know what happened to them?

You certainly would not let it happen.

We know pretty much what fervant Moslems do even in this modernized time and society and at this very moment.

Shouldn't that enough to warn people against it?

reply to post by David9176


This is not about Republicans and Democrats, do you still believe in the two party system?

Republicans are as responsible for the job losses/ruined economy/and current wars, as the Democrats.

Both parties are responsible.

The Mosque issue is not even a issue, everyone knows what the American constitution allows and does not allow, and everyone knows what American laws are.

Are people accusing American Muslims of being responsible for 9/11? Or are people accusing American Muslims of being the master minds of 9/11? If not, then there is no debate, this is a Mosque being built in America for American Muslims to pray and study.

This is not even a debate, this has more like a rant against a group of people, because the country is in ruins, you have to blame your problems on someone? If you don't, then you have to change and do the hard, and boring work to bring that change, some times deadly.

So keeping blaming your own citizens, like that is gonna help, while leaving the corrupt politicians with fake hair at large, to feed the military complex.

ZZZzz

People are become Naive + Naive = double Naive - by the day.

Well, I confess that I have not read the whole thread. But the title, especially before the mod edited it, and a brief glance at the content was enough to draw a conclusion.
If you or anyone else does not think that this is a victory mosque meant to inflame any intelligent american that doesn't have his head up his arse, then I really have no idea how to explain to you the reality of the situation.
You have given a whole new meaning to the catch phrase "deny ignorance"!!!
If this makes me a bigot, then count me in. Must be a new word for "patriot".
Seeashrink

reply to post by oozyism

Want to see an ad than might piss you off? In regard to blame for 9/11?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm still a bit dumbfounded.

People can disapprove all they want, ultimately. If people truly feel that Islam is a threat to their way of life or in any other respect, then yes, they do have a right to express that view. The same is true of condemnation of any religion or belief system in the world. If you live in the United States, you absolutely have a right to express such views. (Just as I and others have the right to be saddened by them and to say so.)

However, by the same token, provided no laws are being violated, religious organizations have the right to build religious institutions. That ground zero is a sacred location is an opinion. (I share that one.) That its sacrosanct nature makes it off limits for nearby religious institutions or structures is also an opinion. (I do not share that one.) It is an opinion people are free to have and to express. However they cannot use that opinion to legally prevent the construction of what will be to others, an equally sacred religious institution.

Did anyone petition to have the already existing mosque removed after 9-11? Why not? Because succeeding in doing so would amount to religious discrimination. Why is this new, proposed one (and the other proposed facilities it will include) any more of a "threat" than the already existing one? There are many places with more than one church, temple, or other religious structure in close proximity. One can hold the opinion that they are redundant or unnecessary, but they still have the right to exist provided no laws are being broken.

I am not a religious person. I neither endorse nor condemn any religious belief system on the face of the Earth. There are some ostensible belief systems with which I personally disagree (hate-driven ideologies for example,) but I do not condemn their right to exist or to practice their faith in their own religious institutions as they please, so long as they are not using them to harm others or breaking any laws.

I see people saying (which they have the right to if that is what they believe) that certain religious groups (in this particular case Muslim groups, however I have seen the same logic applied to others) hide behind this freedom of religion in order to advance violent and destructive agendas. If that is true, then there surely must be proof of it, and legal action can then be taken to stop it, can it not? Not in this case? Why? I thought there was proof that these particular Muslims who plan to build this mosque are violent and a threat. No? Well then what's all this about?

There is a distinction between freedom of religion, and freedom to commit violence. If it should be proved that any religious institution or structure is threatening violence or harm against anyone, then legal action can and in my opinion should be taken in order to prevent it. Until and unless that happens though, what people are supporting is the abridgement of religious freedom on the basis of potential crimes which have yet to occur, and that I simply cannot support or agree with.

Not every member of any given religion or every structure associated with it is automatically going to endorse or agree with the most radical elements associated (correctly or incorrectly) with that faith and prohibiting the construction or practice of their faith on the basis of a potential threat is not only unconstitutional, but is in my opinion unethical. Likewise, everyone else has a right to disagree with me, and to say so. They just don't have the right to shut me up until and unless I threaten of commit violence (which I don't, and never will.) Just as they don't have the right to prevent the construction of this mosque and community center.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


darn, they are blaming American Muslims..

Well I think the prediction I made long, long time ago is coming true, when a super power goes down, it goes down with a booom/

Look at Nazi Germany, it was a super power, but when it was hit hard by economic down fall, it went and invaded countries, hence Poland. Then it started prosecuting Jews, and the finger was pointed at Jews.

I hope it doesn't come true, but the mentality I'm studying here in ATS proves that it must come true. Why? Because ATS is suppose to be the smart ones out of the American public, but if even ATS has those mentalities, it means something.

The Soviet Red Army's invasion of the Kresy on 17 September, in accordance with a secret protocol of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, rendered the Polish plan of defence obsolete.[14] Facing a second front, the Polish government concluded the defence of the Romanian Bridgehead was no longer feasible and ordered an emergency evacuation of all troops to neutral Romania.[15] On 6 October, following the Polish defeat at the Battle of Kock, German and Soviet Union forces gained full control over Poland. The success of the invasion marked the end of the Second Polish Republic, though Poland never formally surrendered.

During its 47 years of existence, the German Empire emerged as one of the most powerful industrial economies on Earth and a great power, until it collapsed following its military defeat in World War I and the concurrent November Revolution. The most important bordering states were Imperial Russia in the east, France in the west, and Austria-Hungary in the south.

The Jews in Nazi Germany suffered appallingly after January 1933.Some rich Jews could afford to leave Nazi Germany (or were forced to) but many could not. Thugs in the SA and SS were given a free hand in their treatment of the Jews. The Jews were frequently referred to in "Mein Kampf" and Hitler had made plain his hated for them. References to the "filthy Jew" litter the book. In one section, Hitler wrote about how the Jews planned to "contaminate" the blood of pure Germans

Muslims contaminating America?

"None but members of the nation may be citizens of the State. None but those of German blood may be members of the nation. No Jew, therefore, may be a member of the nation."

I think the next American vote will bring a Hitler like leader which will make the above statement a law. Replace the Jews with Muslim.

Once in power, Hitler used his position to launch a campaign against the Jews that culminated in the Holocaust.

Hitler blamed the Jews for all the misfortunes that had befallen Germany

the loss of the First World War was the result of a Jewish conspiracy

the Treaty of Versailles was also a Jewish conspiracy designed to bring Germany to her knees

the hyperinflation of 1923 was the result of an international Jewish attempt to destroy Germany

During the time when Weimar Germany was seemingly recovering under Stresseman, what Hitler said about the Jews remained nonsense listened to by only the few - hence his poor showing at elections prior to the 1929 Depression. During the impact of the Great Depression, though, when people became unemployed and all looked helpless, Hitler's search for a scapegoat proved a lot more fruitful.

History will repeat itself.

reply to post by mothershipzeta


It will include a mosque and if you need to see that then here is a couple of links that say there will be one.

blogs.reuters.com...

The proposed $100 million, 13-story facility, which is being built by the Cordoba Initiative, will include a mosque, performing arts center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces. The Cordoba Initiative describes itself as a Muslim outreach group.

religion.blogs.cnn.com...

So you see a mosque is planned for this site.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


That's a disturbing video Lucidity. WOW.

reply to post by ~Lucidity
I tremble for my country to know that God is Just. I find it so typical to make such a deal about post-traumatic events 911, The holocaust, Pearl Habor Etc. I hope that we can truly look at how we can be steered into prejudice sparked by our ignorance and bigotry, there is already a mosque about 2-4 blocks away! Wake up People Superiority won't be accepted. ALLAH U AKBAR!

this is a non-debate, it isn't even being built on ground zero it's being built a couple of blocks away. it isn't even new, they are converting an existing building into a mosque. if you where to look at it and someone didn't tell you that was a mosque you wouldn't look twice at the building. it looks like an apartment building. the msm is just building conflict because they are giving the impression that they are building a dome of the rock style mosque in the middle of ground zero.

reply to post by Gorman91

Just as I would want a westbro baptist church member as far away from a ymca as possible, I would want a hamas supporter as far away from a cultural center as well.

Hamas nod for Ground Zero mosque
Terror group's leader: 'Have to build it'

Read more: www.nypost.com...

Feisal Abdul Rauf, the imam behind the proposed mosque, and two other leaders of the plan who previously had commented extensively, were silent yesterday.

They did not respond to The Post's phone calls or e-mails about the Hamas endorsement.

Hamas first came up in the mosque debate earlier this summer when Abdul Rauf refused to describe the group as a terrorist organization -- despite the State Department listing that identifies it as such.

Tom Brown, a chief opponent of the mosque, said: "This is what we've been saying . . . Imam Rauf is a radical Muslim who will not call Hamas a terror group."

A retired firefighter who was a first responder on 9/11, Brown lost 100 of his FDNY friends at the Twin Towers.

"How much evidence do we need that this guy is a radical Muslim?" he asked.

"If Rauf really were a bridge builder and an interfaith guy and all the things he professes to be, he wouldn't be doing this to people."

Originally posted by randomname
this is a non-debate, it isn't even being built on ground zero it's being built a couple of blocks away. it isn't even new, they are converting an existing building into a mosque. if you where to look at it and someone didn't tell you that was a mosque you wouldn't look twice at the building. it looks like an apartment building. the msm is just building conflict because they are giving the impression that they are building a dome of the rock style mosque in the middle of ground zero.

During the time when Weimar Germany was seemingly recovering under Stresseman, what Hitler said about the Jews remained nonsense listened to by only the few - hence his poor showing at elections prior to the 1929 Depression. During the impact of the Great Depression, though, when people became unemployed and all looked helpless, Hitler's search for a scapegoat proved a lot more fruitful.

Hate grows at hard times, expect it to grow and expect non sense to grow.

I don't see the difference between this and a church or place of worship...not all islamic people were part of the terrorist attack on the united states...so its a place to worship...let it go

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Well there you have it. You can just as easily change a few words and have a ymca lead by a westbro baptist church leader.

That is my point. The hell if I care who's religion. The fact remains that this center's architecture spells it out as a spreader of Islam and the leader spells it out as a radical one. It is, in practice, a training camp of radicalism. In as much as westbro baptist church is one for radicalism of another kind.