# (non) Mosque (not) at Ground Zero..



## synrgy (Aug 20, 2010)

I did a fair bit of searching and also checked the politics/CE forum before posting this.

I haven't seen any discussion here on this, which is probably a good thing considering how completely absurd it all is, but since most of the country still seems up-in-arms about it, I thought I should start a dialog here.

My very, very simple position is this: We either have freedom of religion in this country, or we don't. If this place can't be built, then we need to start tearing down all the other buildings associated with other religions. End of story.

Anyway, while I'm not always crazy about this guy, Keith Olbermann basically NAILED it. At least in my eyes, anyway:



Bottom line for me is, I'm fucking offended that people are even debating this. It strikes me as a cut and dry non-issue, but I apparently don't drink the same water a considerable portion of the rest of the country does...


----------



## Prydogga (Aug 20, 2010)

I remember seeing this on The Daily Show, it still sounds as far fetched a problem, some people still seem to forget what Muslim's really are like, and as talked about, it's _not _ground zero. So yeah, non issue. 

Also, I'm not an American, so I didn't realise this was a big story, and you're right, the denial of this (and other mosques around the country, which apparently is also happening) goes against something that America always stodd for.


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 20, 2010)

people are losing their minds about this. let them build the fucking thing.


----------



## Randy (Aug 20, 2010)

"Because this is America, dammit" 

I love that man.


----------



## djpharoah (Aug 20, 2010)

I heard/read it's a Islamic community center with a prayer room, work out room and an indoor basketball court that's open for anyone! Also it's gonna be far away from Ground Zero in an abandoned Burlington Coat Factory that no one is using....


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 20, 2010)

^Exactly! You should read some of the shit over at the powerboat forums. crazy conservatives are losing their shit thinking its going to be a huge ugly terrorist training facility on the grounds of the towers.


----------



## IDLE (Aug 20, 2010)

I would expect that new yorkers of all people wouldn't give a fuck.

I don't understand this at all, it's just insane. I haven't paid much attention to it because it just seems so trivial it's not even worth debating.


----------



## Pauly (Aug 20, 2010)

Title of thread summed it up. It's two blocks away from ground zero, there's an ACTUAL mosque that's nearer anyway (this isn't a mosque and has no minarets or anything) and it's surrounded by, among other things, a strip club. The facts are being hilariously/tragically overlooked.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

I wouldn't consider 1/10th of a mile, a few minutes walking distance "far away". 

I think common sense should be applied on both sides of this issue. On one hand, I think people should try to understand that this is not "literally" on top of Ground Zero. However, it is close. At the same time, people should try to understand that Freedom of Religion as outlined in The Constitution does not put any one religion above or below another. Thus, if it's OK to build a church or synagogue, it should be equally OK to build a Mosque.

On the *other* hand, I think the Muslim community should have chosen a location for The Cordoba House a bit more wisely. Whether they, or anyone else, likes it or not, 9/11 is still an open wound for many Americans. You could argue whether it should or shouldn't be, but it is. It is still fresh in America's consciousness and like every national tragedy or disaster, it will fade a bit in time.

That said, I think they could have found a location for their project somewhere else that would rile a lot less feathers. How many Mosques are there in NYC? Going by Google Maps it looks like there's over 20 in the downtown area with more spread out the further from the city you get. I would think of all the real estate available in NYC, of which I'm sure there is plenty, there must be *some* semblance of a suitable location for them that wasn't as close to Ground Zero as the one they've chosen.

Because that's the fundamental problem people have with it. They're not happy with the idea of them building anything resembling a Mosque as "close" as they have, to Ground Zero. Now do you honestly think the fact that it's open to anyone, or that it includes other amenities matters to the people upset? Of course not.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 20, 2010)

orb451 said:


> Now do you honestly think the fact that it's open to anyone, or that it includes other amenities, or that it *isn't a mosque*, or that it *isn't on ground zero* matters to the people upset? Of course not.



fixed. 

Look, I do get what you're saying, but I think it's unconstitutional to suggest that they should find another location just because some completely non-rational people take umbrage at it. Like I said; it's cut-and-dry. If this has to move, than so do all the other religious buildings near ground zero. Period.


----------



## Randy (Aug 20, 2010)

Yeah, implying "common sense" dictates the appropriate course of action on this speaks more about whatever your personal convictions are than it does the legality, constitutionality, or... hell... the fairness of the issue.


----------



## eaeolian (Aug 20, 2010)

More to the point, national politicians shouldn't be involved in what is a local zoning matter. If NYC doesn't have a problem with it, let them build it if they can raise the money.

Once again, the American public misses the point: This is a distraction. It's this year's version of "one man and one woman". Immigration was losing traction, so let's dig up something even more ridiculously overblown and make it a national issue going into the fall.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

synrgy said:


> fixed.
> 
> Look, I do get what you're saying, but I think it's unconstitutional to suggest that they should find another location just because some completely non-rational people take umbrage at it. Like I said; it's cut-and-dry. If this has to move, than so do all the other religious buildings near ground zero. Period.



Well therein lies the problem. Rational or irrational, people are guided by their emotions a great deal of the time and this *is* an emotional issue. Is there a Benihana's restaurant on top of the Pearl Harbor Memorial in Hawaii? If there is, I doubt it was built 9 years after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.

The point I'm making is that when you're dealing with an emotional issue, you're going to get emotional responses, so don't be surprised when people throw logic out the window. And while you're right it may be unconstitutional on the face of things, to ask them to choose another location, common sense on THEIR part, perhaps, would have guided their decision on a location.

If The Cordoba House contains no Mosque or place of worship, the story *would be* a non-issue and a non-starter. But the fact is, it DOES contain a prayer room or place of worship.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

eaeolian said:


> Once again, the American public misses the point: This is a distraction. It's this year's version of "one man and one woman". Immigration was losing traction, so let's dig up something even more ridiculously overblown and make it a national issue going into the fall.



Unlike Gay Marriage and Immigration policy however, this issue will have next to no impact on the mid-term November elections, outside of NY and NYC that is.


----------



## Murmel (Aug 20, 2010)

orb451 said:


> On the *other* hand, I think the Muslim community should have chosen a location for The Cordoba House a bit more wisely. Whether they, or anyone else, likes it or not, 9/11 is still an open wound for many Americans. You could argue whether it should or shouldn't be, but it is. It is still fresh in America's consciousness and like every national tragedy or disaster, it will fade a bit in time.



I am all for a mosque, but they should really reconsider the location if it WAS at ground zero.

And if all Muslims were terrorists then trust me, Sweden would be loooong gone because like 80% of all of our immigrants are Muslim right now, and 15-20% of our population are immigrants, mostly consisting of Finns and Muslims.

We may only have 9 million people but still, say that 10% of the immigrant community are muslim that still makes for 900 000 people.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 20, 2010)

synrgy said:


> We either have freedom of religion in this country, or we don't.


 
This.

We can't arbitrarily decide these things based on what a small portion of a religious group chooses to do. Moreover, the religion cannot be held accountable for their misuse/misinterpretation/what-have-you of its principles. Plus Muslims have been here since well before 9/11. Ppl need to grow the fuck up.

$0.02


----------



## eaeolian (Aug 20, 2010)

orb451 said:


> Unlike Gay Marriage and Immigration policy however, this issue will have next to no impact on the mid-term November elections, outside of NY and NYC that is.



It's not for lack of trying, and I wouldn't count it out just yet. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American press.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

Murmel said:


> I am all for a mosque, but they should really reconsider the location if it WAS at ground zero.



As close as it is, I think it is "close enough" to piss people off. Hence the emotional row the projects developers have created.



Murmel said:


> and if all Muslims were terrorists then trust me, Sweden would be loooong gone because like 80% of all of our immigrants are Muslim right now, and 15-20% of our population are immigrants, mostly consisting of Finns and Muslims.



I don't think anyone is really saying that all Muslims are de facto terrorists, but the members of their extreme fringe have all but ruined it for the rest of them unfortunately in terms of popular opinion here in the states. Mainstream Muslims, of which I'm sure there are plenty, would do well to vocally distance themselves from the extremists as much and as often as possible.

Something the leading Imam of the Cordoba House seems unable to fully do as noted in part, in this article:

Ground Zero Mosque Imam: ?They Feel the Need to Conflagrate? - The Corner - National Review Online


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 20, 2010)

eaeolian said:


> Never underestimate the stupidity of the American press.


 
This should be engraved on a gold plaque somewhere...


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

eaeolian said:


> It's not for lack of trying, and I wouldn't count it out just yet. Never underestimate the stupidity of the American press *AND American People*



There, fixed that for ya


----------



## Rick (Aug 20, 2010)

Just let them fucking build it, Jesus H. Raptor Christ.


----------



## Randy (Aug 20, 2010)

Rick said:


> Just let them fucking build it, Jesus H. Raptor Christ.



Which gives me an idea... How about a Flying Spaghetti Monster Temple instead?


----------



## LUCKY7 (Aug 20, 2010)

Opening day: Sept. 11, 2011.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

LUCKY7 said:


> Opening day: Sept. 11, 2011.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Aug 20, 2010)

I kinda see why people might be a little bit offended by it, but they need to realise that by stopping this place being built they are letting terrorists win.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 20, 2010)

just to clarify on what a lot of you already know:

It's not a mosque, first of all.

second, it's a long way away and not even visible.

this stuff makes me want to start the 4chan esque crusades, like they did on scientology. seriously, let's all get Guy fawkes masks, jack a TV station and just say shit like " You have been Lied to."

but in all honestly, I'm pretty sure the "Prayer space" is christian/Jewish accessible too, so why the fuss?

Seriously, If i went in the deep south and tried to build a community center with a top floor for "cultural studies", would i suddenly be protested for making a building for "N****R activites?"

people are too impressiopnable.

they're using slots in MAryland as a way to get votes to

"Vote no on prop 12, let's keep gamblers away from our mall shoppers, families and children"

jeez, they treat them like murderers, but most of these " Murderer-gamblers" are - you guessed it - mall goers and people with families and children. besides, slots aren;t even that big a deal, sheesh, and arundel mills mall ( where they're trying tp build it) is fucking dead these days, they need the tourism.

and like with the Muslims, so many of the people they're lampooning as "terrorists" are NATIVE new yorkers in addition, the area where they're going to build it, about 6 to 7 blocks from the east end of ground zero in an old abandoned store, is a fucking GHOST TOWN, this would help bring people into the communities.

...i swear, this isn't an america thing, this is a herd mentality thing. i hate that when people are addressed as a group they don't think for themselves. 

WTF

/rant


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Aug 20, 2010)

"What a couldron of terrorism that will be"


----------



## ittoa666 (Aug 20, 2010)

How about we tear down EVERY church in the US.


----------



## pink freud (Aug 20, 2010)

This is only news because it's an election year. 

Think about what the debate really is about. They obviously have the _right_ to build there. Everybody with the smallest shred of knowledge of the constitution knows this. The fucktards in the infotainment industry and on capitol hill are simply sensationalizing it so the debate can be about _if people think it's a good idea._ The "debate" is literally two sides stating support or resistance to the idea of it being built. It's sick that the balance of our government could very likely shift based on politicians giving their opinions on something that is completely none of their business. Due to the combination of inherent bigotry in much of the American public and the complete lack of any spine on their side, Democrats either have to say that they don't think the mosque should be built (therefor supporting the bigotry) or have to risk their seats by supporting the build.


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 20, 2010)

Bin Laden must be thrilled. It's one thing to make us scared of terrorist attacks for the next kajilliion years, but now the effects of terror are making Americans talking themselves out of the fucking first amendment.


----------



## setsuna7 (Aug 20, 2010)

I'm glad that you guys agree on building the mosque. I'm a Muslim,and where I came from, we have churches,mosques,temples within the vicinity of each other. We eat in the same restaurant,we ride the same train every morning to work,go to the same market. I don't see why Americans can't get along? In my country,Islam,Hindu and Bhuddist are the major religions,Christianity is a small but not minor community.but we still let them build churches,even though islam is our Official Religion. I hope the mosque will/can be build and I hope this is just a publicity stunt for the coming election-Peace \m/


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 20, 2010)

setsuna7 said:


> I'm glad that you guys agree on building the mosque. I'm a Muslim,and where I came from, we have churches,mosques,temples within the vicinity of each other. We eat in the same restaurant,we ride the same train every morning to work,go to the same market. I don't see why Americans can't get along? In my country,Islam,Hindu and Bhuddist are the major religions,Christianity is a small but not minor community.but we still let them build churches,even though islam is our Official Religion. I hope the mosque will/can be build and I hope this is just a publicity stunt for the coming election-Peace \m/



Its not that Americans don't get along, its that they have to right to bitch about everything they don't like.


----------



## setsuna7 (Aug 20, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> Its not that Americans don't get along, its that they have to right to bitch about everything they don't like.


Ok,now I see why!!!


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

pink freud said:


> The fucktards in the infotainment industry and on capitol hill are simply sensationalizing it so the debate can be about _if people think it's a good idea._ The "debate" is literally two sides stating support or resistance to the idea of it being built. It's sick that the balance of our government could very likely shift based on politicians giving their opinions on something that is completely none of their business.



You seem to be saying that as though it's a new idea. Am I getting the wrong impression from what you've written above? Especially the last part. Politician's sole purpose in life, in I don't know how many years going back, has been precisely expanding government and thus putting it's nose in people's private affairs. From civil rights for women and minorities, to abortion and the woman's right to choose, whether or not to "come out" if you're gay in the military, immigration, healthcare, gay marriage, all come down to various levels of government intrusion into the goings-on of regular people.




pink freud said:


> Due to the combination of inherent bigotry in much of the American public and the complete lack of any spine on their side, Democrats either have to say that they don't think the mosque should be built (therefor supporting the bigotry) or have to risk their seats by supporting the build.



I disagree, I think that average Joe American is just ill-informed on the differences between run-of-the-mill, mainstream Muslims, and Muslim Extremists. The former, to my knowledge, would probably just like to live their lives without being harassed. The latter would like nothing more than to watch the Western World burn to the ground. Now if "I" were a member of the former, and was getting tired of having my community besmirched by the actions of a few, I would go OUT OF MY FUCKING WAY TO VOCALLY and VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE THE DIPSHITS ON THE FRINGE.

Every. Chance. I. Got. I'd be telling people how much I fucking HATED those shit eating cowards. And somewhere South of that view point, is a more controlled, measured approach that could deliver the same message. That "WE ARE NOT THE SAME". See that? We're NOT the same Muslims that strap on bombs and blow things up, we're not the same Muslims that get "so" offended by a cartoon Muhammed that we'll hunt you down and kill you.

For the most part, I don't see enough Muslims actively disassociating themselves from the fringe. And yet they sit back and "wonder" why they're being lumped in. My advice? Step up your fucking game people. Get out there and make it known everywhere and anywhere that you don't play by the same rules as the extremists. If you want to label most Americans as lazy bastards that will take bigotry over anything else, then I'm more than happy to label most Muslims as lazy bastards that aren't doing ENOUGH to distinguish themselves and their views, from those that DO strap on bombs, etc.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

setsuna7 said:


> I'm glad that you guys agree on building the mosque. I'm a Muslim,and where I came from, we have churches,mosques,temples within the vicinity of each other. We eat in the same restaurant,we ride the same train every morning to work,go to the same market. I don't see why Americans can't get along? In my country,Islam,Hindu and Bhuddist are the major religions,Christianity is a small but not minor community.but we still let them build churches,even though islam is our Official Religion. I hope the mosque will/can be build and I hope this is just a publicity stunt for the coming election-Peace \m/



When the Christian Extremists in your country bomb or blow up a building, killing 3000+ people (of various faiths) and then 9 years later, come back and try to build a brand new church and "activity center" just a stone's throw from the buildings their fringe members destroyed, perhaps you, and your countrymen may think differently about letting them. 

Maybe not though, maybe it'd get built without so much as a word of opposition. Who can say? Point is, 9/11 is an EMOTIONAL issue for many many Americans. Both good and bad. I would think that common sense would prevail on behalf of those seeking to build this thing and choose another spot that was met with less vocal opposition. But they haven't, and that's where things are at.

And before anyone jumps up my ass about this, let me reiterate that I DO believe in Freedom of Speech (especially the kind that chaps some of your asses) as well as Freedom of Religion and while I support the idea of the Cordoba House, Mosque, Non-Mosque, Whatever-the-fuck you want to call it, I just WISHED they'd chosen ANOTHER place for it. That's all. 2 Blocks away, 7 blocks away, 10 miles away, whatever... why don't we just say, for the time being, don't fucking build anything resembling a Mosque in the 5 burroughs. How about that? And at some future date, we'll revisit the issue and you can build all the mosques and minarets that your hearts desire?


----------



## Randy (Aug 20, 2010)

pink freud said:


> This is only news because it's an election year.



QFT


----------



## Dan (Aug 20, 2010)

Pat raises some valid points here. I'm staying neutral.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 20, 2010)

1. Cordoba, and the Al Andus kingdom SAVED much of the scientific knowledge of the ancient Greeks that Dark Age Europe just threw into a big fire of "heresy" and therefore was instrumental in our rational society today.
2. The founding fathers were mainly deists, an enlightenment movement regarding God as "a great clockmaker," and a "great clockmaker" wouldn't give a shit about whether or not people in a certain country eat bacon or not.
3. EVERY religion has extremists. There are now Christian extremists killing abortion doctors and, as we saw, blowing up Mosques. What is scary is that these extremists are gaining credibility.
4. What is the fucking point of stopping people of a certain religious persuasion from cooking and playing basketball together?


----------



## Randy (Aug 20, 2010)

Somberlain is a wise man.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 20, 2010)

Plug said:


> Pat raises some valid points here. I'm staying neutral.




This punk needs to learn some history

Oh and Randy, you just got some +rep for stroking my ego.


----------



## pink freud (Aug 20, 2010)

orb451 said:


> You seem to be saying that as though it's a new idea. Am I getting the wrong impression from what you've written above? Especially the last part. Politician's sole purpose in life, in I don't know how many years going back, has been precisely expanding government and thus putting it's nose in people's private affairs. From civil rights for women and minorities, to abortion and the woman's right to choose, whether or not to "come out" if you're gay in the military, immigration, healthcare, gay marriage, all come down to various levels of government intrusion into the goings-on of regular people.



It's none of their business because of the First Amendment. The government cannot legally stop this building from being built because of religious reasons. Also, your examples are all pretty much the government giving rights, not taking away rights (unless you count oppression as a right).



orb451 said:


> I disagree, I think that average Joe American is just ill-informed on the differences between run-of-the-mill, mainstream Muslims, and Muslim Extremists. The former, to my knowledge, would probably just like to live their lives without being harassed. The latter would like nothing more than to watch the Western World burn to the ground. Now if "I" were a member of the former, and was getting tired of having my community besmirched by the actions of a few, I would go OUT OF MY FUCKING WAY TO VOCALLY and VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE THE DIPSHITS ON THE FRINGE.
> 
> Every. Chance. I. Got. I'd be telling people how much I fucking HATED those shit eating cowards. And somewhere South of that view point, is a more controlled, measured approach that could deliver the same message. That "WE ARE NOT THE SAME". See that? We're NOT the same Muslims that strap on bombs and blow things up, we're not the same Muslims that get "so" offended by a cartoon Muhammed that we'll hunt you down and kill you.
> 
> For the most part, I don't see enough Muslims actively disassociating themselves from the fringe. And yet they sit back and "wonder" why they're being lumped in. My advice? Step up your fucking game people. Get out there and make it known everywhere and anywhere that you don't play by the same rules as the extremists. If you want to label most Americans as lazy bastards that will take bigotry over anything else, then I'm more than happy to label most Muslims as lazy bastards that aren't doing ENOUGH to distinguish themselves and their views, from those that DO strap on bombs, etc.



You seem to be applying a standard to Muslims that I'm betting you don't apply to other groups. Do you expect the Pope to talk about Fred Phelps? Al Sharpton to talk about Darfur? 

This Cordoba House? It's intent is to show that Islam is not inherently violent. Pretty much exactly what you are asking for.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 20, 2010)

pink freud said:


> It's none of their business because of the First Amendment. The government cannot legally stop this building from being built because of religious reasons. Also, your examples are all pretty much the government giving rights, not taking away rights (unless you count oppression as a right).



I'm not the one that said the government was, is or should be involved in this particular discussion as it relates to the building of The Cordoba House. The government can't get involved because it "is" a constitutional issue. They have the "right" to build it there as much as any other religious group does. Some are saying that this is going to become some kind of "issue du jour" come election time, I think that's just an overestimate of the issue. Immigration and Gay Marriage are likely to remain the key issues come November and this, at best, will be a foot note. Maybe in NYC or NY state it'll be something more, but elsewhere? I sincerely doubt it. 



pink freud said:


> You seem to be applying a standard to Muslims that I'm betting you don't apply to other groups. Do you expect the Pope to talk about Fred Phelps? Al Sharpton to talk about Darfur?



Could you clarify what standard it is that you think I'm applying to Muslims and not other groups. That is, could you be more specific or elaborate on what it is you think is an unfair standard?



pink freud said:


> This Cordoba House? It's intent is to show that Islam is not inherently violent. Pretty much exactly what you are asking for.



Except it just happens to be just a little too close to an open wound in American history. Do you really think we'd be having any kind of discussion about this if it were being built in Los Angeles? Or San Diego? Or Miami? Or Chicago? Not fucking likely. This whole thing hinges on location location location. If it weren't for that, there would NO discussion. If the Moderate Muslim or Mainstream Muslim communities wanted to distinguish themselves, I would think a healthy donation to the 9/11 survivors or some charity associated with 9/11 would do world's more good for them than trying to erect a new cultural center 2 blocks from the WTC site. In other words, there's better ways for them to show how inherently decent Islam as a whole is.

And it'd be an added bonus if they got an Imam to run The Cordoba House that wasn't waffling at best in his thoughts regarding American culpability for Muslim Extremism (READ: America brought it on itself). But that's probably asking too much.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 20, 2010)

Violence and Islam:
1. The conquest of the Islamic Empire was out of necessity of resources for the Arabs, for they lived in desert and needed the foodstuffs of the fertile crescent. This is an economic, not a religious issue.
2. Once they conquered said areas, they did not massacre followers of other religions, unlike the Crusaders. Instead they required a tax for the "people of the book," which was incidentally lower than the almsgiving required by their faith.
3. As I stated earlier, the Islamic Empire was a place of tolerance and science.
4. The modern hatred towards Jews is an issue of land and economics, not Nazistic pathological hatred.
4. Evidence throughout history shows that destitute people get angry and violent. Due to the actions of Western Imperialism, the peoples of the Middle East are destitute and therefore a minority are violent.
5. Wahabism goes against many fundamental Islamic teachings.


----------



## setsuna7 (Aug 20, 2010)

The Somberlain said:


> Violence and Islam:
> 1. The conquest of the Islamic Empire was out of necessity of resources for the Arabs, for they lived in desert and needed the foodstuffs of the fertile crescent. This is an economic, not a religious issue.
> 2. Once they conquered said areas, they did not massacre followers of other religions, unlike the Crusaders. Instead they required a tax for the "people of the book," which was incidentally lower than the almsgiving required by their faith.
> 3. As I stated earlier, the Islamic Empire was a place of tolerance and science.
> ...



The Somberlain is wise indeed!!!+1


----------



## Trespass (Aug 20, 2010)

synrgy said:


> *Keith Olbermann*





So much.



orb451 said:


> For the most part, I don't see enough Muslims actively disassociating themselves from the fringe. And yet they sit back and "wonder" why they're being lumped in. My advice? Step up your fucking game people. Get out there and make it known everywhere and anywhere that you don't play by the same rules as the extremists. If you want to label most Americans as lazy bastards that will take bigotry over anything else, then I'm more than happy to label most Muslims as lazy bastards that aren't doing ENOUGH to distinguish themselves and their views, from those that DO strap on bombs, etc.



I agree with this statement. However! There is obviously some strong intimidation at work towards Muslims in America at the moment. Islamophobia, if you will. Anyone willing to give pro-Muslim activists a voice immediately cut out the majority of the pro-conservative population, and in the all important profit margins case (that hasn't gotten us into trouble before, or even recently, right?) that's not very smart.

Olbermann's able to do what he can here because it's an editorial, it's aimed to a largely liberal audience anyways, and because it's less of a Left vs. Right issue than a complete and utter lack of clarity.



The Somberlain said:


> 1. Cordoba, and the Al Andus kingdom SAVED much of the scientific knowledge of the ancient Greeks that Dark Age Europe just threw into a big fire of "heresy" and therefore was instrumental in our rational society today.




Golden Age of Islam


----------



## Whiskey_Funeral (Aug 21, 2010)

It's a violation of these peoples' rights to not let them build it if they're legally permitted to. I can't believe people are even fighting over this. "It's okay to take away the rights of someone else, because I disagree with them,". That kind of mentality is great until the tables are turned.
It's amazing how many freedoms we've forfeited to our government since 09/11. We've let the government and the media scare us and reassure us that every time they take MORE power away from the American people that it's for our own good. It's to protect us from the 'bad guys'.
We pay for OUR government to exist and serve us, not the other way around. A small percentage of our paychecks gets taken out to pay for their fucking salaries, but it seems like every time our government votes something into law it's against the wishes of the majority of our citizens. 
If we let shit like this keep on happening, those dickhead terrorists really have won. 
This is so incredibly frustrating.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 21, 2010)

Here's something funny.

Every argument I've been hearing about the NY thing, I've previously heard from a friend of mine. She is black, and her husband is white, with his family from Texas.

All of the things about needing to be sensitive to the community, even if it interferes with something private (religion), were applied to his marrying a black woman. 

I hate racists and bigots. 

If you decide to put away the Constitution, you give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States. End of story.

In terms of the government granting "rights" rather than taking them away, the core of that argument appears to be that the government can determine that someone is not worth a full person, or decide that they are... and can take that away again. Is that what happened, or were old mistakes corrected? 

Could someone decide that the decent guy from Texas shouldn't have married the n****r? That his kids should be picking cotton? 

I did find a funny theme in the following...



orb451 said:


> From civil rights for women and minorities, to abortion and the woman's right to choose, whether or not to "come out" if you're gay in the military, immigration, healthcare, gay marriage, all come down to various levels of government intrusion into the goings-on of regular people.



I think it extremely noteworthy that every example given, where one person wanted to deny someone rights in their private life, are driven by one party in the United States. What's up with that? Are minorities and women really that blind when they vote for that party?


----------



## FretWizard88 (Aug 21, 2010)

I'm all about building the Mosque in the United States, but WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE AT GROUND ZERO! Build a Mosque anywhere else but there. I believe that Ground Zero should be reserved for either the building of another form of the Twin Towers, or some sort of Park/memorial. 

I'm not just saying this because it is a Mosque either. I don't believe any religious building should be built on ground zero. It is just too touchy.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 21, 2010)

FretWizard88 said:


> I'm all about building the Mosque in the United States, but WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE AT GROUND ZERO! Build a Mosque anywhere else but there. I believe that Ground Zero should be reserved for either the building of another form of the Twin Towers, or some sort of Park/memorial.
> 
> I'm not just saying this because it is a Mosque either. I don't believe any religious building should be built on ground zero. It is just too touchy.



Did you read or watch anything here? It's a community center about half a mile from ground zero


----------



## Explorer (Aug 21, 2010)

^Well, let's just say that this is a good example of what's been happening with this. A lot of people are getting riled without knowing the facts, and without digging for them, even if they've been stated a few times in any given discussion....


----------



## Mexi (Aug 21, 2010)

It's been a couple years since I've been in an american history lecture, but I'm pretty sure alot more than 3,000 people have died on the land that NYC now resides on. Whether its one dead person or a thousand, the amount of outrage can't be based solely on the number of dead and the number of years that have gone by, cause you essentially just break down the value of human life in those terms and thats really no better than the thinking of the jihadists themselves. people really need to come to terms with 9/11 already and deal with more pressing domestic issues and Afghanistan (where innocent people are dying every day).


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 21, 2010)

I suppose the self-righteous liberals and intolerant conservatives will never look at all the facts...


----------



## BlindingLight7 (Aug 21, 2010)

Tellin it like it is Olbermann!


People need to stop freaking out, it's been 9 years, I'm sorry, but I've moved on.


----------



## Dan (Aug 21, 2010)

@somberlaind Pat Condell is one of the most well versed and intellegent people i know. He like to share his views, and i can assure you he is in no way a punk. 

Yes every religion has extremists. But you have to look past that to the negative and positive reputation the media gives these extremists.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter after all.

Im not condoning anyones actions with that comment, im simply pointing out the obvious. The world would be a better place without organised religion.

Logic not Faith

In the words of scottish comedian Frankie Boyle. Why not just build a runway on ground zero. How much would it fuck up terrorists to attempt to crash into a building and end up having to do a textbook landing


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 21, 2010)

I'm not denying that he is an intelligent person. He just should learn Middle Eastern history before condemning it all to violence and extremism, which was a phenomenon that arose only in the late 19th century with the wahhabi, sanusi, and mahdiyyah movements on the edge of Islamic society, which, until recently played second fiddle to many other movements.


----------



## LUCKY7 (Aug 21, 2010)

The Sphere is a large metallic sculpture that once stood in the middle of the area between the World Trade Center towers in Manhattan.

It was designed by trade center architect Minoru Yamasaki to mimic the Grand Mosque of Mecca, Masjid al-Haram, in which The Sphere stood at the place of the Kaaba.

The Sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Anthony (Aug 22, 2010)

BlindingLight7 said:


> People need to stop freaking out, it's been 9 years, I'm sorry, but I've moved on.



 Yeah, it's not like thousands of people died that day, it's not like people lost family members and loved ones. 

To those people, 9/11s effects will last a life time.



Anyways
Part of me is saying "yes, they're legally allowed to build this and they should because if we say no we'll make more enemies" and another part of me is saying "Are we really this fucking stupid? It's an obvious insult to the country, especially since it will be open on the 10th anniversary of 9/11. We need to stop being PC pussies and take initiative."


----------



## BlindingLight7 (Aug 22, 2010)

So it's ok to build a christian community center, but they can't build a Muslim community center? Why not?


----------



## liamh (Aug 22, 2010)

^Is that a serious question?


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 23, 2010)

synrgy said:


> I did a fair bit of searching and also checked the politics/CE forum before posting this.
> 
> I haven't seen any discussion here on this, which is probably a good thing considering how completely absurd it all is, but since most of the country still seems up-in-arms about it, I thought I should start a dialog here.
> 
> ...




Late to the party. 

Let them build it. There is absolutely no reason the law should prohibit them from building a mosque. The idea offends me from the whole "muslims plant mosques at sites of their great historic victories" perspective, but there should be absolutely no reason the law should prevent them from building it. 

That said, if someone wants to open up pork only barbeque restaurants all around the new thing and a shoe re-soler that prominently displays the bottom of the shoe toward the new building, then they should be allowed to build them too. All of that is in bad taste, but so is building a mosque on ground zero.


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 23, 2010)

The Somberlain said:


> Did you read or watch anything here? It's a community center about half a mile from ground zero



A landing gear from one of the planes damaged the roof on the building being demolished back on 9/11, which technically makes the site ground zero. 

as for rebranding a building that contains a mosque (oh excuse me "prayer room") an "Islamic center" versus mosque, save your politically correct bullshit. It won't soften the blow for those who are offended by the very idea of it and on another wavelength are one in the same. 

The imam who is heading the project, Feisal Abdul Rauf, has a book out "what is right with Islam is what is right with America", but the arabic title is completely different.






Translated, means A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post-9/11

I will reiterate, assuming the zoning is proper and there are none of the standard reasons you couldn't build, then by all means the government should not obstruct them from building it.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 23, 2010)

orb451 said:


> And before anyone jumps up my ass about this, let me reiterate that I DO believe in Freedom of Speech (especially the kind that chaps some of your asses) as well as Freedom of Religion and while I support the idea of the Cordoba House, Mosque, Non-Mosque, Whatever-the-fuck you want to call it, I just WISHED they'd chosen ANOTHER place for it. That's all. 2 Blocks away, 7 blocks away, 10 miles away, whatever... why don't we just say, for the time being, don't fucking build anything resembling a Mosque in the 5 burroughs. How about that? And at some future date, we'll revisit the issue and you can build all the mosques and minarets that your hearts desire?



Sorry dude, but while I can see where you're coming from, I'm going to have to call bull shit. 

ALL OVER THE COUNTRY, mosques are being protested and people are trying to paint the entire community of Muslims with an extremist brush. It has nothing to do with ground zero, or even NYC, and everything to do with ignorance and fear.

Tennessee mosque protests draw hundreds | ksdk.com | St. Louis, MO

Connecticut: Mosque Protest by Group, Declaring War on Mosques | Before It's News

Temecula: Tea Party Anti-Islam Mosque Protest Planned for July 30 :: Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) 



Hell, it's even going on across the pond:

BBC NEWS | UK | England | London | Ten arrested over mosque protest

Huge mosque stirs protests in Cologne - Telegraph

So, I don't wanna hear anyone talking about how "It would be different if they built it somewhere else", as if the sole reason for people's dismay is the proximity to Ground Zero rather than their own unreasonable insecurities. That's simply complete nonsense, and if we wanna talk about "manning up", then Western Culture needs to own up to its bigotry. I don't like _any_ bigots, but I'll respect one who admits what he is well before one who tries to pretend he's something he isn't.

Also, this isn't directed at you Orb, but at the World in general: Doesn't ANYONE read up on the history of Christianity? If I hear one more person say some reasonable facsimile of "But Christians aren't violent", I'm think I'm going to be sick.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 23, 2010)

synrgy said:


> So, I don't wanna hear anyone talking about how "It would be different if they built it somewhere else", as if the sole reason for people's dismay is the proximity to Ground Zero rather than their own unreasonable insecurities. That's simply complete nonsense, and if we wanna talk about "manning up", then Western Culture needs to own up to its bigotry. I don't like _any_ bigots, but I'll respect one who admits what he is well before one who tries to pretend he's something he isn't.
> 
> Also, this isn't directed at you Orb, but at the World in general: Doesn't ANYONE read up on the history of Christianity? If I hear one more person say some reasonable facsimile of "But Christians aren't violent", I'm think I'm going to be sick.



I see what you're saying Syn and I acknowledge the links you provided showing the protests of other Mosques. However, I think this particular Mosque, in such a large Metropolitan area, would go largely unnoticed if it weren't so close to Ground Zero. Note the two of the three locations you linked to, Murfreesboro Tennessee and Temecula California, are for lack of a better description not nearly as populated as downtown NYC nor do they vary significantly demographically as they do in downtown NYC. I believe my example still stands, if this was being built in another major city in America, where the population varied in it's demographic make up, I think it would not be a big deal. Also note that from the article in Connecticut, an extremist Christian group (OSA) is largely responsible for harassing Muslims at various Mosques all over the country FWIW and no, I don't condone that kind of behavior or think that it's justified or "OK".

Point being, if The Cordoba House were being built in another MAJOR US City, I don't think it would be sensational national news... Certainly not national news for weeks on end. 

Well I think we'll agree to disagree then on who's more to blame for manning up and owning up to their own insecurities. 

With respect to your point about Christianity (and I'm sure other major religions as well) having blood on their hands, never think that I'm saying they don't. I know you didn't single me out on that point and I appreciate it, because I don't feel that way at all. There's enough blood on hands to go around ten fold. But, what you and others that constantly bring up Christianity's "checkered" past, should remember is that "for the most part" those things lie in the past. The bulk of Christianity's atrocities last happened when? 400 years ago? 600? 1000? 

Setting aside for a moment the few contemporary Christian extremists that blow up abortion clinics and kill abortion doctors, Christianity is not nearly as actively involved in violent religious retribution or punishment as contemporary Islamic extremists. How many abortion clinics have been blown up in total? And how many abortion doctors killed? Is it safe to assume it's been less than 100? Or 500? Say, in the last 10 years as a time-frame. I mean maybe it's just me and the news I read, but I don't hear about it as often as say, a suicide bomber in the Middle East blowing him/herself up and taking 40, 50, 60+ people along with them. But again, maybe it is happening far more often.

But just setting aside them, because they do represent the extreme fringe of Christianity, there is no denying that contemporary Islamic extremists are more violent and more frequently, than their contemporary Christian counterparts. But you can't say that without starting a religious pissing contest.

Who's more evil and who started it and who started doing it first? Another poster pointed out that the radical Islamic extremism is a relatively new concept. Moreover, alluding to the idea that it was the Western world that created it. That's fine, but do you not see that as Christianity found a place in the world, it settled in, gave up the hardcore violence and basically calmed the fuck down? And believe me, I'm NOT A FAN of Christianity, or any major religion for that matter. Whereas with Islam, if they were once the technological "center" of the modern world, doing great things and living peacefully, that as other religions have ramped DOWN their level of violence, radical Islamic extremists have ramped UP theirs. And for what? All because of Western foreign policy? That's the core reason behind their violence? I think that's just a "bit" short-sighted.

In other words, I'm sure there was a time in Christian history that burning a bible or denying God's existence would be grounds to be burned at the stake. Or for that matter, committing Adultery (a sin) would be considered grounds for corporal punishment or worse. Thing is, those days are gone. They're done. They're an embarrassing footnote (like MANY others) in Christianity's history. Whereas with Islam, in the present day, corporal punishment for Adultery is still considered acceptable. The woman in Iran who was to be stoned to DEATH for Adultery in the last 2 months or so comes to mind. I believe she was later let go, but not before international outcry helped Iran take it's head out of it's ass.

And as far as England or the UK goes, it is my understanding from an American's perspective that the Muslim immigrants there (and France as another example), for the most part, have done little to integrate themselves into society. All but refusing to take the slightest bit of initiative when it comes to blending into their new homes and instead insisting over and over again that their new home BEND to their will.

While at face value that might not be grounds for getting panties collectively in a twist, it certainly doesn't help the Muslims' cause at large by being so divisive. The more artificial borders and boundaries they put up, in any country, solely for religious reasons, the more they as a community, will be painted with broad brush strokes. 

Not saying it's right, but that's just what's going to continue to happen and I for one, am not surprised by it in the least.

I think it was Carlos Mencia the comedian (whom I'm not a fan of) that said it best regarding Islam and Islamic extremists in general, and that was: It's your turn in America.

Essentially saying that everyone (Black, White, Brown, Christian, Mormon, Jew, etc) all had their turn getting shit on. Getting the piss taken out of them for stupid reasons, now it's Islam's turn to get their proverbial beat down. And when it's done, and it will be done, we can all go back to this melting pot of a country we have and live our lives.


----------



## pink freud (Aug 23, 2010)

Anthony said:


> it will be open on the 10th anniversary of 9/11.



I have yet to see this from a verifiable source.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 23, 2010)

orb451 said:


> awesome continuing discussion



Firstly, . You're one of my favorite people to have conversation with in these kinds of threads.

This is gonna be a bit discombobulated, but I digress..

I think you raise fair points. I still have trouble believing what you're getting at, yet at the same time I'm now re-thinking my own position. 

As you may remember, while I've lived in a ton of places over the last decade, I currently reside in and was born/raised in the Washington DC Metro area. I don't expect anyone here has forgotten that NYC was not the only place attacked on 9/11. One of the planes was flown directly into a wing of the Pentagon -- a building that I drive by every single day on my commute to work, and that my brother-in-law watched burn from his office window 9 years ago. I was reminded every day for years, as the construction to repair the Pentagon seemed never-ending.

I'm not bringing that up to pull anyone's heart strings, but to make a counter point, which is that there is a non-denominational prayer area (that functionally becomes a mosque when in use by Muslims, which is a daily ocurrance) *IN* the Pentagon. Not a few blocks away, not across the street; IN IT.

Nobody seems to have a problem with that, presumably because it's non-denominational? (We'll disregard, for a moment, that nobody seemed to have a problem with the ACTUAL mosque that's been right by Ground Zero for the last 30 years, either.)

And therein lies the really interesting point here, which I'm just now realizing kind of illustrates that the reality is somewhere between our two positions; It's not about proximity to 9/11, as illustrated by the tolerance shown at the Pentagon, which also illustrates that the intolerance isn't as rampant as I might believe.

Anyway, unless I recall incorrectly, there are prayer areas in this proposed community center in NYC that will be non-denominational, and everyone is missing that point completely because the media insists on referring to the building as the 'Ground Zero Mosque' ('Cause traditional mosques have swimming pools and basketball courts, right? *facepalm*) in order to boost those ratings, I guess? I just think it's shameful, is all. For every step humanity takes forward, I feel like we take 2 steps back. Cliche, I know, but no less true.

As for the whole Christianity thing; I wasn't trying to re-ignite that age-old debate by any means, and I don't disagree with any points you raised. I was just giving voice to my frustration with the voices I'm hearing on the airwaves -- my fellow citizens adamantly opposing this building, and trying to justify their bigotry by using their own religion as some sort of crutch or 'beacon of tolerance'. You can't grow up in America with a halfway-decent education without having a lifetime of examples of Christian intolerance to reference. Fundamentalists are fundamentalists, and I think you and I are quick to agree that they know very few religious boundaries.

That said, I can't say I often hear of Tibetan Buddhists fucking people up. 

*edit* I was just reading this during a smoke break. It's not exactly directly relevant, but there are some interesting points and correlations to be made:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/8/22/895047/-Who-are-these-people


----------



## LUCKY7 (Aug 23, 2010)

pink freud said:


> I have yet to see this from a verifiable source.


 
Mosque madness at Ground Zero - NYPOST.com


----------



## pink freud (Aug 23, 2010)

LUCKY7 said:


> Mosque madness at Ground Zero - NYPOST.com




That's not a verifiable source. That's somebody perpetuating what they have heard. Also, forgive me for not blindly agreeing with a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch. I want to see documents. Surely there must be a transcript of the owners of the project? A proposed completion date on the building permit? Some hard evidence to support this claim?

The tenth anniversary of 9/11 is less than a year and a month away. It seems very unlikely that a demolition, clearing, landscaping, building a 13 story glass and steel skyscraper, and furnishing will happen in that time.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 23, 2010)

synrgy said:


> Anyway, unless I recall incorrectly, there are prayer areas in this proposed community center in NYC that will be non-denominational, and everyone is missing that point completely because the media insists on referring to the building as the 'Ground Zero Mosque' ('Cause traditional mosques have swimming pools and basketball courts, right? *facepalm*) in order to boost those ratings, I guess? I just think it's shameful, is all. For every step humanity takes forward, I feel like we take 2 steps back. Cliche, I know, but no less true.



I think the developers are part of the issue here. Location being one, and developers with obvious sway towards, or in, Islam is two. If it were the YMCA building a community center with a gym, pool, etc AND a prayer room for any and all to use, the public at large would not have an issue with it. Because the developers are primarily Muslims though, that raises people's red flags immediately. And yes I know good and well that the Y is Young Men's *CHRISTIAN* Association. 

And you know what? They're probably wrong and that *is* probably being bigoted, like I said, Muslims at large are painted with broad brush strokes. The peace loving average joe's would be a lot better off vocally condemning anything and everything their extremist counterparts do. And if they really want to honor the victims of 9/11 in the case of this new activity center/mosque/whatever, just take all the money (or large part of it) that's going toward the building of this place (The Cordoba House) and instead, donate it to the victims of the families that died in 9/11. That would do WORLD'S more for their cause and show a profound respect for the atrocity and at the same time, show the world that they are very much willing to separate themselves from the extremists. 



synrgy said:


> That said, I can't say I often hear of Tibetan Buddhists fucking people up.



That's because they know Kung-Fu and kick the ever living shit out of people that piss them off so badly, their victims can't complain. 

And thanks man, I enjoy the back n' forth as well  

Oh and lastly, that wasn't a jet that crashed into the Pentagon, that was a cruise missile  But seriously, the Pentagon attack if often overlooked unfortunately and my joke was in no way meant to diminish or dishonor those that died that day in DC.


----------



## Razzy (Aug 23, 2010)

RenegadeDave said:


> A landing gear from one of the planes damaged the roof on the building being demolished back on 9/11, which technically makes the site ground zero.
> 
> as for rebranding a building that contains a mosque (oh excuse me "prayer room") an "Islamic center" versus mosque, save your politically correct bullshit. It won't soften the blow for those who are offended by the very idea of it and on another wavelength are one in the same.
> 
> ...


 
I was reading this thread today hoping SOMEONE would mention Rauf. Fuck that guy, seriously. I think him funding this thing is a WAY BIGGER ISSUE than where he's wanting to build it. Some of his viewpoints are fucking scary.

I think everyone in this thread needs to go ahead and read up on Shariah law. THAT'S what Rauf wants for our country.


----------



## LUCKY7 (Aug 23, 2010)

It is a symbolic date. The name is also symbolic. The original mosque of Cordoba  the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque  was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church. Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true  and ominous  legacy of Cordoba.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 23, 2010)

LUCKY7 said:


> It is a symbolic date. The name is also symbolic. The original mosque of Cordoba &#8212; the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque &#8212; was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church. Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true &#8212; and ominous &#8212; legacy of Cordoba.



They've actually changed the name to Park51, and I agree that any Murdoch fueled organization can't be considered 'credible'.

I heard mayor Bloomberg on NPR yesterday, giving a beautiful speech in full support of the building:

I haven't been able to find a transcript yet, but here's an article about it:

As Polls Go Against the Mosque, Bloomberg Preaches Religious Liberty - Page 1 - Columns - New York - Village Voice)


----------



## Randy (Aug 23, 2010)

TRAITOR!


----------



## liamh (Aug 23, 2010)

There's nothing I can add to this thread.
But I think if you're going to sack religious freedom off just because it offends people, there's no point in having it at all.
Remember that the terrorists destroyed the buildings to attack the west's freedom.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 23, 2010)

liamh said:


> There's nothing I can add to this thread.
> But I think if you're going to sack religious freedom off just because it offends people, there's no point in having it at all.
> Remember that the terrorists destroyed the buildings to attack the west's freedom.



Bingo. Doesn't anyone opposed consider that that the _real_ way to "let the terrorists win" (God, I really hate uttering that phrase..) is to let our sensitivities override our rights and freedoms?


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 23, 2010)

Its not being built at the site where the buildings fell, and is therefore a non-issue. People need to stop being so ignorant. The church has done much worse (killing non-followers and forcing their establishments into those lands) intentionally. This, however, is not an intentional stab at Americans, like its being made out to be. The media would like to make it seem as though there's some sort of war between Muslims and Americans... why? The same unspoken reason they want America's full support of war in the Middle East without much of a legitimate goal. 

This is bullshit.


----------



## C2Aye (Aug 23, 2010)

Constitutionally, if thousands of Americans can own a firearm and use them then they can build an Islamic community centre.

However, facts I have uncovered from Time magazine.

- The place has already been used for a year, this new centre is simply an expansion.
- Near the site of ground zero are strip clubs and liquor stores, not exactly what I'd want near a site of such a devastating attack.

Also, I'm led to believe it's being built 2 blocks away and apparently, a block is quite a distance. However, I don't live in the US so I couldn't confirm that one.


----------



## ElRay (Aug 23, 2010)

orb451 said:


> And before anyone jumps up my ass about this, let me reiterate that I DO believe in Freedom of Speech (especially the kind that chaps some of your asses) as well as Freedom of Religion


You don't. If you did, then you wouldn't make this comment:


orb451 said:


> why don't we just say, for the time being, don't fucking build anything resembling a Mosque in the 5 burroughs


.Dude. Some terrorists, that happen to be muslims blew-up the building. Muslims as a group are no more guilty than Christians as a group are for:
The KKK
The Inquisitions (Spanish and others)
The Crusades (I'm talking about the ones against pacifist vegetarians in France, other flavors of Christianity in Turkey, etc.)
Bombing of medical clinics
Assignations of doctors
Bombing in Ireland
Pedophile Priests
Salem Witch Trials
anti-Semitic teaching that lead to the death camps in WWII

The main point of the courts is to protect the minorities from the majority raving masses of idiots. 

Ray


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 23, 2010)

Possibly the greatest comedy in this whole affair is them using our own laws against us. Muslims, as a group, use populous furor to quell anything that might be a negative message with respect to the Muslim agenda (read: getting cartoons censored due to their global vaginitis with respect to depiction of their prophet) Now they are the ones who have spawned a populist furor against their moves and none of "sensitivity" that is demanded by their camp can be found anywhere.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 23, 2010)

ElRay said:


> Muslims as a group are no more guilty than Christians as a group are for:
> 
> The KKK
> The Inquisitions (Spanish and others)
> ...



Whooosh goes the sound of my tongue-in-cheek comment regarding no new mosques in the 5 burroughs right over your head.

If I were being serious, I would have said so with respect to that statement. I thought it was so patently ludicrous on its own that it should be *obvious* that I wasn't being sincere with it.

The main "point" of the courts is not protection, it's to interpret and uphold the laws. Nothing more and nothing less. And I never said Islam, Christianity or any other faith owns the patent on past misdeeds. Only that while other faiths have assimilated for the most part and "calmed down" Islam has not, and has gone the opposite direction ramping up their level of violence for the slightest insult.

There's a difference.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 23, 2010)

C2Aye said:


> Constitutionally, if thousands of Americans can own a firearm and use them then they can build an Islamic community centre.



The 2nd amendment is NOT THE SAME as the 1st amendment. If they were the same, they'd be the same or fall under the same title. Just because you can do one, does not necessarily mean that you can do the other. However, in this case, they ARE constitutionally within their rights to build their community center. Few are arguing that point. What they're arguing is whether or not they *should* build it, and moreover, that they *should* build it close to the WTC Ground Zero. As RenegadeDave pointed out, a piece of the fuselage and landing gear for one of the planes fell through the roof of the building they'd chosen.

That also helped devalue the property from 18 million to 4 million dollars.



C2Aye said:


> However, facts I have uncovered from Time magazine.
> 
> - The place has already been used for a year, this new centre is simply an expansion.
> - Near the site of ground zero are strip clubs and liquor stores, not exactly what I'd want near a site of such a devastating attack.
> ...



A city block as a unit of measure is somewhat relative. In this case, the center is 1/10th of a mile or 528 feet. Not as "far" as some would lead you to believe. But hey, calling out someone's hyperbolic description of distance only works when you're on the Left and you're pissing and moaning about the Right and their claims that it's "close". Guess 528 feet is a half a mile to some and pretty "far" to others.

As far as the strip clubs and liquor stores go, who cares? And with respect to the other mosque that's there or near Ground Zero at present, or for that matter the one at the Pentagon in DC, I would assume that they have all been developed, planned and built long before 9/11.


----------



## Randy (Aug 23, 2010)

orb451 said:


> The 2nd amendment is NOT THE SAME as the 1st amendment.



Oh boy.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 23, 2010)

ElRay said:


> You don't. If you did, then you wouldn't make this comment:.Dude. Some terrorists, that happen to be muslims blew-up the building. Muslims as a group are no more guilty than Christians as a group are for:
> The KKK
> The Inquisitions (Spanish and others)
> The Crusades (I'm talking about the ones against pacifist vegetarians in France, other flavors of Christianity in Turkey, etc.)
> ...



So...in totality, Islam has a better pacifism record than Christianity


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 23, 2010)

^Yep

but to be fair, christianity has been more popular for a bit longer.


----------



## C2Aye (Aug 23, 2010)

orb451 said:


> The 2nd amendment is NOT THE SAME as the 1st amendment.



Yeah, if I got that wrong, then that would be because I live in a country without a written constitution and still has a monarch. I just assumed it was all constitutionally sound.

I'm more inclined to side with the slightly more left view since the right in America doing it's best to prevent Obama's nationalised healthcare plans, (calling it socialist, wtf?), ruin any climate change action (since I guess they own most the factories) and not banning clusters bombs (again, own the factories that make the damn things).


----------



## orb451 (Aug 23, 2010)

Randy said:


> Oh boy.



Am I wrong?


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 23, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> ^Yep
> 
> but to be fair, christianity has been more popular for a bit longer.



I suppose a good 300 years, but don't get me wrong, Christianity gave birth to many great things.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 25, 2010)

Also note that it never states a religious affilliation with this "Prayer space"

so it seems like people are getting upset because People of Muslim faith want to build a community center open to anyone for any thing.

I swear to GOD I would go to court for these people.

they DESERVE to do this. the people of new york, regardless of what religion they are, DESERVE to have something NICE and ENJOYABLE near ground zero, an area that to this day still reminds people of being uncertain and afraid.

Bigotry is Killing this country, i swear.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 25, 2010)

TreKita said:


> Bigotry is Killing this country.


 
QFT


----------



## groph (Aug 25, 2010)

Oh man what a clusterfuck. 

DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT REALLY TRYING TO IMPLY ANYTHING, I ADMIT THAT I KNOW NEXT TO NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING

I am not an American, I know dick about the Constitution and the Quran. I do not have an academic background in religious studies and therefore really also know dick about Christianity and Islam and their respective histories. I am not against religion in general though I am not faithful. I do not support racists, I do not support people who don't care to do their homework before they spout uneducated bullshit everywhere like it's the truth. I am merely against violent people and people who wish to impose a law that makes it legal for them to behead me because I don't believe in their God. Obviously I'm talking about Muslim extremists. I've just heard that if Sharia law were to be passed then some shit like that might end up happening. Sounds ridiculous and it probably is, so I hope I'm totally wrong but I don't see how I could be wrong in being against a person who can kill me without consequence.

Also, I disagree with a group entering a country and trying to put it's native law above the existing law. My stance on that is pretty simple: you're 100% welcome in our country, but we have rules, so you go by them. If you don't like it, look for somewhere else or go home. Yeah I know it's a real "NUKE THE BASTARDS!" kind of opinion but that's it.

So now that that's out of the way, I'll try to figure out what I think of this.

On the Muslim's side. Yes, if a country has freedom of religion then there is no problem with building a mosque. If there have already been mosques around then what's the issue? If this new terrorist training camp really is just a community centre with a prayer room then what's the problem?

On the American's side (the crazy conservative side, so the 'Merican side) 

Is Islam really a religion of peace? YES I KNOW that tons of people have been killed in the name of Christianity, but if Islam is killing people NOW, then there's a problem. I said already, I haven't read the Quran and I don't really know much of anything about the religion except (PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong in a civil manner, I'm not trying to start fires) that it really seems that women have next to no rights or status compared to Western women, they're veiled in public and always have to be with a man who considers her to be his property (which doesn't jive at all with Western culture and is something that I think a Muslim would have to change if he and his family were to move here, his wife would suddenly be considered an equal). Also, there have been some beheadings and no shortage of terrorist acts in the name of Islam. Yes, these are probably done by extremists and if they are misinterpreting their religious rules then there is no reason to assume that all Muslims think and act that way. And again with the Christians killing people, I know. Religions are guilty of lots of deaths.

The worry is that Islamic extremists are trying to take over the world, and nobody is going to be able to do anything about it thanks to freedom of speech being gradually eliminated through political correctness and ridiculous policies in the name of diversity. If everybody is too afraid to speak up, then scary stuff can happen. I think this is a completely legitimate concern, if it is indeed what is happening today. Either way, I totally disagree with the PC movement and I will take my liberty to say whatever the hell I want wherever the hell I want whenever the hell I want to whoever the hell I want. It's a beautiful thing. 

Eventually these extremists will creep into countries, build centres of worship which will teach hatred toward the West and brainwash the young boys who will turn into young men with guns, who will behead you and your infidel family in the name of Allah. Of course nobody wants that to happen and I don't blame them.

I agree that people seem to be a bit too paranoid but I don't think they're completely irrational because Muslim minorities have succeeded in getting some pretty controversial laws passed that really shake the status quo. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but it proves that they have political sway, and when the Islamic terrorists/extremists are identified with the general Muslim population (logically so, they're both Muslim), they have a significant amount of justifiable fear backing them as well.


Really, whenever I think of these kinds of issues I'm always torn between not wanting to get killed and not wanting religious freedom to be ignored. I like being able to say and believe what I want, and I'd be more than willing to blast a couple of deer slugs into some crazed maniac looking to cut my head off. That's my ultimate stance. Be free to practice your religion, as long as you don't kill me or start telling me what to do. No problems.


----------



## C2Aye (Aug 25, 2010)

I'm just happy I'm a Buddhist. I get no trouble from people, only the occasional genuine interest


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 26, 2010)

C2Aye said:


> I'm just happy I'm a Buddhist. I get no trouble from people, only the occasional genuine interest


or ignorant questioning 

(i do practice buddhism, but not as a religion, more of a lifestyle thing)

@groph:

the Taliban identify with Muslims about as much as the Westboro baptist church identify with christians.

they're not only extremists, they're extremists in the ABSOLUTELY ridiculous sense.

Most people who are muslim are muslim by choice these days.

and i like to give credit to people that they aren;t THAT stupid to follow a book that would state it was peaceful and then spur people into a war where if they kill themselves and take people with them, that they go to heaven and get to bang virgins ( who wants virgins anyway? I just want some incredibly sexy disease free chicks who know what they're doing and just want to please me... for once). while the book does mention Jihad and state that all of those who die in the name of god will recieve reward, i doubt they meant " blow yourself up, recieve virgins".

anyway, there was something i had watched about a british muslim who had been a nonpracticing muslim his whole life. never even cared about the texts, until some " charismatic leaders" (like in my other posts) came to him and said "don't you hate how they treat you? it's because you're muslim. stand with your muslim holy brothers and start war"
and in that time he became a muslim extremist in the Taliban.

as time went on he becan looking at his life, all fo his friends, his colleagues, were normal british people. no one treated him differently because he was muslim, it was all smooth talk.

thats what happens with religious extremism.

it's just a community center, it's not a mosque, and the prayerspace is nondescript of religious affiliation, so a christian and a Jew can just as easily walk in to the prayer space and pray, or a buddhist meditate, or an atheist walk in and be disrespectful (if he/she wants to)

yourstance is respectable, but in this situation, highly unnecessary.


----------



## Varcolac (Aug 26, 2010)

C2Aye said:


> I'm just happy I'm a Buddhist. I get no trouble from people, only the occasional genuine interest



I'm happy being an atheist, so I can stand on my high tower of arrogance and mock all religious people with equal contempt. Except Mormons. They get double contempt. 

That said, let them have their community centre. There's a Catholic church half a block from the Oklahoma City bombside, and Timothy McVeigh was a practising Catholic. There's Catholic places of worship and Irish community centres all over London, and the (P)IRA blew a _lot_ of stuff up in the '80s. Freedom of religion is freedom of religion. You can speak out against it because you've got freedom of speech (and I can and will call you all idiots for believing in your imaginary bearded man in the sky), but that's it. You can voice your opposition, but permission has been given for the construction and it's got no closer ties to terrorism than any other religious space on the continent.

Fun fact: the Catholic church has close ties to terrorism, covering up a priest's involvement in a bombing which killed nine people. There's a Catholic church ZERO blocks away from the WTC. Seriously, it's across the street. Riddle me that, tea party mooks.


----------



## Mr Violence (Aug 26, 2010)

Regardless of how offensive it may be and how emotionally agitating it may be, we protect the right to build it.

If they are indeed using this to spit in the face of Americans, America is all about letting that happen. I see no issue.

Also, I find it funny that people are focused so much on the location. Here's a scenario for you: Suppose it is a Mega Terrorist Super Center, weapons cache and staging area. Suppose this center is the worst of our fears, and like the mouth of hell it channels thousands of extremists in to take over NYC. If they change the location, it's STILL going to be that Mega Terrorist Super Center. Then what? Do we get mad because we didn't see it coming because they moved it for us? At worst, if there is ill intention behind it, it's probably to pick the 9/11 scab, which by our law they have the right to do. If it was supposed to be some terrorist bullshit, they'd probably stay as quiet as they could be. They'd move, they'd do anything to not draw attention to themselves.

Well, assuming they're smart anyways.

People are so ass-backwards. Disconnect the emotion. I understand that's why people get upset, but it's also because the news corporations started by saying, "Hey Muslims are building a mosque out of the rubble from 9/11 and using the bodies as mortar! Go forth and be pissed off!"


----------



## Randy (Aug 26, 2010)

Well said.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 26, 2010)

Varcolac said:


> I'm happy being an atheist, so I can stand on my high tower of arrogance and mock all religious people with equal contempt. Except Mormons. They get double contempt.
> 
> That said, let them have their community centre. There's a Catholic church half a block from the Oklahoma City bombside, and Timothy McVeigh was a practising Catholic. There's Catholic places of worship and Irish community centres all over London, and the (P)IRA blew a _lot_ of stuff up in the '80s. Freedom of religion is freedom of religion. You can speak out against it because you've got freedom of speech (and I can and will call you all idiots for believing in your imaginary bearded man in the sky), but that's it. You can voice your opposition, but permission has been given for the construction and it's got no closer ties to terrorism than any other religious space on the continent.
> 
> Fun fact: the Catholic church has close ties to terrorism, covering up a priest's involvement in a bombing which killed nine people. There's a Catholic church ZERO blocks away from the WTC. Seriously, it's across the street. Riddle me that, tea party mooks.


 just one thing i wanted to state: 

i believe in god and don't believe in bearded men in the sky.

sooooo it's not quite as black and white s you're making it 

but i agree with your main point

@MR Violence: so well said. +rep for you.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 26, 2010)

C2Aye said:


> Constitutionally, if thousands of Americans can own a firearm and use them then they can build an Islamic community centre.
> 
> However, facts I have uncovered from Time magazine.
> 
> ...


actually about 7.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 26, 2010)

TreKita said:


> actually about 7.



Sources???

Here's a hypothetical situation that you can hopefully understand that might help explain where the ire is coming from:

Imagine the KKK blowing up a church as they did in the 60's. Some innocent people are killed as a result. Now imagine a conservative religious organization stepping into the fray. Some members of the KKK were members of this organization, but not ALL members of this religious organization are members of the KKK. So this organization steps in, and to "honor" those that died in the bombing, they decide to build a memorial a short distance away. The distance is arbitrary for the sake of argument. To the families of the victims of the bombing, however altruistic the builders intentions might be, constructing a monument is perceived as insulting and insensitive. It doesn't matter for one second whether you, or I, or whomever thinks their reasoning to be unjustified, because that's not the point.

That's the core of the problem here. The question is NOT whether they can build. How many fucking times does it need to be said? They can build it. They're within their rights. We know that already. The question is, whether or not they *should* build it. There's a world of difference between the two. In the hypothetical example above, the religious organization seeking to build their memorial are most certainly within their *rights* to do it. But it is perceived by many to be in poor taste. So it stands to reason the builders should take the victims feelings into consideration.

This is especially true of Islam because they, quite often, and quite vocally, are most sensitive to perceived insults. How do you people not see the hypocrisy? If Christians/Catholics/Jews all have to "toughen" up when it comes to slinging insults, stereotypes, perceived insults, why not Islam too? What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Oh I forgot, it's because Islam get's a pass at the moment. It's the greatest religion since sliced bread. 

I don't think the arguments against this thing are that hard to understand, I really don't. And yet they're eluding so many of you. If we're expected to understand that not all Muslims are awful people (which I've never said they were) and understand that they're not all terrorists (which I've never said they were) and understand that cartoons of Mohammed, shoe-pointing, etc are insulting and or degrading to them and we need to be "sensitive" to them and their feelings, then I think it's fair that the same be applied going in the other direction.

That *they* understand that their motives for building this center, however benign they might be, can and will be, perceived by a growing number of people, as being an insult. What's so hard to grasp about that? 

It's not a matter of could, it's a matter of should.


----------



## Mr Violence (Aug 26, 2010)

I'm not saying you're wrong, Rich. I understand the points you're making. The thing is, I said disconnect emotion. We don't have to be sensitive to anyone and I'm not sympathizing with anyone in the matter.

Actually, personally, I'm very insensitive when it comes to religious beliefs. I will make fun of people to no end for it, especially when it comes to tradition and being offended. The reason emotion can't be factored into this equation is because it lies in the eye of the beholder. Some people are okay with it, some are furious because of their opinions and emotions. It's not universal, but the laws for us are.

Logically and without emotion, there is no issue. No one has a right to push decisions based on their own moral standards, because they are one's own. I'm not saying anyone needs to go easy on a certain group. Every single person needs to toughen the fuck up and stop taking offense to everything. If you can't listen to someone sling mud on your beliefs, then how strong are your fucking beliefs in the first place? If they're so true to you, why can someone else invoke such emotion when, in your mind, they are just ignorant. Sure, it's frustrating, but forcing your opinions is not an option. That wasn't directed at anyone in particular.

They can build a building that's called "9/11 was the best thing that ever happened," with a statue of Mohammed kicking over the towers. They are allowed to do that. Everyone is allowed to hate them for it. No one has censored the vitriol from the Westboro Baptists yet, and people hate them and complain. Hell, I hate them and wish that something could be done sometimes. The fact of the matter is they're allowed to say and do whatever they want within the law.

Please don't take offense to the prior statement, it was gross exaggeration for the sake of making a point. After typing it, I can understand where a line could be drawn. I understand you're saying if we're not allowed to do things like draw Mohammed without death threats and backlash, they shouldn't be allowed to hurt our feelings one way or another, too. I agree here, but I lean towards the position for offending the shit out of people without prejudice rather than the position of sympathizing with everyone.


I back your points, Rich. I understand what you're saying. I just think they don't deserve sympathy if they refuse to offer others the same. I don't think we should sympathize with either group. Separation of church and state was intended for stupid bullshit like this. Religious practice and beliefs should be ones own and those people need to realize that others do not need to adhere to their beliefs.


It's hard to come to a conclusion. I, personally, say fuck the people that feel offended. It's just the way I am. They shouldn't let it affect them. Maybe the moral majority sees it as an affront, but that's too bad. They can be as mad as they want, but the decision to build it is not theirs. Just like Islam can be mad when someone draws Mohammed. End of story.

When it bleeds over into violence, that's when someone's shit is going to get ruined. People can raise arguments about people doing things in the name of many religions that are not acceptable. We can't predict who's going to act like that, but when they do, we will kindly fuck them up.



Also, for reference, I made a picture of where the place is going to be built in relation to ground zero. It's 2 very short blocks away.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 26, 2010)

Am I the only one still pissed the fuck off about that hole still being there after nearly nine years?


----------



## orb451 (Aug 26, 2010)

Mr Violence, I appreciate you having a civil discussion about this! 

I agree also, that we *should* be taking emotions out of it, but disagree that we *could*.

I see what you're saying in your example, and agree that on the face of it, they would be within their rights to put up such a memorial. However, being that we as humans are not like Spock (all logic-driven), emotions can and will be a factor. Always. 

Again, it kind of sucks that that's the way the world works, or people work, but that's the way it goes I guess. I can imagine some good coming to the world if we were to remove our emotions, but then again, our emotions are what make us so unique. I don't think I want to permanently live in a place like the movie Equilibrium depicts whereby emotions are chemically repressed in order to achieve peace.

I also agree with your point about people in general toughening up, I'm so sick and fucking tired of pussyfooting around this topic or that topic. It's tiring. I guess we're in agreement about the "fuck people that are offended" point, just that we differ in who we're telling to fuck off 

And Max, no, you're not alone in thinking that gaping hole has been there too long. I don't know what the plans for the site are, but if it were up to me, they should build another WTC, not some fucking light show in the sky or flowers n' rainbow bullshit.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 26, 2010)

So what is the final verdict on the distance? Is it 2 blocks or 7????
I'd only seen 2 blocks reported...


----------



## Mr Violence (Aug 26, 2010)

orb451 said:


> So what is the final verdict on the distance? Is it 2 blocks or 7????
> I'd only seen 2 blocks reported...



2 blocks. I even drew a map. You ignored me. 

I just wish very much that people could put logic first. I'm not saying dispose of emotion. Emotion makes us human and it's the only real reason to live. Just logic based decisions will get us much further than emotion based decisions in terms of the betterment of humankind.

I think I just pointed out your argument but from the other side. Pick one or the other. Sympathize with people's emotion and be accepting, or tell everyone fuck off and let people do what they want regardless of offensive nature. Either or. What it seems people are trying to do is walk the line. People are trying too hard to draw the line between what needs to be sympathized with or disregarded. There will never be agreement here. Ever. Hence my standpoint of total logic.

It's not feasible to conclude this in any sense and this issue will just fizzle out before there's a conclusion. If it's built, some people are going to take offense. If they decide to not build it to avoid offending people, some other people will take offense.

I just think the laws were always supposed to outweigh emotion. Founding fathers reiterated that many times. Mostly in the sense of religion needs to be out of government decisions.

I quit this argument, but I appreciate the good, civil discussion, as well. I should probably concentrate on getting something done at work today.

And I'm probably going to watch Equilibrium when I get home. Thanks for the reminder. 

EDIT:


orb451 said:


> And Max, no, you're not alone in thinking that gaping hole has been there too long. I don't know what the plans for the site are, but if it were up to me, they should build another WTC, not some fucking light show in the sky or flowers n' rainbow bullshit.



Definitely in agreement on this. Build it again. That would be the biggest fuck you to terrorists we could conjure. Paint it the pattern of the flag. None of this hippie bullshit.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 26, 2010)

Mr Violence said:


> 2 blocks. I even drew a map. You ignored me.
> 
> I just wish very much that people could put logic first. I'm not saying dispose of emotion. Emotion makes us human and it's the only real reason to live. Just logic based decisions will get us much further than emotion based decisions in terms of the betterment of humankind.
> 
> ...



Wasn't ignoring you man, I saw the map and that's the same or similar to the one I found in my research. Just that others in this thread have made it out to be 7 blocks, half a mile, "in a galaxy far, far away", etc... and I wanted any of *them* to step in and verify where they're getting their info.

I guess I see your point about making logical decisions. But then it goes back to what is *most* logical? In other words, who's to say what is logical to one person or group, will not be to another. In essence, what I'm saying is that even if you go by logic alone, you're bound to bump heads with someone who disagrees.

I think walking the line between good/bad or emotional/logical is important. In that few decisions in life will ever boil down to something so black and white. So cut and dried. It happens, but it's rare. I guess I side with those that see Islam as hypocrites with respect to feelings and perceived insults. If they want to build this center, knowing full well the emotional outrage it will cause some (however illogical it is to them) then we should be under no obligation to treat them as exceptional or special when it they're offended by something or other that we do. If that's cartoon Mohammeds buttfucking pigs, swilling beer and wearing Yankees hats, then oh well. And if they want T-Shirts with Osama taking a class IV shit on the American flag, whilst pissing on the bible and finger banging George Washington's asshole, then the people offended by that can also fuck off. 

I just want some semblance of standards across the board. That's all. Since we're not likely to get to that higher level of awareness and enlightenment as humans, anytime soon, and emotions will remain part of the equation in decision making, I say fuck one and all. I have a T-Shirt that I wear that says "I don't discriminate: I hate everyone equally". God damned right.


----------



## Mr Violence (Aug 26, 2010)

orb451 said:


> Wasn't ignoring you man, I saw the map and that's the same or similar to the one I found in my research. Just that others in this thread have made it out to be 7 blocks, half a mile, "in a galaxy far, far away", etc... and I wanted any of *them* to step in and verify where they're getting their info.
> 
> I guess I see your point about making logical decisions. But then it goes back to what is *most* logical? In other words, who's to say what is logical to one person or group, will not be to another. In essence, what I'm saying is that even if you go by logic alone, you're bound to bump heads with someone who disagrees.
> 
> ...



I know you didn't ignore me, I was fucking around. 

You know, I actually really agree with you on the black and white thing. On the same note, to side with calling Islam hypocrites would be a black or white situation. So many other factors are involved to hop on either side for me. The fact that there are Muslims who won't get offended by insults. There are patriots who may not be at all offended by this place going up, too. I am the most grey area person there could be. Hell, my opinion has changed within this thread alone, just because of our discussion. I don't think I've ever even subscribed to whether morally or not they should do it. I just said that people need to suck it up no matter the conclusion.

Walking the line can be important, but personally, I'm not troubling myself with it. Life's too short to get pissed off about someone else's opinion. I'm not saying I'm perfect. I've done it. I mentioned the Westboro Baptists. On more than one occasion I felt as though if I were at one of their pickets, I would've wanted to pummel them. Thinking further and logically, I shouldn't and refuse to be offended anymore, but I understand how emotions can run away with you. It's hard to get over them, but people need to.

I agree with the "If I shit on you, you are allowed to shit on me," sentiment. Like I said earlier, when violence enters the picture is when I become concerned. It's like that video of the dude that made a video of Mohammed to prove a point and the Muslims in the crowd took mob mentality and rushed the guy. That is what is truly unacceptable and needs intervention. Otherwise, do whatever you want.

I'm tired. It's been fun. I'll check this later on! Much respect, man.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 26, 2010)

cvinos said:


> Why, oh why, does violence enter the picture in almost every Hollywood movie?
> 
> And why are the United fucking States of America a country with very high gun crime rates?
> 
> ...



Even though it sounds like you're trolling, I'll take a stab at it because I'm bored.

1. Violence sells, in Hollywood and on TV.

2. Gun crime rates are probably high because the criminals in the US have easy access to them and the public at large do not. No gun = easy target.

3. We fight for our right to keep and bear arms because we are exercising our constitutionally guaranteed right. That we have to jump through hoops to do so is a problem. China or Japan might have more strict gun control laws than we do in the US, and how many knife attacks have killed innocent kids in the last year alone? Aren't knives just tools that can be used for both good and bad? Should we ban knives too? How about baseball bats? Or cars? Nothing like 2 tons of steel coming at you at any speed to ruin your day...

4. American soldiers are violent and merciless? Not like those awful hun bastards that dropped bubonic plague on civilians, cut off appendages, performed vivisections and countless other human experiments right? I'm looking at YOU Unit 731 and others I won't mention because god forbid we start stereotyping the rest of "certain" people and their past actions... I'm not Godwinning myself with that one.


----------



## Whiskey_Funeral (Aug 27, 2010)

It's really nice to be able to read civil discussions on this subject. It's always nice to see the other side of an argument and get some form of enlightenment or semi-understanding, even if you still end up disagreeing with it. One of the many reasons why I love this forum. 

This is somewhat connected, but have you guys seen this video? A black guy in a skullcap walks by the protests and the crowd freaks out on him because they automatically assume he's a Muslim. Here's a summary from the guy who filmed it:
"A man walks through the crowd at the Ground Zero protest and is mistaken as a Muslim. The crowd turns on him and confronts him. The man in the blue hard hat calls him a coward and tries to fight him. The tall man who I think was one of the organizers tried to get between the two men. Later I caught up with the man who's name is Kenny. He is a Union carpenter who works at Ground Zero. We discussed what a scary moment that was for him. I told him that I hoped it did not ruin his day."


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 27, 2010)

personally, i feel like people getting upset are the stupid ones here.

seriously, who gives a fuck?

people of a religious affiliation want to turn a run down burlington into something better for everybody.

if you're dumb enough to think its a mosque or terrorist training ground you can go fuck yourself.

matter of fact, if you have an issue with it in general, you're pretty silly.

i have jewish community centers here ( which are the same thing) christians are allowed in the prayer areas, muslims are as well, everyone is welcome, because it's a COMMUNITY center not a " community of only muslim terrorist talibanites" center.

this will be no different.

should they build it?

why the fuck not?

tell americans to quit being such pussies about it. so it's near where some planes flew into buildings and killed al ot of people.

are the people establishing the center the same people who hijacked the plane?

...no?

...well, do they at least represent the same mindset?

...no?


...THEN SHUT UP.

(this wasn;t aimed at anyone here, it's just a rant. no one take it the wrong way, ok?)


----------



## orb451 (Aug 27, 2010)

^^^Right, so much easier said than done. If you lost family members in the 9/11 attacks or someone close to you, you *might* be singing a different tune. On the other hand, you *might* not. Don't slag the people that are against this just because you can't or don't understand where they're coming from.

Next time someone threatens to burn a Qu'ran or draw cartoon Mohammed or tell some chick to take off her ninja uniform or hajib at her place of work, and some Muslims get their panties in a twist, you be sure to tell them to stop being such pussies too m'kay?

Next time the WBC decides to protest gays doing whatever gays do, or abortion clinics, or some other random shit, you be sure to tell the people offended to fuck off as well.

So long as you're applying your "fuck off" mentality with equal measure across the board, I've no problems with it.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 27, 2010)

orb451 said:


> ^^^Right, so much easier said than done. If you lost family members in the 9/11 attacks or someone close to you, you *might* be singing a different tune. On the other hand, you *might* not. Don't slag the people that are against this just because you can't or don't understand where they're coming from.
> 
> Next time someone threatens to burn a Qu'ran or draw cartoon Mohammed or tell some chick to take off her ninja uniform or hajib at her place of work, and some Muslims get their panties in a twist, you be sure to tell them to stop being such pussies too m'kay?
> 
> ...


you haven't read my other posts around here have you?

i participated in "Draw mohammed day" because the islamic community aren't respecting our first amendment rights.

the WBC? people don't get offended by those nut jobs, everyone i know just shakes their head and ignores it.

i would know, they proested near my neighborhood not too long ago.

they can say it all they want. i don't care.i stand by the statement of old:

"I don't agree with what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it"

the people are allowed to be upset, of that there is no doubt.

does it need to be said? no

are their assumptions correct? hell no.

should they just drop it because they're attacking native new yorkers who probably ALSO lost loved ones in 9/11? yes, absolutely.

but can they be upset? sure, it's not going to stop anything, and it doen;t mean they're correct in the slightest, but sure.

see my point?

also orbs, be warned, people who speak with venom oft poison themselves.


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 27, 2010)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Am I the only one still pissed the fuck off about that hole still being there after nearly nine years?



Quoted for mother fucking truth. They have been moving dirt forever and the new towers should fucking be halfway done by now.


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 27, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> Quoted for mother fucking truth. They have been moving dirt forever and the new towers should fucking be halfway done by now.


i bet they found bodies. 

(not serious, before you even say anything.)


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 27, 2010)

OH course they found bodies... 8 years ago maybe. By now they should be building shit.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 27, 2010)

TreKita said:


> you haven't read my other posts around here have you?



Can't say that I have.



TreKita said:


> i participated in "Draw mohammed day" because the islamic community aren't respecting our first amendment rights.



Excellent.



TreKita said:


> the WBC? people don't get offended by those nut jobs, everyone i know just shakes their head and ignores it.



I was actually referring to the people on here and their comments. It's not a stretch to see them (The WBC and others like them) being held up as poster children for moronic behavior on this forum on a regular basis and thus subject to ridicule. And it's also not a stretch to see run-of-the-mill Christians/Catholics absolutely slammed on here on a regular basis whenever any kind of religious discussion comes up. While the people you know personally may shrug off the WBC and their actions (and that's great), people on here frequently do not just shrug them off and ignore them. Moreover, people on here are quick to judge anyone with Christian/Catholic leanings and lump them in with evangelicals, fundamentalists, New Earth Creationists, et al. And I say this as an outsider, not affiliated or subscribing to ANY major religion.

And the point I'm making is, on here, if it were a Christian/Catholic community center being put up, and for whatever reason, if it made a national stink, as this Islamic center has, people on *here* would be verbally bashing them left, right and center and god forbid (no pun intended) someone on *here* comes on, who happens to believe in God or sonny Jesus and tries to defend it, they'd be sent packing in short order. 

See my point? If on here, it's OK to lump in any religious believers with the silly extremist points of view and paint a group with large brush strokes, than it should be OK regardless of which religion we're collectively taking a dump on. That's all.



TreKita said:


> they can say it all they want. i don't care.i stand by the statement of old:
> 
> "I don't agree with what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it"



Agreed 



TreKita said:


> the people are allowed to be upset, of that there is no doubt.



That's a fact.



TreKita said:


> does it need to be said? no
> 
> are their assumptions correct? hell no.
> 
> ...



Those are opinions. Neither right, nor wrong, just like the people whose opinions are different from yours. There's a difference between a fact and an opinion. Going by what you said earlier, if you support their right to say things, even if you disagree with them, why tell them to shut up? As you said, it's not going to stop anything, they're not going to stop voicing their discontent and in all likelihood, provided the developers get their funding, the center will probably be built and the whole matter will just fade away. 



TreKita said:


> see my point?



Yeah I think I get what you're saying.



TreKita said:


> also orbs, be warned, people who speak with venom oft poison themselves.



Ummmm ok, thanks for the tip! Here's a few from me: Don't swim in shark infested waters. Always look both ways before crossing the street. Never look a gift horse in the mouth. Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Always use the buddy system, especially when riding a bike, hiking or taking a shower.


----------



## synrgy (Aug 27, 2010)

orb451 said:


> Going by what you said earlier, if you support their right to say things, even if you disagree with them, why tell them to shut up? As you said, it's not going to stop anything, they're not going to stop voicing their discontent and in all likelihood, provided the developers get their funding, the center will probably be built and the whole matter will just fade away.



I know I'm not touching on anything you don't already know, but I think the idea is that (if we're generalizing) the people who are doing the most complaining are the same types who cry foul about their Constitutional rights on a regular basis every time the government does just about anything, therefore it's awfully hypocritical to complain about the non-mosque regardless of the emotional attachment.

Obviously, I get that this is yet another broad brush stroke, but I think that was the underlying idea. That said, I totally see where you're both coming from (more or less the same place), and I agree.




orb451 said:


> or taking a shower.


----------



## orb451 (Aug 27, 2010)

synrgy said:


>



It's the buddy system man, thems' the rules!


----------



## Konfyouzd (Aug 27, 2010)

The only buddy I bring w/ me to the shower is the one that's attached to me... 

(Sorry for being off topic)


----------



## willy petro (Aug 27, 2010)

Im a huge conservative. And you can look at either way. I dont think its a big deal considering that we have certain freedoms guarenteed by are natural born rights. I mean yeah its 80 feet from ground zero according to some people. People are to critical. Yeah its been what almost 9 years since the two towers went down. ITs a community center. People need to just take a chill and let it be!


----------



## TreWatson (Aug 27, 2010)

orb451 said:


> Can't say that I have.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




......  my buddy doesn't have to be a DUDE does it?


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 27, 2010)

orb451 said:


> ^^^Right, so much easier said than done. If you lost family members in the 9/11 attacks or someone close to you, you *might* be singing a different tune. On the other hand, you *might* not. Don't slag the people that are against this just because you can't or don't understand where they're coming from.
> 
> Next time someone threatens to burn a Qu'ran or draw cartoon Mohammed or tell some chick to take off her ninja uniform or hajib at her place of work, and some Muslims get their panties in a twist, you be sure to tell them to stop being such pussies too m'kay?
> 
> ...



I did lose loved ones, and i still say these New Yorkers are out of their fucking minds.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 27, 2010)

We seem to be ignoring the fact that _Islam did not attack America on September 11th, 2001._

With that in mind, its not much different to be upset over a dark skinned person being near the Twin Towers' site.. or for that matter, an airline pilot, because they had as much to do with the 911 attack as Islam did.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 27, 2010)

Adam Of Angels said:


> We seem to be ignoring the fact that _Islam did not attack America on September 11th, 2001._
> 
> With that in mind, its not much different to be upset over a dark skinned person being near the Twin Towers' site.. or for that matter, an airline pilot, because they had as much to do with the 911 attack as Islam did.



What did airline employed pilots have to do with the attacks of 9/11/01?


----------



## liamh (Aug 27, 2010)

Not really on topic, but I'm in New York right now.
I should be going to ground zero this week, I'll have a look around


----------



## chimp_spanner (Aug 28, 2010)

Sorry I couldn't find it in isolation. Although I don't mind TYT at all. But ignore the commentary if it's not your thing  Irresponsible, IMO. And hilarious that Republicans claim to care about Americans...then proceed to treat them like they're the most gullible, easily frightened people on the planet. Whichever side of the argument you fall on, there's no denying that the fear mongering surrounding it is utterly sickening and, if anything, likely to put Americans in greater danger in the long run.


----------



## Rashputin (Aug 28, 2010)

NO they shouldn't build a mosque at the very site where people of that religion killed thousands of people. Have we really forgotten so fast? I remember like it was yesterday. I actually wrote a whole rant about islam here, but decided to erase it. You can listen to Pat Condell and pretty much get my views on religion in general.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Aug 28, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> NO they shouldn't build a mosque at the very site where people of that "religion" killed thousands of people. Have we really forgotten so fast !? I remember like it was yesterday. I actually wrote a whole rant about islam here, but decided to erase it. You can listen to Pat Condell or Geert Wilders and pretty much get my views on this.


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 28, 2010)

chimp_spanner said:


> Sorry I couldn't find it in isolation. Although I don't mind TYT at all. But ignore the commentary if it's not your thing  Irresponsible, IMO. And hilarious that Republicans claim to care about Americans...then proceed to treat them like they're the most gullible, easily frightened people on the planet. Whichever side of the argument you fall on, there's no denying that the fear mongering surrounding it is utterly sickening and, if anything, likely to put Americans in greater danger in the long run.




As long as America is not an Islamic state, it will be targeted by radical islamic groups. Regardless of what happens either way on the GZM, we will still be targeted by the fringe. To suggest we will somehow be safer based on any result from this development debacle is nearly painfully naive. Rationalize it to yourself however you like, we're going to be enemies of radical Islam however this pans out. 

It's like saying an all out litmus test ban on gays in the military will somehow placate the Westboro Baptist crowd. Odds are they would move on to protesting gays in the majors or unwed mothers or some such other nonsense.


----------



## chimp_spanner (Aug 28, 2010)

Hey Dave. I didn't say it'd make you guys "safer" to placate the supporters of the mosque/cultural center. But would you not agree that if America starts to look Anti-Islam, not just a Non Islamic state, then it makes you _less_ safe? It ratchets the war up a notch from America vs fringe Islamic Extremists, to America vs Islamic countries. I'm not silly enough to assume that if you build the mosque, it'll make the terrorists hate you less! 

To an extent I do see both sides on this, btw. My post was more to highlight the lengths to which some people will go to get elected regardless of the damage it will do, the fear it will spread and the hate it will incite. I think people would be less offended by this if something had've gone up in place of the WTC *before* the Islamic center opens (if it does).

I also think that you can't force people to be tolerant. It has to be a natural evolution. I believe it's already been said here but this shouldn't even be a party issue. It should be decided by New Yorkers, who I'm quite sure are capable of making a sane decision by themselves.

My interest in this, in case you're wondering, comes from my American (Bronx) Dad, and largely American family. Nobody gets why I give a crap around here


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 28, 2010)

So long as America is not an Islamic state?

This video might surprise some people. Take anything quoted and throw it out the window as I'm sure its WAY out of context, but the facts on population should be correct.


----------



## Rashputin (Aug 28, 2010)

I don't want to offend anyone, but I just think the world needs way less religion and way more reason, science and music. We didn't send people to the moon by simply praying for it. Modern medical science cures people every day that would otherwise be dead. These things didn't come by them selves. We made them, and they are tangible things that are actually helping humanity as a whole. Music makes people happy, and provides an outlet for anger, happiness, sadness and a range of other emotions. I believe that creativity and music is a much more constructive conduit than religion. So I'm with Pat.


----------



## Customisbetter (Aug 28, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> I don't want to offend anyone, but I just think the world needs way less religion and way more reason, science and music. We didn't send people to the moon by simply praying for it. Modern medical science cures people every day that would otherwise be dead. These things didn't come by them selves. We made them, and they are tangible things that are actually helping humanity as a whole. Music makes people happy, and provides an outlet for anger, happiness, sadness and a range of other emotions. I believe that creativity and music is a much more constructive conduit than religion. So I'm with Pat.



If the world revolved around music ... i think all us 7 stringers who play "the djent" would likely be crucified.

People Love to Hate. Its what we do. There is nothing that will change that.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 28, 2010)

MaxOfMetal said:


> What did airline employed pilots have to do with the attacks of 9/11/01?



That's my point - they were involved to the same extent that Islam was, which is only a very loose association.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 28, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> I don't want to offend anyone, but I just think the world needs way less religion and way more reason, science and music. We didn't send people to the moon by simply praying for it. Modern medical science cures people every day that would otherwise be dead. These things didn't come by them selves. We made them, and they are tangible things that are actually helping humanity as a whole. Music makes people happy, and provides an outlet for anger, happiness, sadness and a range of other emotions. I believe that creativity and music is a much more constructive conduit than religion. So I'm with Pat.



Without commenting on any other part of this, Modern Medical Science, at least in the west, is largely about treating people and not curing them. There's a massive business to be had here with insane profit. Curing people does away with a large part of that profit.


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 28, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> So long as America is not an Islamic state?
> 
> This video might surprise some people. Take anything quoted and throw it out the window as I'm sure its WAY out of context, but the facts on population should be correct.



I meant US as an Islamic state meaning governed by the Sharia, not meaning a majority muslim or even high percentage muslim population. 

Islam did have a hand in the 9/11 attacks, since it was one of the tools used to manipulate weak minded, ill-educated youths with cherry picked quotes into hijacking airplanes and committing suicide by flying the plane into the WTC. 

It's the same cherry picked quotes that drums up the fervor in Islamophobes (verse of the sword, speaking about dhimmi, rules about beating wives, etc that can be found in the Islamic cardinal doctrine). 

Basically, a lot of people look back at history and see how Muslims tend to build mosques at the site of great victories and see this "mosque with bells and whistles" going up as literally part of ground zero (landing gear fell through the roof of the building at the proposed site). A lot of people see this as a big middle finger to America while a bunch of apologists trying to tell us it's a sign of good faith and peace, more of a handshake really. 

Considering the Park51 project was originally called the Cordoba House project (significant because: Great Mosque of Córdoba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia specifically


> After the Islamic conquest of the Visigothic kingdom the Emir Abd ar-Rahman I bought the church.[3] Abd ar-Rahman I and his descendants reworked it over two centuries to refashion it as a mosque, starting in 784


 and reference to it being the cordoba house Park51 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia you can find a pantload of conservative blogs that have laid eggs about this very fact as well if you care to google) there is little debate given the cast of characters involved, especially with all the new audio of Imam Feisal's speeches from 4-5 years ago emerging with typical extremist apologetic rhetoric laced in it 

()

I am very much against them building this on that site, but I am even more against anyone using the government to stop them.


----------



## cvinos (Aug 28, 2010)

> Islam did have a hand in the 9/11 attacks, since it was one of the tools used to manipulate weak minded, ill-educated youths with cherry picked quotes into hijacking airplanes and committing suicide by flying the plane into the WTC.



Even though this is the view of quite a few people in the USA, let me remind you that you will be unable to provide ANY prove for this.

To me, 9/11 was clearly an inside job. As long as the opposite cannot be proven, I personally will make this the basis of any statements related to 9/11 and the aftermath. And in this correct context, 9/11 cannot be blamed on a Religion at all.

I think leaders of the USA have a very particular notion of establishing a public opinion without the general public grasping that they are deceived. However, when I was in the USA and gave Fox News and other such institutions a try... I was disgusted. Not that our news reports in Germany are much better, but at least they are not so plain and obviously lying into your face. They are doing it smarter, in a way. 

Edit: In case someone wants to know why I think this way... see the text and the referenced paper here and this site about building 7.


----------



## Explorer (Aug 28, 2010)

Adam Of Angels said:


> Without commenting on any other part of this, Modern Medical Science, at least in the west, is largely about treating people and not curing them. There's a massive business to be had here with insane profit. Curing people does away with a large part of that profit.



I hear this claim a lot, normally from alternative medicine and vitamin advocates who use the statements to prevent double-blind studies and quality standards from being applied to their industries. 

With that said, the massive profit is to be found in getting around existing rules which require good science to be done to prove one's product works. 

The UK is probably the leader on starting to crack down on junk medicine at this point. There was a report issued this past year regarding Parliament having looked at all the evidence submitted to them, including from pro-homeopathy practicioners and researchers; the conclusion was that it doesn't work, and so such treatments will no longer be funded.

At least at this point in the UK, one no longer has to worry about the water having the continuing properties of shit after its exposure to sewage, something which would occur if homeopathy were science instead of pseudoscience....


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 29, 2010)

cvinos said:


> Even though this is the view of quite a few people in the USA, let me remind you that you will be unable to provide ANY prove for this.
> 
> To me, 9/11 was clearly an inside job. As long as the opposite cannot be proven, I personally will make this the basis of any statements related to 9/11 and the aftermath. And in this correct context, 9/11 cannot be blamed on a Religion at all.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry, I've misplaced my tinfoil hat.


----------



## Daggorath (Aug 29, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> So long as America is not an Islamic state?
> 
> This video might surprise some people. Take anything quoted and throw it out the window as I'm sure its WAY out of context, but the facts on population should be correct.




Bullshit propaganda. I'm not going to dismiss the situation, it's just the integrity of their sources is no doubt dubious. It's a fine line between protecting innocent people from fundamentally destructive religions and being Hitler.


----------



## Cabinet (Aug 29, 2010)

I believe in freely practicing your religious beliefs, not in rubbing it in other peoples faces


----------



## Rashputin (Aug 29, 2010)

RenegadeDave said:


> I'm sorry, I've misplaced my tinfoil hat.


 
hehe!

9/11 was no inside job. wtf man...

RELIGION caused 9/11. Now they wish to build a religious institution there... Religion is what got us into this mess in the first place. We need less religion and more reason.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 29, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> hehe!
> 
> 9/11 was no inside job. wtf man...
> 
> RELIGION caused 9/11. Now they wish to build a religious institution there... Religion is what got us into this mess in the first place. We need less religion and more reason.



What he said is that there's no way for you to prove this. You're saying this because the "official report" said so. 

...actually, the "official report" never said that religion was what caused this. The media, in all of its speculative propaganda, has done a good job of blaming Islam for this whole mess, but that's just not the case. 

I'll say it one more time - Islam did not attack America on September 11th, 2001. Period.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 29, 2010)

RenegadeDave said:


> I'm sorry, I've misplaced my tinfoil hat.



This is a convenient way of ignoring something.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Aug 29, 2010)

I'm not sure what I think about 9/11.

I've been both sides of the fence about it.

The 'official report' doesn't add up, but then neither does the conspiracy.


----------



## The Somberlain (Aug 29, 2010)

Customisbetter said:


> So long as America is not an Islamic state?
> 
> This video might surprise some people. Take anything quoted and throw it out the window as I'm sure its WAY out of context, but the facts on population should be correct.




What irks me about that video is that it doesn't acknowledge that demographic change just HAPPENS. So, the modern French and English came from central Europe. The Hungarians and Finns came from the Urals. Populations move over time and nothing can reverse it. The only loss is really the future dearth of Italian cold cuts. Oh, and a lower birthrate is a byproduct of a higher standard of living...enjoy it.


----------



## RenegadeDave (Aug 29, 2010)

Adam Of Angels said:


> This is a convenient way of ignoring something.



That's if you're assuming I'm just dismissing it out of hand. A more likely scenario is it's me being dismissive because the "something" I'm "ignoring" is even less concrete than the official story.


----------



## Adam Of Angels (Aug 29, 2010)

Well, no, its not.


----------



## C2Aye (Aug 29, 2010)

Rashputin said:


> hehe!
> 
> 9/11 was no inside job. wtf man...
> 
> RELIGION caused 9/11. Now they wish to build a religious institution there... Religion is what got us into this mess in the first place. We need less religion and more reason.



Absolutely not. Several individuals caused 9/11. Religion is a product of humans. Humans follow religions. Egro humans are the result of everything you say is caused by religion.

If religion never existed, which I highly doubt is possible due to the nature of what we are as humans, there are still dozens of reasons that will make humans blow each other up, be it resources, ethnic differences, you name it. Religion is an easy scapegoat for what is human nature.

Idividuals perform terrorist acts, individuals can rape, steal and kill. At the same time, individuals can also change an entire planet for the better, or simply brighten up somebodys day.

Don't generalise when it comes to humans and their religions, race, whatever. Generalisation is the first step to bigotry.


----------



## cvinos (Aug 29, 2010)

Scar Symmetry said:


> The 'official report' doesn't add up, but then neither does the conspiracy.



What particular conspiracy?



C2Aye said:


> Several individuals caused 9/11.



Certainly. But do we _know_ who they were? Exactly. Has there been any prove? No.


----------



## C2Aye (Aug 29, 2010)

cvinos said:


> What particular conspiracy?
> 
> Certainly. But do we _know_ who they were? Exactly. Has there been any prove? No.



Well, I don't know and I guess nobody really does (technically, several or more individuals did do it but I never did point any fingers!) but my point was that it's pointless blaming religion for the world's problems.


----------



## Rashputin (Aug 30, 2010)

I'm pulling out of this discussion as I dont want it to get ugly or insult anyone.


----------



## eaeolian (Aug 30, 2010)

I think this has run it's course. By the time it reaches 9/11 conspiracy discussions in any thread it's pretty time to kill it. It's the new version of the Hitler meme.


----------

