Mosque going up in NYC building

[jbg]

There's a reason why those states are authoritarian. You expect fair treatment from those kinds of governments?

Yes. If we're fair to Muslims in our lands I expect them to be fair to us in their lands. I expect to be able to hold Torah study in Riyadh.

[bloodyminded]

Yes. If we're fair to Muslims in our lands I expect them to be fair to us in their lands. I expect to be able to hold Torah study in Riyadh.

Ideally that would be the case, if we just have to have religion.

But we shouldn't hold ourselves to the standards of Riyadh, surely?

Edited October 5, 2010 by bloodyminded

[The_Squid]

Yes. If we're fair to Muslims in our lands I expect them to be fair to us in their lands. I expect to be able to hold Torah study in Riyadh.

So because Christians are maligned in some backwards, intolerant and bigotted countries, America should malign its own Muslim citizens? America should become as bigotted and intolerant as Saudi Arabia until the Saudis clean up their act?

Interesting concept... but I see a flaw in the reasoning. Luckily, America was founded on principles of becoming a better society, not one that strives to start a crusade against its own non-Christian citizens.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Gone for a month and everything is still pretty much exactly in the same place it was when I left. I haven't read through all of the 80 or so pages that have come along but as far as I can tell no new arguments have come along.

[nicky10013]

Yes. If we're fair to Muslims in our lands I expect them to be fair to us in their lands. I expect to be able to hold Torah study in Riyadh.

You're not getting it. These countries aren't democratic. They use religion as a political tool. Why would you expect freedom of religion from a government that wants nothing else than to be viewed as the supreme authority on everything. The Soviet tried to ban god. Nations like Iran try to be god. Probably an easier approach.

[Guest American Woman]

The Park51 project for a 15-story mosque/community center at Ground Zero, led by developer Sharif El-Gamal and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has dwindled down to a much smaller vision, a four or five-story 'PrayerSpace' and community center.

Sharif El-Gamal [...] believes that he is acquiescing to the community's desire for the building not to tower over Ground Zero and states: "If the community only wants four or five floors, it's going to be four or five floors." link

Evidently Imam Rauf isn't involved in the project any more, Imam Adhami was chosen to replace him, and then his questionable comments on homosexuality and call for sharia law in a sermon led to his quitting, too.

The article is rather radical in nature, but I found the update interesting - if it's true. I'm wondering why it hasn't been in the mainstream media, as this is quite a change from the original project plans.

At any rate, it sounds as if it's going to take at least five years to raise the necessary funds, so it sounds as if it won't be a big spectacular event coinciding with the tenth anniversary of 9-11 as originally presented.

[guyser]

I'm wondering why it hasn't been in the mainstream media, as this is quite a change from the original project plans.

Probably for the same reasons as the teacher who gets acquitted on some 'minors' charge, it doesnt sell very well.

Sensationalism sells.

[Guest American Woman]

Probably for the same reasons as the teacher who gets acquitted on some 'minors' charge, it doesnt sell very well.

Sensationalism sells.

True. And the new approach is more low key - I did find an article about it in The NY Times: Developers of Islamic Center Try a New Strategy (excerpts)

...they have ... embraced what they call a slower, more deliberate and more realistic approach to the project, acknowledging it will take years of hard work to determine what kind of facilities Muslim and non-Muslim visitors want and need, to raise money, and to build public support.

...it could be five years before they even try to begin any physical transformation of the property, now a bare-bones building that once housed a Burlington Coat Factory store. And the Muslim center might never become the 15-story, $100 million edifice that the developers had once envisioned, and that some opponents had labeled a “megamosque.”

Sharif El-Gamal, the lead developer, who controls the property at 45-51 Park Place, has spent the past year trying to regroup. He has severed ties with the project’s original imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf.

He said the ultimate form of the center, called Park51, and its building would be determined after consultation with two main audiences, residents of Lower Manhattan and Muslims who live in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

“If the community only wants four or five floors, it’s going to be four or five floors,” Mr. El-Gamal said.

Leaders of several Muslim community organizations, some of whom were upset last year that they were not consulted about Park51 before it became the center of national controversy, said in interviews that Mr. El-Gamal had mended fences with them.

Perhaps if the project had started out this way, the controversy wouldn't have existed.

[BubberMiley]

Oh my god. This is the last thread I would ever have wanted to see resurrected.

[Guest American Woman]

Oh my god. This is the last thread I would ever have wanted to see resurrected.

Damn. And here I posted my update just for you. Had I known how you feel, I would have forgotten all about an issue that I'm interested in and not posted the update on issues that I, and others, had raised. But you did respond, so all is not lost.

:rolleyes:

-----------------------------------

Generally speaking, I want to find out how issues I'm interested in work out. I started this thread because of my interest, and throughout the thread, many points were made - some by me - that this "update" addresses. I find it very interesting that this project isn't going ahead the way it was originally planned/presented and am glad to see that others' feelings will ultimately be a factor if the project continues in the direction it's now headed.

If some people aren't interested in the update, I have to assume they had no interest in the actual issue - only in mouthing off. For those who share my interest, my update is for you.

[GostHacked]

If some people aren't interested in the update, I have to assume they had no interest in the actual issue - only in mouthing off. For those who share my interest, my update is for you.

Did you feel you needed to update this thread because you were confronted about it in another thread?? This way you can claim you are not racist or biased or a bigot in anyway? I could be wrong.

[Guest American Woman]

Did you feel you needed to update this thread because you were confronted about it in another thread?? This way you can claim you are not racist or biased or a bigot in anyway? I could be wrong.

Let's put it this way. You couldn't be MORE wrong. I've been "confronted" by this thread in other threads ad naseum - and I don't need this update to state that I am not a racist or biased or a bigot in any way - and your insinuation that I am is pure ignorant self-righteous bullshit.

Furthermore, the people in CHARGE of this project are going in the direction that addresses my concerns, so how could I possibly have been a racist or biased or a bigot in any way?

Seriously. Get a clue. I stated quite clearly why I posted the update. If you can't understand it, find someone who does to explain it to you.

Edited August 23, 2011 by American Woman

[GostHacked]

Let's put it this way. You couldn't be MORE wrong. I've been "confronted" by this thread in other threads ad naseum - and I don't need this update to state that I am not a racist or biased or a bigot in any way - and your insinuation that I am is pure ignorant self-righteous bullshit.

Furthermore, the people in CHARGE of this project are going in the direction that addresses my concerns, so how could I possibly have been a racist or biased or a bigot in any way?

Seriously. Get a clue. I stated quite clearly why I posted the update. If you can't understand it, find someone who does to explain it to you.

Ok, so I am wrong. I can deal with that.

[Machjo]

Wow, this thread is still going on.

So any conclusions yet?

I haven't read the entire thread, but I'll guess that there really have been only three positions presented in spite of the long thread:

1. The "communitarian" argument, arguing that the community is responsible for the actions of its members, thus all Muslims, including victims of 9/11 and their families, are guilty by association and should therefore be punished somehow such as by not being allowed to build community centres in select locations, and

2. The legal argument, arguing that each person must be judged on his own merits and not on those of his community, thus no person, regardless of his religious convictions, should have to apologize for the actions of others, especially wehn he himself disagrees with them.

I still fall into the second category. And even if I held the former view, I could just as easily argue that, especially with regards to Park 52 seeing that the members of local NYC Muslim community have themselves lost members to the terror attacks on 9/11. Looking at it that way (not that it should really matter), they, along with members of other religious communities that have lost members to the 9/11 attacks, should have a prior right to decide what is to be built there.

So, am i wrong that any other view has been presented other than those 2?

[Machjo]

Let's put it this way. You couldn't be MORE wrong. I've been "confronted" by this thread in other threads ad naseum - and I don't need this update to state that I am not a racist or biased or a bigot in any way - and your insinuation that I am is pure ignorant self-righteous bullshit.

Furthermore, the people in CHARGE of this project are going in the direction that addresses my concerns, so how could I possibly have been a racist or biased or a bigot in any way?

Seriously. Get a clue. I stated quite clearly why I posted the update. If you can't understand it, find someone who does to explain it to you.

It may be that they are tired of the harassment? If a person simply gets tired of the local bigotry and so moves away, it doesn't make the community less bigoted.

Edited August 23, 2011 by Machjo

[Guest American Woman]

It may be that they are tired of the harassment? If a person simply gets tired of the local bigotry and so moves away, it doesn't make the community less bigoted.

Perhaps you should read the update I posted. It explains why the project is now headed in a different direction.

[Machjo]

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (bolding mine):

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

[Machjo]

Perhaps you should read the update I posted. It explains why the project is now headed in a different direction.

The first paragraph from your link:

"The Park51 project for a 15-story mosque/community center at Ground Zero, led by developer Sharif El-Gamal and Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, has dwindled down to a much smaller vision, a four or five-story 'PrayerSpace' and community center. This may be a far cry from their original plan, but many are bewildered as to why they are still moving ahead with any planned mosque at this site, given the tremendous negative opinion most Americans have of its location."

Clearly it's succumbing to pressure from the Islamophobes and other bigots (though I doubt it describes the majority of Americans as the article claims). As I suspected, they're simply wisely scaling the project back to try to divert some of the bigotry.

[Guest American Woman]

I suggest you read beyond the first paragraph ..........

[DogOnPorch]

I suggest you read beyond the first paragraph ..........

Don't forget the soft Corinthian leather...

[Machjo]

I suggest you read beyond the first paragraph ..........

I just did, and came across this gem:

"El-Gamal's new tactic is in line with the moderate, non-violent global approach for Islamic conquest of Western societies. Terrorism is the tool of choice by radical Muslims. But, under the guise of love and peace, moderate Muslims populate neighborhoods and build Mosques as the tool to take over communities, one at a time. This is what has happened in Germany with multiculturalism, as well as France, Sweden, Spain, Australia, Denmark and the UK. Neighborhood after neighborhood, Muslims build up their population to an intimidating level where police do not even enter. They build their religious centers with leaders and literature that radicalizes their membership. They demand that 'Sharia Law' becomes the law of their enclave and the original residents are either driven out or run scared."

Hardly objective. It's making an a priori conclusion that as soon as a Muslim is kind, it MUST be because he's trying to convert you. Never that mind all religions proselitize, but now Muslim kindness is to be treated with supsicion. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

[Guest American Woman]

I just did, and came across this gem: [...]

I didn't realize you were quoting from that link/souce - I clearly stated that that article was rather radical, that I was linking to it because I couldn't find an update in the mainstream media - and then made another post shortly after since I found an article in The NY Times - which I also linked to - quoting the main developer - as to why he changed the direction of the project. I have no desire to discuss something I see as "rather radical," ie: the opinions stated in my first link, as I was posting the link only for the updated information on the development of the project.

[Guest American Woman]

Don't forget the soft Corinthian leather...

I don't think the Cordoba Initiative is involved in the project any more - as Imam Rauf is no longer involved. From what I've read, he's still got his big plans, but for another property site in NYC. I don't think any Imam is associated with the project any more.

[DogOnPorch]

I don't think the Cordoba Initiative is involved in the project any more - as Imam Rauf is no longer involved. From what I've read, he's still got his big plans, but for another property site in NYC. I don't think any Imam is associated with the project any more.

BL*T*NT *TT**PT T* *XPL**T 9-11

Pat...I'd like to buy a vowel..."A".

[Yukon Jack]

I am all for a mosque near the Ground Zero site.

I am also all for a Catholic Church and/or a Jewish Synagogue built in Mecca.

Anyone tell me why this would be different?