Mosque at Ground Zero? Plan angers NY

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
The terrorist operations in Kashmir began in 1989, correct? Can you provide me with verifiable intel, that US supported these terrorists by supplying weapons or intel?
Also at that time, India was inclined towards the USSR, India was a socialist country till 1992 when it opened up. And in 1995, India & US signed MoU on defense.

The only incidence you should rightly blame US is in 1965, when US provided support to Pakistan.
Exactly. Since India was "alligned" with the USSR, there was absolutely no problem with the US turning the blind eye to terrorists coming from Pakistan its ally into India which was in the " opposite" camp. Again a matter of geopolitics and convenience.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
The terrorist operations in Kashmir began in 1989, correct? Can you provide me with verifiable intel, that US supported these terrorists by supplying weapons or intel?
Also at that time, India was inclined towards the USSR, India was a socialist country till 1992 when it opened up. And in 1995, India & US signed MoU on defense.

The only incidence you should rightly blame US is in 1965, when US provided support to Pakistan.
That you should ask to the former secretary of state Ms.Madeline Albright in 1st Clinton admin in early 1990s.She termed kashmiri L-e-T and JEM terror groups as freedom fighter.And behold same L-e-T kills americans in mumbai 26/11.so now the usa 's freedom fighters of 1990s suddenly became terror groups.Karma.
 
Last edited:

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
are you talking about this? "And yes, powerful countries make the laws and the definitions and then go about preaching"

It was a statement, I didnt know you had asked me a question here.

It is correct that US preaches its principles, just like India does or for that matter many stronger nation does to others.
Nope read the entire post and reply.
 

dulce bellum inexpertis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
69
Likes
0
Exactly. Since India was "alligned" with the USSR, there was absolutely no problem with the US turning the blind eye to terrorists coming from Pakistan its ally into India which was in the " opposite" camp. Again a matter of geopolitics and convenience.
Okay so it would have been better to fight Pakistan, block their support against soviets in Afghan, and risk a nuclear war??
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Okay so it would have been better to fight Pakistan, block their support against soviets in Afghan, and risk a nuclear war??
Why get involved in Astan in the first place? Why enlist the Pakistanis in the first place? Why would there have been a nuclear war over Astan in the 80s? There was no reason.

US got involved to give the USSR a taste of what happned to the US in Nam. It was a all dictated by cold war one upmanship. Because of that, shortsighted decisions were made. Then the definitions were changed. Osama was a hero when he fought the Soviets for the US, and became a terrorist when he turned his back.

You guys used terror to your convenience. Osama was a product of the CIA.
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
US should've attacked Saudis and Pakistanis instead of Astanis and Iraqis but I digress.

Building a muslim centre at 9/11 is always going to be controversial but the best thing the administration or the civ-society can do is to refer the matter to the Courts.

Muslims can however stage a coup by buying this area and turning it into an interfaith centre cum memorial.
 

dulce bellum inexpertis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
69
Likes
0
That you should ask to the former secretary of state Ms.Madeline Albright in 1st Clinton admin in early 1990s.She termed kashmiri L-e-T and JEM terror groups as freedom fighter.And behold same L-e-T kills americans in mumbai 26/11.so now the usa 's freedom fighters of 1990s suddenly became terror groups.Karma.
Mate, Im a republican, and was against Clinton admin & am against Obama's policies. I do not agree with their methods. Anyhow, to answer your question, first please provide me with an answer to one of my above posts, provide me verifiable information, that US armed or provided intel to LeT.
US as a nation is not perfect, you must understand that, we have done follies in the past, just like many other countries, but can you tell me, that US knew at that time, did not just consider this a problem between India & Pakistan, something for them to sort out, as US does right now, no interference in India Pak dialogue on kashmir?
This is a question, not my opinion
 

dulce bellum inexpertis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
69
Likes
0
Why get involved in Astan in the first place? Why enlist the Pakistanis in the first place? Why would there have been a nuclear war over Astan in the 80s? There was no reason.

US got involved to give the USSR a taste of what happned to the US in Nam. It was a all dictated by cold war one upmanship. Because of that, shortsighted decisions were made. Then the definitions were changed. Osama was a hero when he fought the Soviets for the US, and became a terrorist when he turned his back.

You guys used terror to your convenience. Osama was a product of the CIA.
Osama was a product of CIA, jihad was & is not.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Mosque at ground zero is as ethically and morally correct as spreading democracy by invading other countries.
 

dulce bellum inexpertis

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2010
Messages
69
Likes
0
All you guys have provided your thoughts mostly on India & US past relations, & US's past actions which somehow I cant see related to my original post on the mosque at ground zero.
Anyhow I'd like to know more and discuss more on both, please leave your quotes, and I will reply back soon. Gotta go for today.
cheers//
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
Mate, Im a republican, and was against Clinton admin & am against Obama's policies. I do not agree with their methods. Anyhow, to answer your question, first please provide me with an answer to one of my above posts, provide me verifiable information, that US armed or provided intel to LeT.
US as a nation is not perfect, you must understand that, we have done follies in the past, just like many other countries, but can you tell me, that US knew at that time, did not just consider this a problem between India & Pakistan, something for them to sort out, as US does right now, no interference in India Pak dialogue on kashmir?
This is a question, not my opinion
US did not arm the terrorists but armed the sponsors of it that is Pakistan. The biggest problem was that they did not declare the terror organizations as such and instead called them freedom fighters. The US had more than enough evidence that Pak was sponsoring terror against India but didnt do anything. Just like how they didnt do anything about the Sino Pak proliferation when it suited them because of the geopolitical reasons and now they are having sleepless nights about those weapons falling into the hands of the people it created to fight the soviets and who have now turned against the US.
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
723
Mate, Im a republican, and was against Clinton admin & am against Obama's policies. I do not agree with their methods. Anyhow, to answer your question, first please provide me with an answer to one of my above posts, provide me verifiable information, that US armed or provided intel to LeT.
US as a nation is not perfect, you must understand that, we have done follies in the past, just like many other countries, but can you tell me, that US knew at that time, did not just consider this a problem between India & Pakistan, something for them to sort out, as US does right now, no interference in India Pak dialogue on kashmir?
This is a question, not my opinion
Does it matter to us if you are republican or democrat?Btw Nixon was republican president and he was the only one who overtly showed aggression towards india by sending 7th fleet in 1971.
 

Illusive

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
3,674
Likes
7,312
Country flag
if this anger is for the hatred of the religion,then i guess its wrong,but y build a mosque,build a memorial instead,it would be rather better
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/07/23/there-has-been-a-mosque-at-ground-zero-since-1970/

There Has Been a Mosque Near Ground Zero Since 1970 – Same Year the World Trade Center Opened
Jon Ponder | Jul. 23, 2010


I lived four blocks east of the World Trade Center in the 1980s, so I've followed the controversy about Park51, formerly known as Cordoba House, the new Islamic center being built two blocks north of the trade center at Park Place, with insider-y interest.
Andrew Sullivan has been posting notes sent to his site, the Daily Dish, from people who live in my old neighborhood — including this factoid that shouldn't be surprising: A mosque, Masjid Manhattan, has been holding services on Warren Street, four blocks north of the World Trade Center for the last 40 years. (It's about a block west of the Tweed Courthouse, if you know the area.)

Our members are city, state and federal employees, as well as professional employees of the Financial [District] who come to our Masjid to perform their daily prayers. Masjid Manhattan and its members condemn any type of terrorist acts. In particular, the attacks of 9/11 where non-Muslims as well as Muslims lost their lives.

The fact that Masjid Manhattan was started in 1970 is significant because the World Trade Center also opened that year. The first tenants moved into the North Tower in December 1970; the South Tower opened a year later, in January 1972.

The fact that Muslims have been worshiping four blocks away from Ground Zero for so long makes it hard to argue that it's a sacrilege for Muslims to worship so close to the attack by their fanatical coreligionists. (So should the fact that about 60 innocent Muslims died in the trade center on 9/11, roughly 2 percent of all fatalities.)


Ideologues like Mark "Colored People" Williams, Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin have been working overtime to demonize the Cordoba project, depicting it as a deliberate affront to the memory of the victims of the attack. But Cordoba's backers say its mission is outreach:

Park 51 is a creation of the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, an organization that seeks to improve relations between Islam and the West.

"This is a way for me to give back, as a New Yorker, to my community," Soho Properties developer and project backer Sharif El-Gamal told The Jerusalem Post. "I'm a New Yorker. This is about giving back to a city that's given us so much."

Gamal pointed out that the proposed center would not be "on Ground Zero," but two city blocks away, and would include a September 11 memorial.

According to the Cordoba House NYC Web site, the 13- story project would include a 500-seat auditorium, swimming pool, art exhibition spaces, bookstores and restaurants.

"There will be a mosque component, which will be a separate not-for-profit component of the project," Gamal said. "It's going to be a small component in a community center, just like the 92nd Street Y has a synagogue."

This Dish reader who lives in the neighborhood sums up how I'd feel if I still lived there:

I first heard about the mosque project a month or two ago, and the thing that struck me the most about it was the overwhelming support it had from the local community board in Lower Manhattan.

I don't know how familiar you are with how zoning works in New York and the role that community boards play in that process, but let me tell you, to have a community board agree 29-1 on ANY land use issue is quite an accomplishment. Furthermore, why is land use in New York City the business of anyone else but the citizens of New York? If so, I would really like to know Sarah Palin's opinion of the Atlantic Yards (or Hudson Yards or the expansion of Columbia University) project, an issue that is 1,000,000x more controversial than this project. That's all this is: a land use issue.

Following her logic (no small feat, I might add), do I now have the right to protest the construction of a new office building in Anchorage because it may house the offices of Big Oil and insult the people who suffered from the BP oil spill? Or can I have a say the next time some city in the "heartland" decides to build more sprawl at the expense of more livable communities with mixed-use development, walkable streets, and public transportation? I think I should, because it really "stabs me in the heart" when places do that.

This is a local issue, plain and simple. The people of New York – the ones actually attacked on 9/11 and who had to live through the aftermath – are the only ones who are affected by this. It is no one else's business. Sarah Palin and the "heartland" do not have permanent veto power over what gets built in Lower Manhattan. If they want a say over what happens there, my advice would be to move to New York. They might even learn something about the values of living in a multi-ethnic, multicultural community. Short of that, please STFU.

Another Dish reader from the neighborhood:

Did Newt really claim that the Cordoba House mosque would "overlook" the World Trade Center site? Rubbish. It is three blocks away and has no line of sight.

And Cordoba House is not a mosque:

I live two blocks from Ground Zero in a six-building apartment complex with an active tenant association. As best I can tell, Cordoba House is a non-issue among local residents. I haven't heard a word from anybody on the subject – not in the elevators, not in the lobby, not at the neighborhood bars or restaurants. Nada.

Here are the facts. The proposed Cordoba House is not a mosque. It's to be a community center modeled after the YMCA and the Jewish Community Center, with most of its 13 floors devoted to classrooms, fitness and recreation – open to the entire downtown community, not just Muslims. There is to be a "prayer space" that can hold up to 2,000 people. I'll aver that "prayer space" could just be a PC term for "mosque," though I confess no knowledge of what procedures must take place to consecrate a facility as an official mosque. The group's leader, Imam Abdul Rauf, has held services in a small mosque in the neighborhood since 1983. It isn't as though the group materialized out of nowhere or has no history in the neighborhood.
 

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
Bloomberg Defends Ground Zero Mosque
Updated: Sunday, 30 May 2010, 10:27 AM EDT
Published : Sunday, 30 May 2010, 10:27 AM EDT

(NewsCore) - In his fiercest defense yet of the mosque proposed near Ground Zero, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has declared that it must be allowed to proceed because the government "shouldn't be in the business of picking" one religion over another, the New York Post reported Saturday.

"I think it's fair to say if somebody was going to try, on that piece of property, to build a church or a synagogue, nobody would be yelling and screaming," the mayor said.

"And the fact of the matter is that Muslims have a right to do it, too."

Placing the proposed mosque two blocks from the World Trade Center site has led to an outcry from opponents, including family members of 9/11 victims, who contend the holy place at 45 Park Place would defile the memories of those who perished in the worst terror attack in U.S. history.

Community Board 1 approved the project Tuesday night by a 29-1 vote after a raucous four-hour hearing in which nine members abstained.

The issue also continues to fuel an intense debate on the Internet.

Bloomberg argued that blocking the 13-story mosque and Islamic cultural center would violate the essence of America.

"What is great about America and particularly New York is we welcome everybody, and if we are so afraid of something like this, what does that say about us?" asked the mayor.

"Democracy is stronger than this. You know the ability to practice your religion was one of the real reasons America was founded. And for us to just say no is just, I think, not appropriate is a nice way to phrase it.

"...If you are religious, you do not want the government picking religions, because what do you do the day they don't pick yours?"

Even with Bloomberg on board, the project still has to win approval of the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission, because the current building on the mosque site dates to 1857-58 and would have to be razed.

Read more: New York Post

(This article is provided by NewsCore, which aggregates news from around News Corporation.)

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpps/news/bloomberg-defends-ground-zero-mosque-dpgonc-km-20100530_7820866
 

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
if this anger is for the hatred of the religion,then i guess its wrong,but y build a mosque,build a memorial instead,it would be rather better
Its not just a Mosque bro, its a complex, and it has praying space. Its not like building a large imposing mosque or anything AFAIK
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Mosque at ground zero is as ethically and morally correct as spreading democracy by invading other countries.
1. Spreading freedom by ridding fascist/dictatorial countries is not morally repugnant to a lot many of us including the citizens of 200 other countries who supported US.
The manner in which it is done and the reasons for which such an act is carried out can be a cause of concern.
While I support US for trying to bring freedom to Iraq and Astan but I can't support because after 9 years they are still trying and those countries are worse off.


2. Building a mosque on the site of ground zero is a PR nightmare and an ethical quagmire. If the law states that yes they can, then they can.

But should they ?

If the Europeans the founding fathers of democracy and fundamental rights can force Muslim women to not wear garments sanctioned by their scholars as they want to protect the rights of the Muslim women, Then why can't Muslims build a mosque on ground zero ?

Since 9/11 was all though done by people professing to be Muslims, this act wasn't even Islamic and even if it was (not saying it is but hypothetically), since terrorism is illegal therefore Muslims are barred from practicing it in the West. So American Muslims are not terrorists and therefore cannot be proscribed and ergo have the right to build their mosques anywhere they feel like in US.
 

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
http://beta.thehindu.com/news/international/article439079.ece

Mosque plan for WTC site wins city approval

New York's World Trade Center (WTC) site, the target of the 9/11 attacks, has become ground zero for a less deadly but equally emotive conflict around questions of religion.

This week a community board in Manhattan fiercely debated but ultimately endorsed a plan to build a mosque near the spot where the WTC stood prior to the attacks.

The proposal's passage, by a vote of 29-to-1, came after weeks of heated discussions that saw the idea being staunchly opposed by some of the families and friends of 9/11 victims and, more remotely, by a leader of the right-wing Tea Party movement.

Media reports quoted Rosemary Cain, whose son, a fireman, died in the attacks, as saying, "I think it's despicable. That's sacred ground. It's a slap in the face. How could anybody give them permission to build a mosque there?"

Some made a subtler point: Bill Doyle, father of a 9/11 victim, reportedly said, "What I'm frightened about is that it's almost going to be another protest zone — a meeting place for radicals."

Radicals court controversy

Sure enough, it would appear that radicals have wasted little time in climbing on board the bandwagon. Mark Williams, a leader of the fiscally and otherwise conservative Tea Party movement courted controversy when he recently made disparaging remarks about Islam, terrorism and the purported use of the mosque for propaganda by a "cult".

However given the extreme nature of Mr. Williams' comments, the New York community authorities were quick to reiterate their support for the mosque proposal.

Manhattan Borough President Scott M. Stringer said, "When a hate-filled individual like Mark Williams spreads lies intended to injure millions of Americans, incite bigotry, and undermine our democracy, we must stand up and respond with the truth."

He added that the mission of the centre, to be called Cordoba House, was "to establish a vibrant and world-class facility in New York City that promotes tolerance and pluralism that will strengthen relationships and attract those of other faiths to integrate and learn about Islam".

State Senator Daniel Squadron noted that community, religious and civic organisations had been a big part of the extraordinary resurgence of Lower Manhattan, arguing, "Religious intolerance, demagoguery, and fear-mongering have no place in the discussion about development on and around the World Trade Center site."

The mosque's development is being led by the Cordoba Initiative which, according to founder Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is about "moderate American Muslims who are the vast majority of the Muslims in the world and who condemn terrorism and 9/11". Imam Rauf noted, "We have been and want to continue to be part of a coalition of Muslims and non-Muslims that work to eliminate terrorism."
 

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
252
The Whole Thing is Not a Mosque!!! Its not like a huge cathedral complex imposing its view on the Site of the ghastly attack! Its a Complex, with a praying space!
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top