Mosque going up in NYC building

Jack Weber · August 31, 2010

And what everyone should be able to understand is that I don't buy it.

You don't buy what?

That an Islamic Mosq...er...community centre/sidewalk cafe called Cordoba House,two blocks from where Islamofascists flew planes into buildings is an attempt at bridgebuilding and ecumenical harmony?

waldo · August 31, 2010

I think it's now time for Muslims to understand where non-Muslims are coming from regarding this issue.

do tell... do tell... just where you're coming from

dre · August 31, 2010

It has obviously proven to be counterproductive in its stated goals of building bridges, healing wounds, reaching out to the community. It has become an issue that has polarized the nation along many lines. It has clearly failed in its objectives, and pushing ahead with it despite of this is shear stupidity.

You cant possibly say whether or not its failed in its objectives until the place has been open for a few decades.

and pushing ahead with it despite of this is shear stupidity.

Again you dont know that. Its highly likely that if the project goes ahead that people will piss and moan for a bit but eventually move on. Once that happens how much of a success the project is will depend on how its run and what they do there, and how many people the facility serves.

And you gotta realize as well... A majority of NewYorkers may answer NO to this project when polled... but my guess is most of them dont feel all that strongly about it. Maybe 1% or 2% might spend all day participating in 130+ page threads about it?... maybe .01% might show up at an actual protest? Lets be honest... no "outreach" center was every going to reach these people anyways.

This is fun stuff for blowhards, ideologs, and pundits... but my guess is that whether the project moves ahead or not, people will move on and none of this will matter.

Edited August 31, 2010 by dre

dre · August 31, 2010

I'm clearly stating that I'm beginning to wonder if the "purpose" of the project is "to build bridges."

OF COURSE you doubt their motives. You spend most of your waking hours trying to explain your negative view of this project OVER and OVER and OVER again. I bet youve explained it on each of the 130 pages in here at least once... twice on some probably. No to mention authored dozens of other negative opinions about Islam as well across an array of different threads.

Yeah... we get that you doubt their intentions :blink:

Edited August 31, 2010 by dre

ToadBrother · August 31, 2010

When all else fails, accuse anyone who dares raise a question of "invoking an Islamist conspiracy."

Stupidity, pure and simple.

What else fails? Time after time you've shown the underlying justification for your position is bigotry. You try to put in nice shining rhetoric, oh so equitable and oh so understanding.

The fact is that they have the legal right to build there, to try to stop them based on the fact they're Muslims is bigotry, and trying to assert, without a single shred of evidence, that they're want to build a mosque there is somehow some Islamist conspiracy only makes the lie of your equanimity all the clearer.

ToadBrother · August 31, 2010

There is absolutely nothing wrong or heinous about burning books that you own (in a fire-safe manner). There is nothing wrong with drawing pictures of Mohammed. There is nothing wrong with protesting the construction of a building you do not approve of.

All you Islamosubmissives need to get a grip. We don't have to walk on egg shells to avoid offending Muslims. Not conforming to your twisted standards of self-censorship and cultural submission is not "wrong".

By the same token, those people have the lawful right to build there, and the protests are bigotry. Any and all Muslims are apparently to blame for 9-11. Of course you have the right to protest, and I certainly support your right to be a hateful bigot, but don't pretend that singling out a group of Muslims who no one has shown had anything at all to do with 9-11 is anything but bigotry.

Bonam · August 31, 2010

By the same token, those people have the lawful right to build there, and the protests are bigotry. Any and all Muslims are apparently to blame for 9-11. Of course you have the right to protest, and I certainly support your right to be a hateful bigot, but don't pretend that singling out a group of Muslims who no one has shown had anything at all to do with 9-11 is anything but bigotry.

Let me know when you tire of throwing the bigot bomb around and feel like having an intelligent conversation. The strange thing is that you are normally pretty reasonable on many other topics, but here hardly a post goes by without you calling everyone you disagree with bigots. I recommend, sincerely, that you think about this and related topics a bit deeper and try to understand how people might have dissenting opinions without being bigots. We have a couple real bigots on this forum, it may help you to contrast their statements and positions with those of the normal posters whom you are repeatedly calling bigots in this thread to gain some insight as to the differences.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Bonam

CANADIEN · August 31, 2010

the protests are bigotry.

As unproven as the conspiracy bit.

BubberMiley · August 31, 2010

Actually, I've begun to wonder about them as well. They just seem hell bent on pushing their plan forward, despite the feelings of anyone around them. It's somewhat bizarre.

Maybe they agree with Charlton Heston. If you concede to those who group you with terrorists, you're willingly being grouped with terrorists.

Cue AW screaming how she doesn't group muslims with terrorists but muslims caused 9/11 and they're muslim and she didn't say that!

August 31, 2010

Maybe they agree with Charlton Heston. If you concede to those who group you with terrorists, you're willingly being grouped with terrorists.

Cue AW screaming how she doesn't group muslims with terrorists but muslims caused 9/11 and they're muslim and she didn't say that!

For the record, I've never made a moronic statement like "I don't group Muslims with terrorists" since the 9-11 terrorists, for example, were Muslims. So I do group some Muslims with terrorists; ie: those who are. :rolleyes: What I said is I realize not all Muslims are terrorists. So there you have it. Now tell all of us what I'm really saying.

August 31, 2010

Let me know when you tire of throwing the bigot bomb around and feel like having an intelligent conversation. The strange thing is that you are normally pretty reasonable on many other topics, but here hardly a post goes by without you calling everyone you disagree with bigots. I recommend, sincerely, that you think about this and related topics a bit deeper and try to understand how people might have dissenting opinions without being bigots. We have a couple real bigots on this forum, it may help you to contrast their statements and positions with those of the normal posters whom you are repeatedly calling bigots in this thread to gain some insight as to the differences.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the "bigot bomb" to fizzle. I've been waiting for many, many pages for an intelligent discussion, but all I get is cries of bigot, for views that I don't even have, no less. I've lost hope, as well as respect. Anyone can 'refute' what someone says with distortions and accusations of bigot; that takes no intelligence or deep convictions. It would be nice if people who support the mosque on this property were actually able to accept that people do see things differently and engage in an exchange of (actual) ideas, but with very few exceptions, there's been nothing but 'you don't really think that' and 'you're a bigot!!' This thread has really been a learning experience; just not in the way I expected/hoped when I started it. But it has been a real eye opener.

dre · September 1, 2010

I guess what we need is a definition of "ok".

If "not ok" means "against the law", then burning Qurans, Bibles, flags, or effigies is indisputably "ok".

If "not ok" means "hurts peoples feelings", then burning Qurans, Bibles, flags, or effigies is certainly not "ok".

Do you have some other definition of "ok" that you'd like to offer, one that considers the hurt feelings of Muslims who are sad that Florida yokels burned their scripture, but discounts the hurt feelings of New Yorkers who are sad that Imam Feisal is co-opting their "hallowed ground" for his own message?

-k

I actually think theres a pretty key difference between the two. The people burning books are INTENTIONALLY trying to start shit, and insult other people. Where-as the motives of the people behind the community center a few blocks away from "hallowed ground" are yet to be determined. You wont know until the place has been open for a while what kind of adgenda they have.

In any case if theyre legal activities then both should go ahead. My personal believe is that contructing a place for the purpose of worshipping a magic man in the sky is not a very usefull endeavor, and neither is burning books just to spite people and start shit... I wouldnt personally waste my time with ANY of that shit, but thats my own opinion. Those people should do whatever they want as long as its legal.

dre · September 1, 2010

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the "bigot bomb" to fizzle. I've been waiting for many, many pages for an intelligent discussion, but all I get is cries of bigot, for views that I don't even have, no less. I've lost hope, as well as respect. Anyone can 'refute' what someone says with distortions and accusations of bigot; that takes no intelligence or deep convictions. It would be nice if people who support the mosque on this property were actually able to accept that people do see things differently and engage in an exchange of (actual) ideas, but with very few exceptions, there's been nothing but 'you don't really think that' and 'you're a bigot!!' This thread has really been a learning experience; just not in the way I expected/hoped when I started it. But it has been a real eye opener.

It would be nice if people who support the mosque on this property were actually able to accept that people do see things differently and engage in an exchange of (actual) ideas

Exchange ideas about WHAT for god sakes? Some people think these developers should do what they want to do... some people think they should do what the polls say the public and 911 family members should do. Theres no room to debate anything.

Besides you NEVER engage in any "exchanges of ideas" anyways. The rest of the threads youre in look the same as this one... with you jumping up and down crying "VICTIM! VICTIM!" and a half dozen or so people scratching their heads and going "WTF?".

Give it up already. You think suddenly this POS thread is gonna get meaningfull on page 200? :lol:

jbg · September 1, 2010

Keep digging yourself in a hole. The U.S. Supreme Court was not asked to decide is burning a flag is right or wrong. It was asked to determine if it was legal.

A joke going around then was "my baby just said his first word; he burned a flag".

But seriously, I think the Supreme Court should have characterized flag burning or desecration as conduct, not speech, subject to being regulated, much the way our First Nations can't use peyote freely.

jbg · September 1, 2010

Of course you have the right to protest, and I certainly support your right to be a hateful bigot, but don't pretend that singling out a group of Muslims who no one has shown had anything at all to do with 9-11 is anything but bigotry.

But why that choice of a site? They may have a right to do it. I may have the right to smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day but does that make it a good idea?

DogOnPorch · September 1, 2010

Exchange ideas about WHAT for god sakes? Some people think these developers should do what they want to do... some people think they should do what the polls say the public and 911 family members should do. Theres no room to debate anything.

Besides you NEVER engage in any "exchanges of ideas" anyways. The rest of the threads youre in look the same as this one... with you jumping up and down crying "VICTIM! VICTIM!" and a half dozen or so people scratching their heads and going "WTF?".

Give it up already. You think suddenly this POS thread is gonna get meaningfull on page 200?

Trying to shut down conversation...again.

GostHacked · September 1, 2010

Trying to shut down conversation...again.

I agree with him. The thread can might reach 200 pages and there will be nothing more of relevance to the topic. So this discussion is going to go around and around .. the horse died over 100 pages ago, but yet it continues to be beaten. There is no room for debate. AW strongly stands on her position without movement. As do the opponents. There is no dialogue anymore, and has not been for many many pages.

And with your one liners, you are not really opening anything up for conversation, not encouraging anything beyond 'I hate Islam' and 'Islam sucks'. I would even say you are part of the problem.

Just pointing out the obvious.

Shady · September 1, 2010

There is no room for debate. AW strongly stands on her position without movement. As do the opponents.

There's been plenty of room for debate and discussion. But in this situation, many of us will just have to agree to disagree. Just because a discussion is had, doesn't mean everyone will agree in the end. Some people are against the idea of building the proposed mosque, for legitimate reasons. Some people are for the idea of the proposed mosque, for legitimate reasons.

Once again, how about we just agree to disagree?

DogOnPorch · September 1, 2010

I agree with him. The thread can might reach 200 pages and there will be nothing more of relevance to the topic. So this discussion is going to go around and around .. the horse died over 100 pages ago, but yet it continues to be beaten. There is no room for debate. AW strongly stands on her position without movement. As do the opponents. There is no dialogue anymore, and has not been for many many pages.

And with your one liners, you are not really opening anything up for conversation, not encouraging anything beyond 'I hate Islam' and 'Islam sucks'. I would even say you are part of the problem.

Just pointing out the obvious.

I am free to say Islam sucks all I wish. I am also free to post onto a multipage thread discussing how much it sucks. Until the Mullahs are in power in Canada, that is. Then I'll be dead. No doubt there are a few here who will cheer that much like the Pallys cheering 3000 dead in 9-11.

GostHacked · September 1, 2010

Once again, how about we just agree to disagree?

Which says to me, there is no more room for debate.

DogOnPorch · September 1, 2010

Which says to me, there is no more room for debate.

Do we agree Islam sucks? If not, there's still plenty of room for debate. Seriously...what's the plan re: Islam? Roll over and let it do as it pleases? At what point do you say: 'enough of these clowns and their medieval misogyny'?

GostHacked · September 1, 2010

Do we agree Islam sucks? If not, there's still plenty of room for debate. Seriously...what's the plan re: Islam? Roll over and let it do as it pleases? At what point do you say: 'enough of these clowns and their medieval misogyny'?

There is no more debate on this specific topic anymore (talking about the topic if this thread). The debate about whether Islam sucks or not can be carried out in another thread. You and I agree all religions suck, but I guess the debate would be how much more does Islam suck compared to other religions.

Edited September 1, 2010 by GostHacked

DogOnPorch · September 1, 2010

There is no more debate on this specific topic anymore (talking about the topic if this thread). The debate about whether Islam sucks or not can be carried out in another thread. You and I agree all religions suck, but I guess the debate would be how much more does Islam suck compared to other religions.

That would be relativism. I have bones to pick with Creationists...fossil bones usually. But they generally aren't known for using a bomb to get their message across...unless you're into more relativism and claim countries like Canada are just terrorist nations no better than Hezbollah as some posters here insist.

GostHacked · September 1, 2010

That would be relativism. I have bones to pick with Creationists...fossil bones usually. But they generally aren't known for using a bomb to get their message across...unless you're into more relativism and claim countries like Canada are just terrorist nations no better than Hezbollah as some posters here insist.

Well it depends on which side of the terrorism you are on. Democracy brought to you by the bomb and the gun just might be terrorism in some others eyes. So yes, it is relative. Our governments can and do act in those ways which can be considered terrorism. It's like the difference between a rebel and a freedom fighter. It can be the same person, but depends on which side you look at it.

DogOnPorch · September 1, 2010

Well it depends on which side of the terrorism you are on. Democracy brought to you by the bomb and the gun just might be terrorism in some others eyes. So yes, it is relative. Our governments can and do act in those ways which can be considered terrorism. It's like the difference between a rebel and a freedom fighter. It can be the same person, but depends on which side you look at it.

So Canada is deliberately targeting civilian populations in order to produce political results? Care to give a few examples?