A Mosque On The Twin Towers Site?

[dapokerbum 0]

We live in a society that is so fearful of what the Muslims think because it might offend them which could lead to another bombing (from a peaceful religion btw) that Comedy Central edited out all images of Mohamed and the mention of his name in a South Park episode recently.Do you really think people will be ok with some redneck burning the Quran?

That is what is so maddening to me ... oh really Islam is a religion of peace, cool Prove It! I'm not sure if they are familiar with the phrase "actions speak louder than words"As far as the last question ... I think in general most peaceful muslims probably don't care. They are probably offended and would not like the pastor, but I don't think any moderate muslims in Florida are going to bomb the church when this is done. It's the radical muslims that are the problem. So then what do we do? Do we bow to Islam at every turn, or do we decide that we don't care. Like I said ... it seems like such a silly thing, but I guess they need to use W/E they can to find another reason to hate on america.

[El Guapo 8]

When I said "do you think people will be ok with some redneck burning the Quran?" I didn't mean Muslims, I meant the majority of the US.

[dapokerbum 0]

When I said "do you think people will be ok with some redneck burning the Quran?" I didn't mean Muslims, I meant the majority of the US.

Ah, they won't be okay with it as I don't think anyone really supports this guy (except his congregation), but they also won't really care. What I am trying to get at is that there is WAAAAYYY to much hoopla surrounding this. And the response from Islam is rediculous. You burn a book, WE ARE GOING TO BOMB AMERICANS!!! It's like they don't get that it's just one whack job out of how many millions of other americans. I mean if I had to weigh in I would say that human life >>>> a book, even if it is a holy book. The whole thing is retarded. I wish we would have seen the "peaceful" side of Islam on this one ...

[El Guapo 8]

Ah, they won't be okay with it as I don't think anyone really supports this guy (except his congregation), but they also won't really care. What I am trying to get at is that there is WAAAAYYY to much hoopla surrounding this. And the response from Islam is rediculous. You burn a book, WE ARE GOING TO BOMB AMERICANS!!! It's like they don't get that it's just one whack job out of how many millions of other americans. I mean if I had to weigh in I would say that human life >>>> a book, even if it is a holy book. The whole thing is retarded. I wish we would have seen the "peaceful" side of Islam on this one ...

I really have not been following this, we have been threatened by Muslims? Do you have a link?

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

You know the more I think about this Koran burning ... it seems like it shouldn't be THAT big of a deal. It's a book, granted it's "the holy word of Muhammed", but it's still only a book. The news is now warning other governments that there could be backlash everywhere. There are literally millions of copies of the Koran. If some ****in whack job wants to burn one then we should just let him do it and STOP with all the coverage. If we could just step back and say WHO CARES then this would just go away. Imagine if he just went to burn the Koran and there was NOONE around ... then the dude feels like the idiot he is and nothing happens. Instead it is turning into this retarded media frenzy where even the POTUS is asking you not to do it.IMO this whole thing is retarded. I don't care if you burn Play Poker like the pros, the bible, of mice and men, or even the Koran. IT'S A BOOK and it's ONE GUY. This isn't like those government book burnings during the Nazi regime ... this is ONE GUY being a moron. Let him be a moron and move on.

Yep.

[Pot Odds RAC 23]

I really have not been following this, we have been threatened by Muslims? Do you have a link?

Te US military intelligence talking guys said that burning the books would put US Troops at danger of retaliation. And the Imam also said that backing off on building the Mosque would provoke Radical Muslims.

[vbnautilus 48]

Te US military intelligence talking guys said that burning the books would put US Troops at danger of retaliation. And the Imam also said that backing off on building the Mosque would provoke Radical Muslims.

It's pretty absurd that even the muslim guys agree we should live in fear of the muslims and their recommendation is that we behave so as not to provoke them. He could very well call for the repudiation of the concepts of jihad from the koran, and the rejection of the religious doctrines which reward people for violence, but no, his stance is that we should just not piss them off. This is exactly the problem with Islam.

[Don Giovanni 0]

She can't just say it's wrong to burn Korans but instead implies that burning somebody else's Holy Book is equivalent to building an Islamic Center next to the porno shops.Not acknowledging that the growing anti-Islamic attitude in the US is a security concern would be pretty stupid.Is anybody other than me thinking that moron Pastor in Florida is a candidate for a future Darwin Award ?

i think YOU may be in line for a darwin award. although sarah palin is an idiot in general, her statement there was completely logically consistent. she compared two actions on the principle that they are both legal, yet insensitive and provocative - a perfectly sound statement, and perfectly true since both planned events ARE legal, and HAVE provoked insensitivity. sarah palin has just outsmarted you apparently. i would feel pretty bad about this. good thing it will never happen to me. growing anti-islamic attitude is a security concern? no. Idiotic cultural relativists like you are a US security concern. US citizens have no moral or legal responsibility to curb their freedom of thought and speech for the sake of the possible offense (and thus recruitment, allegedly) of religious psychopaths abroad. the idea that we should go easy on our constitutional rights because they may upset deranged killers elsewhere is ludicrous, and thats what you are implying. im going to suggest you, obama, and general petraeus for darwin awards. sarah palin, however, is off the hook this time.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

US citizens have no moral or legal responsibility to curb their freedom of thought and speech for the sake of the possible offense

So, you're for building the Mosque near ground zero? And so is Palin?

[timwakefield 68]

im going to suggest you, obama, and general petraeus for darwin awards. sarah palin, however, is off the hook this time.

I'm not sure you know what a Darwin Award is. A person can't really be nominated because you only get one when you're dead, and it is the way that you caused your own death that earns you the award. It's not like, 'Oh that guy's dumb, he gets a darwin award.' It's like, 'Oh that guy electrocuted himself to death trying to toast a bagel, he gets an award cuz he just made our species smarter, by dying.' Doesn't really apply to Bob or Obama or Patraeus.

[Don Giovanni 0]

I'm not sure you know what a Darwin Award is. A person can't really be nominated because you only get one when you're dead, and it is the way that you caused your own death that earns you the award. It's not like, 'Oh that guy's dumb, he gets a darwin award.' It's like, 'Oh that guy electrocuted himself to death trying to toast a bagel, he gets an award cuz he just made our species smarter, by dying.' Doesn't really apply to Bob or Obama or Patraeus.

i was suggesting they be monitored for displaying thought conducive of future darwin award eligibility. obviously. you get a darwin award too.

[Don Giovanni 0]

So, you're for building the Mosque near ground zero? And so is Palin?

i dont know how you infer that. even taken out of context as it was, what i said does not necessarily suggest im for building the mosque. i can support their right to do so, but be against the action itself.but im against those antagonistic assholes building near ground zero just to elicit a reaction from the general public, as i would be against a nazi parade. however, im for the burning of korans because in this case, slavish religious idiots are the target, and im for the burning of any religious book in general.

[timwakefield 68]

you get a darwin award too.

No I don't. One has to be dead to get that award. I thought I said that.

[timwakefield 68]

but im against those antagonistic assholes building near ground zero just to elicit a reaction from the general public

You know that there are like 2 other mosques within a few blocks of the GROUND ZERO TERROR MOSQUE! Should we tear them down too?

[strategy 4]

TW, stop feeding the troll.

[JubilantLankyLad 1,957]

That is what is so maddening to me ... oh really Islam is a religion of peace, cool Prove It!

but not by building a church, fuck no!

[vbnautilus 48]

You know that there are like 2 other mosques within a few blocks of the GROUND ZERO TERROR MOSQUE! Should we tear them down too?

That would be ideal.

[timwakefield 68]

Ok, just one more. GROUND ZERO TERROR MOSQUE is the orange dot, and the red A is the Masjid Mosque. So really, just 2 blocks further and nobody would care about the new mosque?

[vbnautilus 48]

Ok, just one more. ]GROUND ZERO TERROR MOSQUE is the orange dot, and the red A is the Masjid Mosque. So really, just 2 blocks further and nobody would care about the new mosque?

You do realize that the existing mosques do not involve the meaningful action of choosing the location next to ground zero to build a mosque? Masjid Manhattan has been there for a long time.

[timwakefield 68]

You do realize that the existing mosques do not involve the meaningful action of choosing the location next to ground zero to build a mosque? Masjid Manhattan has been there for a long time.

Actually, according to their website, they moved in 2008. Granted they say that they moved basically next door, but the point is that in 2008 a new space was allocated for a mosque near Ground Zero. Why weren't they forced to move to a less sensitive location?

[vbnautilus 48]

Actually, according to their website, they moved in 2008. Granted they say that they moved basically next door, but the point is that in 2008 a new space was allocated for a mosque near Ground Zero. Why weren't they forced to move to a less sensitive location?

They've been there since the 70's. It's not a new mosque. And, no one has forced anyone to move to a less sensitive location. We have commented on the significance of choosing to build a new, large, islamic center in the location where Rauf has chosen to do it.

[Balloon guy 158]

They've been there since the 70's. It's not a new mosque. And, no one has forced anyone to move to a less sensitive location. We have commented on the significance of choosing to build a new, large, islamic center in the location where Rauf has chosen to do it.

And the very pertinent fact that is constantly being ignored is that this location was damaged by the 9-11 hijacker's plane when the landing gear crashed through the roof.The location is a building destroyed by the 9-11 hijackers.It's not just any building, or just any location.It was damaged by the 9-11 hijackers.The reason that people are against this is because of the location...which was destroyed by the landing gear from the plane that flew into the World trade Center buildings.Building a mosque on the site damaged by the 9-11 hijackers is world's apart from building a mosque in Manhattan.Because of the 'damaged by the 9-11 hijackers' part of the location.Except for VB, he is against it because the reality of the islam being a disruptive force everywhere they seem to go.Which is an interesting discussion that will only fall into people looking at the facts honestly being called ilsma-phobes by people who have picture of Neville Chamberlain up in their bedrooms.

[timwakefield 68]

And the very pertinent fact that is constantly being ignored is that this location was damaged by the 9-11 hijacker's plane when the landing gear crashed through the roof.The location is a building destroyed by the 9-11 hijackers.It's not just any building, or just any location.It was damaged by the 9-11 hijackers.The reason that people are against this is because of the location...which was destroyed by the landing gear from the plane that flew into the World trade Center buildings.Building a mosque on the site damaged by the 9-11 hijackers is world's apart from building a mosque in Manhattan.Because of the 'damaged by the 9-11 hijackers' part of the location.

You do know that Muslims died on 9-11 too, right? Innocent ones working in the towers. It's like hating on Christianity because David Koresh led an insane group of fanatical Christians, and saying that out of respect for the horrible thing that Christians did in Waco, no churches should be built near the site of his former complex out of respect for the victims.

[Balloon guy 158]

You do know that Muslims died on 9-11 too, right? Innocent ones working in the towers.

Again, building a mosque on the site damaged by the 9-11 attackers is the issue, that is a nationally affected action, not one we leave only to people who lost lives.Let me ask you this, if they build the Mosque, and there is a fire, do you think the NY Fire Department is going to hurry over there?

It's like hating on Christianity because David Koresh led an insane group of fanatical Christians, and saying that out of respect for the horrible thing that Christians did in Waco, no churches should be built near the site of his former complex out of respect for the victims.

Well if Janet Reno wanted to have a Fire Safety for Children clinic built at the Waco compound, I would be equally against it.Her action of burning dozens of children alive, impacts her 'right' to build on that site.Doesn't matter that horribly ugly women also died there.

[timwakefield 68]

that is a nationally affected action

What do you mean? I just want to point out something that bothers me, and I'm not accusing you of this (at least not right now!): New York City is, to Republicans, often considered the center of elitist liberal bullshit, completely out of touch with "real America." Except when anybody has anything to say about September 11. Then it's the stalwart, unafraid, morally unimpeachable and honorable men and women we can all be proud of - businessmen and women, firemen, policemen, citizens. But the rest of the time it's seen as all snooty professors and basically French people. That duality bothers the hell out of me. Also, some recent news story I saw had an interview with some jackass from Georgia who said he'd come all the way to Manhattan just to protest this mosque. Dude, go back to Georgia and let New Yorkers worry about our own goddamn streets. Seriously pisses me off. People forget that NEW YORK got attacked, and NEW YORKERS had to deal with losing loved ones and PTSD and all that. I'm not saying that only NY got attacked or that only New Yorkers died, just saying let New York deal with what happened in New York. It's rude and arrogant for some dick in Georgia to tell the world how New Yorkers and survivors feel about the mosque. It should be a New York issue, and if the whole world wants to watch and see how NY solves it or deals with it fine, but please news commentators, shut up already.P.S. Yes I'm from Boston but my whole family is from New York and I've lived here for a long time now. That's why I said "our" streets.