Just not there

[sirs]

This mosque at ground zero, has the making to be quite the "takedown" of the President.  Put aside his arrogant talking-down-to-us tone, about Religious freedom and the 1st amendment.  Set aside that the fella behind the mosque actually claimed the U.S. kind of had it coming, and refuses to denounce Islamic terrorist attacks.  This has little to do with either.  It has to do with the location, so those who moronically try to make this about bigotry, know where to stick that.

Try this analogy....my brother kills your brother.  A tragedy indeed, but I had nothing to do with it, as it was my brother.  You think my going to that victim's funeral is a good idea.  Think its just a TAD insensitive on my part, to place myself in front of that family, who had been murdered by my kin??  Think I should go anyways, even if they didn't want me to?

Same concept here, the location of a mosque, that symbolizes the religion of those who mutated it for their justification of the thousands they murdered, in the same spot is about as insensitive as one can get.  One can even argue a slap in their face, all the while Usama smiles ear to ear, in some cave, watching his religion put up a symbolic beacon, in practically the best spot he could have wanted.

Anywhere else, which is how this refutes the notion of bigotry

[Kramer]

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

What in the hell does this statement have to do with building a Mosque in the spot where over 3,000 people died in the name of Islam. He can rot in hell!

[BT]

The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.

He's right.

But there is nothing that says the funding for the cultural center can't be monitored. I'd much rather have jihadists donating to a symbol than funding IED's.

[sirs]

So.....you have no problem attending a funeral to someone your brother murdered?

[BT]

So.....you have no problem attending a funeral to someone your brother murdered?

Now that would depend, wouldn't it.

What was my relationship with the family of the deceased?

Did i know them? Did I have a relationship with members of that family that was separate from my brother's relationship?

Would I expect that family to hold me accountable for actions that were not my own?

Truth of the matter is, if i were close to that family, my absence would speak louder than my presence.

Now to the best of my knowledge, the Cordoba Initiative is not being led by anyone with direct relations to the 9-11 attackers. So I'm not sure what the point of your analogy would be.

And i really don't buy into group guilt. I don't buy it when Mikey tries to paint all Republicans as racists, nor to I buy it that Islam is a religion of extremists and needs to be shunned.

BTW 28 muslims were killed in the attack. And that number is proportional to their percentage of the population nationwide.

But let's get back to your original point. Do you believe that religious affiliation itself is reason enough for the government to treat an applicant differently than any other citizen?

[sirs]

So.....you have no problem attending a funeral to someone your brother murdered?

Now that would depend, wouldn't it.

Not really.  We're using 911 with the anaolgy

What was my relationship with the family of the deceased?

What is this Imam's with the deceased?

Did i know them? Did I have a relationship with members of that family that was separate from my brother's relationship?

Does the Imam have one with the 911 familes?

Would I expect that family to hold me accountable for actions that were not my own?

Doubtful.  However if the family doesn't want you there, as does a majority of both NY and the country, do you go anyways?

Truth of the matter is, if i were close to that family, my absence would speak louder than my presence.

And there in lies the issue.  There is no such relationship between this Imam and ANY of those who lost family members during 911.

But let's get back to your original point. Do you believe that religious affiliation itself is reason enough for the government to treat an applicant differently than any other citizen?

You must be mistaken with the person that said the Government should intervene.  I'm merely stating its simply the wrong place to allow buidling of a Mosque.  Anyplace else would be just fine, and as such, the Government could help to locate an alternate site.  The location here opens a very deep wound, and as I said, paints a big smile on the fella that was behind 911, knowing his religion now will sit in direct view and in place of what he took down, in the name of Islam. 

Meaning, he wins

[BT]

The Cultural Center is not being  where the towers were. It is being built 2 blocks away. So let's just do away with the fiction that it is being built on hallowed ground.



But let's dig further into your reply.

Last i heard the Iman held American citizenship therefore he is related to the families the same way you and I are.

or are you saying only relatives of the deceased should be allowed to develop property in proximity to the WTC?

BTW if the government should not be involved in denying the necessary permits for building the center because of religion it should not be involved in helping to find another more "suitable" site because of religion.

Government should be neutral when it comes to religion.


 

[sirs]

Too close for me, and most of the rest of the country, and the damage was over far more than 2 blocks, so no fiction need be dispenced.  1/2 mile should do

[BT]

Too close for me, and most of the rest of the country, and the damage was over far more than 2 blocks, so no fiction need be dispenced.  1/2 mile should do

I don't see where it is any of your business. Hopefully you aren't arguing a moral or ethical position based on polling.

The fact of the matter is the rights of the property owner trump your rights as an interested bystander.

[sirs]

Of course not (arguing a moral or ethical position based on polling).  My decision, is mine alone.  I merely reference the fact I'm in the majority on this issue.  And my decision is merely that it's too close.  1/2 mile should suffice for me, and I've provided the reasons why  

[BT]

Of course not (arguing a moral or ethical position based on polling).  My decision, is mine alone.  I merely reference the fact I'm in the majority on this issue.  And my decision is merely that it's too close.  1/2 mile should suffice for me, and I've provided the reasons why  

Then you are confusing me.

Your biggest objections seems to be that any muslim activity within a 2600 ft perimeter of ground zero would be a victory for Osama.

So is it true, in your mind, that all Muslims are linked to Osama and share his guilt and should be treated accordingly, either officially by government agencies or unofficially by the people?

[sirs]

Let me unconfuse you

The Mosque should not be built 2 blocks from ground zero.  Building one so close, indeed gives Usama a major win, now being able to brag that his religion and symbol stand in direct contrast to what he took down, and to the thousands he had murdered

It's the same as you going to the funeral of a person your brother just killed, and the family does not want you there, so no it's never been about associating Muslims with Usama.  It's about Usama being associated with a religious symbol that's about to replace that of the WTC.  It's offensive, and as insensitive to those families who lossed loved ones on 911, as can be

Now, if you can provide a record that a majority of 911 families support the Mosque, then I would be in error

[BT]

The Mosque should not be built 2 blocks from ground zero.  Building one so close, indeed gives Usama a major win, now being able to brag that his religion and symbol stand in direct contrast to what he took down, and to the thousands he had murdered

How? Because all Muslims are the same? Show me the link between Bin Laden and the Rahm Faisal and maybe your argument would have a little more legitimacy.

It's the same as you going to the funeral of a person your brother just killed, and the family does not want you there, so no it's never been about associating Muslims with Usama.  It's about Usama being associated with a religious symbol that's about to replace that of the WTC.  It's offensive, and as insensitive to those families who lossed loved ones on 911, as can be

Bullshit. You just associated the project with Bin Laden in the previous quote.
Ground Zero will have its own memorial and symbolic consecration. I don't see how this Cultural Center will replace that, nor do i see how the center's potential offensiveness nor insensitivity to those families is anything other than an emotional argument.

And i don't see how the 9-11 families have any rights to trump the rights of a property owner to develop their land as they see fit within the confines of any building or zoning laws that exist at the time.

[sirs]

The Mosque should not be built 2 blocks from ground zero.  Building one so close, indeed gives Usama a major win, now being able to brag that his religion and symbol stand in direct contrast to what he took down, and to the thousands he had murdered

How?

Already answered that.  I don't need to repeat myself.

It's the same as you going to the funeral of a person your brother just killed, and the family does not want you there, so no it's never been about associating Muslims with Usama.  It's about Usama being associated with a religious symbol that's about to replace that of the WTC.  It's offensive, and as insensitive to those families who lossed loved ones on 911, as can be

Bullshit. You just associated the project with Bin Laden in the previous quote.

I associated the connection of the mutual religion, they both share, Bt.  Please keep it honest

[BT]

I associated the connection of the mutual religion, they both share, Bt.

And abortion clinic bombers usually share the same religion as other Christians. So what?

Are you saying all Christians are now abortion clinic bombers or is it somehow different?