Mosque being built at Ground zero
- Thread starter BRUTALITOPS
- Start date
another perspective~~~
Why There Should Be No Mosques at Ground Zero
Now that it has been revealed that not one, but two mosques are planned for the area around Ground Zero, the supremacist and triumphalist character of this effort is clearer than ever. Is the Muslim population of lower Manhattan so huge that one projected mosque—even one so large as to be housed within a 15 story Islamic Center—would immediately be bursting at the seams, and thus yet another is required even before the first is built?
Of course not. Muslims are already praying at the projected site of the massive Islamic Center, an old Burlington Coat Factory outlet that was damaged by a piece of one of the hijacked airplanes fell through the roof on 9/11. (A Muslim real estate company paid $4.85 million in cash for the building. Where that cash came from has not been explained).
That building doesn’t appear to be overflowing, although Muslims are reportedly holding prayers on the sidewalk outside another lower Manhattan mosque, apparently in order to give the impression that they’re in dire need of more space. This is, however, more for show than for necessity.
The placement of mosques throughout Islamic history has been an expression of conquest and superiority over non-Muslims. Muslims built the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in order to proclaim Islam’s superiority to Judaism. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus was built over the Church of St. John the Baptist, and the Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople was converted into a mosque, to express the superiority of Islam over Christianity. Historian Sita Ram Goel has estimated that over 2,000 mosques in India were built on the sites of Hindu temples for the same reason.
But the Ground Zero mosque, or mosques, won’t be another example of that Islamic supremacism, will they? After all, the mosque initiative’s organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has said that the building of the mosque by the World Trade Center site was intended to make “the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”
The group behind the 15 story Islamic Center sent a statement to Mike
Huckabee’s show on Fox News (declining an opportunity to meet my colleague, Pamela Geller, to discuss the mosque issue), claiming that the planned mosque was “a project to honor those who were harmed on September 11. It is a project to proclaim our patriotism to this country and to stand side-by-side all men and women of peace.”
And Ground Zero is not a holy site, so the symbolism of Islam conquering and replacing other religions isn’t there—or is it?
The Twin Towers, after all, were the symbol of America’s economic power. Placing a mosque by the site of their destruction (at the hands of Islamic jihadists) symbolizes the taming of that power. Abdul Rauf has placed the blame for 9/11 not on jihadists at all, but on the U.S. and the West, saying that they “must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.” Statements like that call into question just who the mosque organizers have in mind when they say the mosque is intended to honor “those who were harmed on September 11.”
The possibility of deception cannot here be ruled out, given that Abdul Rauf has a history of making smooth statements that appear to endorse American principles and values, when on closer examination he is upholding Sharia law, denigrating freedom of speech, and advocating against anti-terror measures.
It was to honor the Americans who really were harmed on September 11 that Pamela Geller has organized, with help from me and our new group, Stop Islamization of America, a rally against the 9/11 Mosque. The rally will be held on June 6 in lower Manhattan. June 6, D-Day, was chosen because on that day Americans began to beat back from Europe the scourge of a totalitarian and genocidal ideology. Today, no less unmistakably, it is incumbent upon us to stand and defend the principles of freedom that are once again threatened, this time by Islamic jihadists.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37132
Why There Should Be No Mosques at Ground Zero
Now that it has been revealed that not one, but two mosques are planned for the area around Ground Zero, the supremacist and triumphalist character of this effort is clearer than ever. Is the Muslim population of lower Manhattan so huge that one projected mosque—even one so large as to be housed within a 15 story Islamic Center—would immediately be bursting at the seams, and thus yet another is required even before the first is built?
Of course not. Muslims are already praying at the projected site of the massive Islamic Center, an old Burlington Coat Factory outlet that was damaged by a piece of one of the hijacked airplanes fell through the roof on 9/11. (A Muslim real estate company paid $4.85 million in cash for the building. Where that cash came from has not been explained).
That building doesn’t appear to be overflowing, although Muslims are reportedly holding prayers on the sidewalk outside another lower Manhattan mosque, apparently in order to give the impression that they’re in dire need of more space. This is, however, more for show than for necessity.
The placement of mosques throughout Islamic history has been an expression of conquest and superiority over non-Muslims. Muslims built the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock on the site of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem in order to proclaim Islam’s superiority to Judaism. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus was built over the Church of St. John the Baptist, and the Hagia Sophia Cathedral in Constantinople was converted into a mosque, to express the superiority of Islam over Christianity. Historian Sita Ram Goel has estimated that over 2,000 mosques in India were built on the sites of Hindu temples for the same reason.
But the Ground Zero mosque, or mosques, won’t be another example of that Islamic supremacism, will they? After all, the mosque initiative’s organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has said that the building of the mosque by the World Trade Center site was intended to make “the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.”
The group behind the 15 story Islamic Center sent a statement to Mike
Huckabee’s show on Fox News (declining an opportunity to meet my colleague, Pamela Geller, to discuss the mosque issue), claiming that the planned mosque was “a project to honor those who were harmed on September 11. It is a project to proclaim our patriotism to this country and to stand side-by-side all men and women of peace.”
And Ground Zero is not a holy site, so the symbolism of Islam conquering and replacing other religions isn’t there—or is it?
The Twin Towers, after all, were the symbol of America’s economic power. Placing a mosque by the site of their destruction (at the hands of Islamic jihadists) symbolizes the taming of that power. Abdul Rauf has placed the blame for 9/11 not on jihadists at all, but on the U.S. and the West, saying that they “must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.” Statements like that call into question just who the mosque organizers have in mind when they say the mosque is intended to honor “those who were harmed on September 11.”
The possibility of deception cannot here be ruled out, given that Abdul Rauf has a history of making smooth statements that appear to endorse American principles and values, when on closer examination he is upholding Sharia law, denigrating freedom of speech, and advocating against anti-terror measures.
It was to honor the Americans who really were harmed on September 11 that Pamela Geller has organized, with help from me and our new group, Stop Islamization of America, a rally against the 9/11 Mosque. The rally will be held on June 6 in lower Manhattan. June 6, D-Day, was chosen because on that day Americans began to beat back from Europe the scourge of a totalitarian and genocidal ideology. Today, no less unmistakably, it is incumbent upon us to stand and defend the principles of freedom that are once again threatened, this time by Islamic jihadists.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37132
You are pressing opinion onto people who do not express that belief, nor do they hold it, simply because that is an easier argument to make, if you can make them pariah by saying they are "bigots" you shut them down and they can no longer legitimately participate in any discourse.
Again, I'll use the example of an abortion provider attacked by Christian militants, if there was a group who didn't want a church built next door to that newly reestablished provider's office, even though the church was specifically against the attack, would they be "bigots" for it?
The reality is, you oversimplify because it makes your argument easier and shuts down all discussion. If you can label anybody a "bigot" they are supposed to run away from the conversation and conveniently shut up. Your oversimplification is part of the problem, never is it a solution to shut down discourse through ad hom attacks.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Actually I am anti-islam. Thinking people are. Just like thinking people are anti-nazi.
This whole discourse needs to be revisited. The concept that anything labelled "religion" is automatically worthy of tolerance is insane. It's a murderous ideology with a long history of spreading by violence alone.
I know you are, I've pointed that out. I'm sorry I didn't include the "except AHZ" in that particular post, but we've all got the general idea that you, personally, think every Muslim is a terrorist. Just assume that when I say "most people" I am not talking about you.
I just read about about "taquiyah". A purposed trickery to fool ones ememy.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
It's not just me. There are many opponents to the whitewashing of islam you liberals (sorry damo, you're there now) are doing.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Well, if there was community disapproval, then they should have gotten off their hateful asses and gone to the planning meetings where the permits were issued and taken care of business back when it mattered.
To now claim this issue needs to be revisited solely because a bunch of lazy racists didn't pay attention to what was happening, is ludicrous.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Now THAT'S what I call a well-thought-out answer!
Hey everybody...did you see how AHZ refuted each and every point in a logical fashion?
I especially liked the part where he avoided the same old idiotic name calling...
Now then...that was right out front where everyone could see it...what you going to do about it big man? Not that I expect anything...I'm STILL waiting on you to "bring it" from the last time you threatened me.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Will you bow to allah when the time comes?
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Don't sweat it...I didn't really expect you to respond to the points I actually made.
You know...the part about permits and meetings where dissenting opinions, if there were any, should have been offered?
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
You made no valid points. All you did is name call.
W
WinterBorn
Guest
No more than I will bow to any other required by unconstitutional laws.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Originally Posted by ZappasGuitar
Well, if there was community disapproval, then they should have...gone to the planning meetings where the permits were issued and taken care of business back when it mattered.
To now claim this issue needs to be revisited solely because a bunch of...didn't pay attention to what was happening, is ludicrous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
/\/\/\/\/\ those aren't valid points?
You make your "points" all while "namecalling" and expect people to take what you say seriously...how about that?
So, either my points are valid, or yours aren't...take your pick.
Last edited:
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
Your point is not valid. Missing a meeting should not condemn manhattan to oppression under the creeping net of islamofascism.
http://www.jihadwatch.org