Merged Two Mosques to be built near Ground Zero

TheDevilCried said:
it is not going to teach anyone anything never has never will, one great thing about this country is you can speak out and let em know what ya think, you call people haters and bigots but you yourself speak out strongly when someone voices there opinion, is that not the same thing you are doing when a guy like me speaks out against something you are so firmly behind ?
Click to expand...

now that's what I call a run-on sentence.

condemning bigotry....is not a form of bigotry. this is an asinine concept.

when thousands of people to march to condemn the vandalization of Jewish cemetery by Neo-Nazis, they are not expressing "bigotry" towards racism.
 
Last edited:
Are we not talking about a Mosque ? for what reason do you bring up Nazis ? come on i think you are the one that needs to drop the hate and move on.
 
TheDevilCried said:
Are we not talking about a Mosque ? for what reason do you bring up Nazis ? come on i think you are the one that needs to drop the hate and move on.
Click to expand...

yes, I am quite intolerant of hatred & bigotry towards ethnic groups and religions. its a gift actually.
 
A Lurker said:
No, it was brought down by Al Qaeda alone, who want you to react like anti-Muslim bigots, so that America looks like an intolerant nation that no Muslims will ever feel it's worth living alongside or amongst you, because they'll all be tarred with the same hateful brush.
Click to expand...

This sounds convenient. Any source? Any muslims leaving because they don't feel welcome?

I remember the spread about Bin Laden and the horse soldiers, NG I think. Before the Time magazine article. But perhaps all that poppy was just too irresistable. That would better explain Al Qaeda.

I don't get all the righteous indignation being displayed in defense of a woo temple. Seriously. And saying it's an educational center isn't going to help matters. We've all seen educational centers in Pakistan and their methods are memorizing the Koran.

I don't hate muslims. I don't hate anyone. In fact, I think Indian women are HOT. HOT HOT HOT. I've read the Koran, much more fantastical than the Bible. Neither as enlightening as Buddha.
 
Last edited:
manofthesea said:
Like I said in my last post, I don't try to understand motivations. We went to war with Iraq because of 9/11.
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing it. Can you lay out each of the steps that lead from 9/11 to the second Iraq war?
 
Having seen the futility of arguing straight-up the appropriateness (or not) of it (here @ JREF), I'll try a different approach. What about the proposed cost? $100 million dollars? That doesn't raise a red flag to anyone (in any way)? I'll bet you could count on one hand the number other churches/centers (of any denomination) across the rest of the country that cost $100 million or more. At least as a single project. And I'll even bet the few exceptions to that are church owned colleges and universities, which are typically ongoing, long time running type projects. In spite of it's modesty compared to trillions, $100 MILLION dollars is a **** load of money. Heck, I'll even propose that there's but probably only a few projects of any kind going on right now in all of New York City that are costing $100 million or more. The WTC site being one of them. Which I guess is ironic, but only here at the JREF.

And, so what about this and this? We're not allowed to consider that 'inappropriate' either for fear of the dreaded 'bigot' label? <Jack Nicholson> "...wheww whewww..." I mean, how many exceptions and entitlements and special treatments does this project get before everyone is finally convinced it's been rubbed in enough? Maybe Thunderstein™ should also start a JREF 'Save The Mosque From Bigots' fund to be used (somehow) to stamp out the most heinous of 'thought crimes' like mistrust and suspicion and doubt. I mean, those are the kinds of notions that threaten 'blind faith' and stuff.

BTW Thunder, given your literally unshakable belief that Rauf and Company are being 100% sincere, I'll bet you believe whatever the Catholic church says is 100% sincere too, right? Thunder?

Anyway, I propose that there's never going to be a $100 million dollar, 13 story Islamic Cultural Center with a rooftop pool put there anyway. In part because there's several huge caveats still unmet including the actual funding. Although I guess it's possible the State Department could pony that up too depending on how it goes on that taxpayer sponsored trip. I got it, maybe the Saudis could 'accidentally' slip the State Department a fully stocked armored car with that **** load of money in it. They can claim they were just cruising along minding their own business and then poof, there's an armored car sitting in a field in Albany with a note 'For Rauf's NYC Mosque and Burka Free Discotheque' taped on the back door. And of course the State Department would take it straight to Rauf because they're honorable that way. I mean, that's so perfectly legitimate who could argue anything nefarious was going on there?! Also, ConEd still seems to have a say in it all.

Yeah, there's likely going to be something happening on that site, but I bet (again) it'll be a more humble $30 million, couple stories lesser attempt at an Islamic Cultural Center with a rooftop pool maybe.

Does anyone know for sure (verifiable) who presently owns that property? Is it the ASMA or Rauf personally? Somebody else?
 
Ladewig said:
I'm not seeing it. Can you lay out each of the steps that lead from 9/11 to the second Iraq war?
Click to expand...

1. Without 9/11, it would not have been politically acceptable for Bush to start the war.
2. For whatever reason, Bush wanted a war with Iraq (only RATIONAL resaon: they broke the peace treaty by not allowing UN inspectors into Saddam's palaces, because Saddam was paranoid he'd get assasinated or maybe valued his privacy for reasons other than hiding WMD's... on second thought, not all that rational).

Only two steps needed.
 
Last edited:
HarryHenderson said:
Having seen the futility of arguing straight-up the appropriateness (or not) of it (here @ JREF), I'll try a different approach. What about the proposed cost? $100 million dollars? That doesn't raise a red flag to anyone (in any way)?
Click to expand...

Not at all.

You go to the planning commission with the plans for the building you WANT to build, not the building you have funding to build right now. There's a very simple and compelling reason for this -- it's much easier to scale down project approval than it is to scale it up. If you want to build a fifty story building, it will have a much bigger impact on the neighborhood than if you want only to build ten. So if you're approved for fifty and you only end up building ten, that's not as big an issue as if you're approved for ten and find the money for fifty.

That's why housing developers submit "master plans," too. You can get approval for a thousand houses and then build only a hundred as "phase 1."

And the easiest way to get the $100 million you need is to sink your initial $30 million into "phase 1" as a proof of concept you can walk around to secondary investors. It's much easier for the bean-counters to see $30 million turning into $100 million than it is to see a bare field turning into $30 million.
 
HarryHenderson said:
Having seen the futility of arguing straight-up the appropriateness (or not) of it (here @ JREF), I'll try a different approach. What about the proposed cost? $100 million dollars? That doesn't raise a red flag to anyone (in any way)? I'll bet you could count on one hand the number other churches/centers (of any denomination) across the rest of the country that cost $100 million or more. At least as a single project. And I'll even bet the few exceptions to that are church owned colleges and universities, which are typically ongoing, long time running type projects.
Click to expand...

You'd be wrong. The colossal stadium-sized "megachurch" phenomenon is extremely widespread, and those churches have comparable costs. Southeast Christian Church in Louisville, Kentucky, for instance, cost $88 million. United Methodist Church of the Resurrection in Kansas City, MO, cost $100 million. First Baptist Dallas cost $130 million. And that's just what I found in a five-second Google search, from the first two pages of results.

In any case, though, all that is irrelevant, since "Christianity only has a few $100 million religious complexes, therefore Islam shouldn't have any!" is not anything resembling an argument.


And, so what about this and this? We're not allowed to consider that 'inappropriate' either for fear of the dreaded 'bigot' label? <Jack Nicholson> "...wheww whewww..."
Click to expand...

Considering Rauf was doing these exact same things years ago at the behest of the Bush Administration, I'm at a loss to explain just why this is such a concern now.
 
Isn't real estate in Manhattan rather expensive too? Perhaps a larger than expected part of their cost is just being able to build near their constituency.
 
Manopolus said:
Given that police presence is a bit spotty in certain places in our inner cities as it is... why should we pull resources from elsewhere to protect property which was ill advised? If they want/need extra protection, I suggest they hire a security agency.
Click to expand...

Pretty much for the same reason we want our police protecting anyone who needs protecting. Because that's the mark of a civil society.
 
Any problems the inner city does have is not related to a lack of police.
 
But will he be slaughtered for it?

Brave stand. But one his political opponents can twist easily. The ads will be simple and they will work:

*heavy music, scenes of 9/11, voiceover* "Obama supported plans to build the mosque honor the 9/11 attackers at Ground Zero *gasp*"


a thirty second ad, and nobody will check the info, they'll just absorb it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom