Where should the new NYC mosque be built?

[Guest American Woman]

Since they don't seem to know what the building is I'm not going to put much weight into what they say.

They don't know what the building is??

But yeah, I guess that's as good a (non) reason to dismiss what they have to say as all your other dismissals. Saves you from having to actually address what was said, at any rate.

Well that's not what's happening so, ya. It's not exclusively for Muslims and it's not at ground zero.

There are no other houses of worship in the center other than a mosque, so yes, it is an "exclusive place of worship" for Muslims. Your changing it to "it's not exclusively for Muslims" doesn't alter the facts.

[DogOnPorch]

AW: But yeah, I guess that's as good a (non) reason to dismiss what they have to say as all your other dismissals. Saves you from having to actually address what was said, at any rate.

Agreed...TM brushed that one aside as it was rather inconvenient.

[Smallc]

Not to mention the question of where the 100 million is coming from,

Oh yes, tell us where it came from, Mr. Hannity.

[DogOnPorch]

The safe money is on Saudi Arabia...

[Guest American Woman]

The safe money is on Saudi Arabia...

Sounds as if the Muslim Canadian Congress thinks that's a real possibility:

The MCC said it is opposed to the Ground-Zero mosque because many questions have gone unanswered. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

[DogOnPorch]

It's a safe bet...otherwise why not spill the beans? It would make his position a bit better if he could show a benign, peaceful source. Rauf has himself said the buckaroos are coming from 'Muslim countries'. Just not WHICH Muslim countries.

[Guest American Woman]

It's a safe bet...otherwise why not spill the beans? It would make his position a bit better if he could show a benign, peaceful source. Rauf has himself said the buckaroos are coming from 'Muslim countries'. Just not WHICH Muslim countries.

The more I read about him, the more I question his being the head of a project such as the one we are discussing. Just the fact that he announced his intent to try to coincide it with the tenth anniversary of 9-11 makes one wonder where he was coming from. I'm pleased to see that people within his own religion, his peers, so to speak, are saying the same thing that all we "Muslim-hating bigots who blame all Muslims" think and I can't help but wonder if these same people 'can't seem to figure out' why the MCC would say and think what it does if they aren't all a bunch of bigots blaming all Muslims .....

[DogOnPorch]

The more I read about him, the more I question his being the head of a project such as the one we are discussing. Just the fact that he announced his intent to try to coincide it with the tenth anniversary of 9-11 makes one wonder where he was coming from. I'm pleased to see that people within his own religion, his peers, so to speak, are saying the same thing that all we "Muslim-hating bigots who blame all Muslims" think and I can't help but wonder if these same people 'can't seem to figure out' why the MCC would say and think what it does if they aren't all a bunch of bigots blaming all Muslims .....

I can't help but notice that Rauf (and his charming wife) seems to think it is the US that needs an education in sensitivity...lol. Reminds me of the British 'Islam Is Peace' ad campaign from a few years back now.

[Sir Bandelot]

Sounds as if the Muslim Canadian Congress thinks that's a real possibility:

The MCC said it is opposed to the Ground-Zero mosque because many questions have gone unanswered. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

Maybe it does come from Saudi, but isn't it a double-standard to condemn it for that? Isn't it blaming all of Saudi Arabia for 9-11? And if you would do that, which I'm sure some will, then isn't Saudi Arabia considered a friend of the United States? I thought George Bush is personal friends with powerful people in Saudi. There wasn't any criticism of Saudi Arabia post 9-11, just mainly Afghanistan and Iraq.

Not saying the Saudi's are not guilty, but seems like a double-standard to me. They probably funded other mosques.

[Bonam]

Maybe it does come from Saudi, but isn't it a double-standard to condemn it for that?

No, projects with dubious funding sources are routinely shut down or forced to seek other funding, to discourage giving publicity to such sources.

Saudi Arabia, a Wahabi Islamofascist state, is certainly a dubious funding source, and if Rauf is truly getting funding from Saudi Arabia, that alone would be enough of a reason to put the brakes on this project and at least force him to find alternate funding.

Isn't it blaming all of Saudi Arabia for 9-11?

No, it is merely recognizing what Saudi Arabia is.

And if you would do that, which I'm sure some will, then isn't Saudi Arabia considered a friend of the United States?

It is an ally, a strategic partner, born out of necessity due to the US's needs for oil and their shared strategic interests in the region. It is not a "friend".

I thought George Bush is personal friends with powerful people in Saudi. There wasn't any criticism of Saudi Arabia post 9-11, just mainly Afghanistan and Iraq.

Why should we care who the personal friends of some ex president are? As for criticism, well, if there isn't, on a moral level, there should be. But, keep in mind that criticism of the USSR during WWII, for example, was very hushed. You don't overly criticize your allies while you are dealing with a situation where their cooperation is important.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Bonam

[Sir Bandelot]

keep in mind that criticism of the USSR during WWII, for example, was very hushed. You don't overly criticize your allies while you are dealing with a situation where their cooperation is important.

So the real enemy is finally revealed, then.

[dre]

No, projects with dubious funding sources are routinely shut down or forced to seek other funding, to discourage giving publicity to such sources.

Saudi Arabia, a Wahabi Islamofascist state, is certainly a dubious funding source, and if Rauf is truly getting funding from Saudi Arabia, that alone would be enough of a reason to put the brakes on this project and at least force him to find alternate funding.

No, it is merely recognizing what Saudi Arabia is.

It is an ally, a strategic partner, born out of necessity due to the US's needs for oil and their shared strategic interests in the region. It is not a "friend".

Why should we care who the personal friends of some ex president are? As for criticism, well, if there isn't, on a moral level, there should be. But, keep in mind that criticism of the USSR during WWII, for example, was very hushed. You don't overly criticize your allies while you are dealing with a situation where their cooperation is important.

Theres money from Saudi Arabia flowing into the US constantly for a million different projects, and even though politicians might not like to talk about it too much theres a very tight and cozy relationship between the US and Saudi governments.

No, projects with dubious funding sources are routinely shut down or forced to seek other funding, to discourage giving publicity to such sources.

Saudi Arabia, a Wahabi Islamofascist state, is certainly a dubious funding source, and if Rauf is truly getting funding from Saudi Arabia, that alone would be enough of a reason to put the brakes on this project and at least force him to find alternate funding.

No no... thats just not true. Theres no moratorium of any kind on the Saudis investing in religious buildings. Proof of Saudi funding would absolutely NOT put this project in jeopardy. The Saudis fund these kind of projects in the US all the time.

For example, the Umar bin Al Khattab Mosque... Which Eric Holder actually did a public appearance at.

July 21, 2009 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - On Thursday July 16 U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder paid a low-key visit to the Omar Ibn Al Khattab Foundation Omar Center for Cultural and Educational Outreach in Los Angeles [aka, the Umar bin Al Khattab Mosque].

The foundation's name denotes a da'wa institute dedicated to "outreach" [islamic code word for proselytizing Islam] and is listed on Saudi King Fahd's website as one of the mosques he finances [see, http://www.kingfahdbinabdulaziz.com/main/m460.htm]

According to the Los Angeles Times, Holder's meeting lasted approximately an hour during which he delivered prepared remarks and took questions.

Heres some more on the Saudis funding these kinds of institutions...

Reza F. Safa, author of Inside Islam, estimates that since 1973, the Saudi government has spent an unbelievable $87B to promote Wahhabism in the United States, Africa, Southeast Asia and Europe. According to official Saudi information, Saudi funds have been used to build and maintain over 1,500 mosques, 202 colleges, 210 Islamic Centers wholly or partly financed by Saudi Arabia, and almost 2,000 schools for educating Muslim children in non-Islamic countries in Europe, North and South America, Australia and Asia.

The Kingdom has fully or partially financed Islamic Centers in Los Angeles; San Francisco; Fresno; Chicago; New York; Washington; Tucson; Raleigh, N.C. and Toledo, Ohio as well as in Austria, Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Russia, Turkey, and even in some Muslim countries such as Morocco, Indonesia, Malaysia and Djibuti.

Edited August 10, 2010 by dre

[Bonam]

The Kingdom has fully or partially financed Islamic Centers in Los Angeles; San Francisco; Fresno; Chicago; New York; Washington; Tucson; Raleigh, N.C. and Toledo, Ohio as well as in Austria, Great Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Russia, Turkey, and even in some Muslim countries such as Morocco, Indonesia, Malaysia and Djibuti.

That may all well be true, and if so, just shows the vast extent of the problem. Saudi money used to spread extremist Wahabi Islam should be shut out.

[dre]

That may all well be true, and if so, just shows the vast extent of the problem. Saudi money used to spread extremist Wahabi Islam should be shut out.

I dont think it necessarily shows a problem. Youd have to look at whats actually taught in those schools before you declare them extremist.

[Machjo]

Sounds as if the Muslim Canadian Congress thinks that's a real possibility:

The MCC said it is opposed to the Ground-Zero mosque because many questions have gone unanswered. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

If that's the case, then Saudi Arabia being a US ally must be an even bigger slap in the face, no?

By the same logic, if an American should commit a crime in Canada, we must therefore consider all US investment in Canada as a slap in the face and Canada ought to break all diplomatic ties with the US no?

So when will you stand up to the US-Saudi alliance by the same logic?

[Bonam]

I dont think it necessarily shows a problem. Youd have to look at whats actually taught in those schools before you declare them extremist.

I think it does necessarily show a problem. Saudi money is dirty money. Would a church funded by a drug cartel fly? I don't think so. Same thing here. If it wasn't for their vast supply of oil and opposition to Iran, we would have Saudi Arabia economically sanctioned to hell and back, it is one of the most backward and repressive regimes in the middle east.

Edited August 10, 2010 by Bonam

[dre]

If that's the case, then Saudi Arabia being a US ally must be an even bigger slap in the face, no?

By the same logic, if an American should commit a crime in Canada, we must therefore consider all US investment in Canada as a slap in the face and Canada ought to break all diplomatic ties with the US no?

So when will you stand up to the US-Saudi alliance by the same logic?

The logic itself is patently stupid.

A bunch of the 911 terrorists were Saudi... so that means that the Saudi Royals funding a church must be a nefarious and dastardly act.

You can see the weak lines of guilt by association being drawn here. Newyork muslims shouldnt participate in this project because the 911 terrorists were muslims. The Saudis shouldnt participate because some of the 911 terrorists were Saudi.

I guess since the 911 highjackers had beards that it would be another "slap in the face" if people that arent clean shaven participate in this project.

[Bonam]

A bunch of the 911 terrorists were Saudi... so that means that the Saudi Royals funding a church must be a nefarious and dastardly act.

No, the problem isn't that a bunch of terrorists are Saudi. The problem is that Saudi Arabia is a state designed to create extremist Muslims. In an ideal world, we should have nothing to do with such a state. Strategically and economically that may be impossible right now, but that doesn't mean we need to let them fund their extremist cultural imperialism in the West.

[dre]

No, the problem isn't that a bunch of terrorists are Saudi. The problem is that Saudi Arabia is a state designed to create extremist Muslims. In an ideal world, we should have nothing to do with such a state. Strategically and economically that may be impossible right now, but that doesn't mean we need to let them fund their extremist cultural imperialism in the West.

Youre trying to make simplistic generalizations and assumptions about a topic that isnt that simple. The Saudi Royals have more to lose from another terrorist attack on the US by Saudi nationals or other extremist behavior by muslims in the west than anybody.

We dont need to make assumptions though... we can look at whats actually being taught in these schools and decide if its extremist and aggresive or not.

In an ideal world, we should have nothing to do with such a state

But in THIS world the US is the key enabler and empowerer of that state.

Edited August 10, 2010 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

....But in THIS world the US is the key enabler and empowerer of that state.

Yep..and the same applies to Canada using this logic. Which nation on earth benefits the most from an economic relationship with the USA and was home base for the Millennium Bomber? Hint: It begins with a "C" and likes hockey!

[Sir Bandelot]

That may all well be true, and if so, just shows the vast extent of the problem. Saudi money used to spread extremist Wahabi Islam should be shut out.

It IS true, and I knew that already when I raised the question. It has been true for a long time, before september 11, and after. But in the aftermath of the terrorist attack the US government did not even seriously raise the question of Saudi Arabia. Or if they did, they only did so in provate, and allowed the economic relationship to continue. Behold the whoredom of capitalism at work.

<BC Qualifier>Yeah Canadas a whore as well</>

[DogOnPorch]

Yeah Canadas a whore as well

Whore to the planet.

[bush_cheney2004]

It IS true, and I knew that already when I raised the question. It has been true for a long time, before september 11, and after.

You are quite mistaken...the United States purposely demobilized from Saudi Bases before 9/11 to reduce the footprint on "holy land". There were changes in the relationship before, during, and after Saddam, their main threat.

<BC Qualifier>Yeah Canadas a whore as well</>

So when should we close the borders to satisfy santimonious assholes who think they are better than Wahabis in Saudi Arabia?

[TimG]

Saw a blurb about someone looking at putting a gay bar next to the mosque. I thought it was a brilliant suggestion that would expose the mosque supporters for the hypocrites they are (i.e. I am certain the gay bar would be opposed by the same people as unnecessarily provocative).

Edited August 11, 2010 by TimG

[Sir Bandelot]

You are quite mistaken...the United States purposely demobilized from Saudi Bases before 9/11 to reduce the footprint on "holy land". There were changes in the relationship before, during, and after Saddam, their main threat.

Threat of what.

They moved the troops around to wherever they need them. And if they need to move them back, they will do that. As in, any nice place to fire Patriot missiles against scuds, or whatever is needed.

And don't give me your sanctimonious crap, Georgie kissed the Prince and they were holding hands. I seen it.

So when should we close the borders to satisfy santimonious assholes who think they are better than Wahabis in Saudi Arabia?

You must mean, yourself.