'Ground Zero mosque'

Tools    





i agree with yods, caity, and everyone else who says it should be allowed to be built, but is in poor taste.

here's the thing: you cannot "make" someone love you, or forgive you, or "get over it" for that matter. my friends were all in an uproar over this, as they felt that it should be allowed to be built, but I gave them this example:

What if, say, it was a black church in the South that had been bombed by the KKK, and all kinds of women and children killed, with a modern-day lynching/drag-behind-the-car body killing of a few black guys to boot. the nation is in an uproar. jesse and al sharpton are mad. blacks want blood, etc. years pass, but this incident (and social volatility) remain at the surface of the consciousness of the populace in the immediate vicinity. then, randomly(?), the Daughters of the Confederacy decide they want to build a building, raise a confederate flag, and hold meetings approx 600 feet from the bombed out church site.

Legal? Sure. Problem? Most certainly!

I dont care if I went to church with the standing leader of the UDOC, and could personally vouch that she wasnt racist - its just a BAD idea, because it rubs salt in an old wound, and is basically akin to a slap in the face of the grieving. While I'm bringing flowers and crying over the memorial wall built for my dead loved ones, the confederate flag is flying right above me, and die-hard segregationists are walking past shrugging their shoulders and giving me a "get over it" look, and celebrating the very thing I may hate (for the wrong reasons, or any reason).

Its a recipe for disaster, and its not a wise move. You cannot make someone forgive you. You cannot make someone love you. And you certainly cant make them heal. In fact, if you truly cared about them and their healing process, and wanted them to see that you are not the enemy who has hurt them - you'd give them all the space they needed.

If nothing else, they could show their altruism, patriotism and support of the grieving, and simultaneously repudiate the acts that created Ground Zero, by simply making the edifice a joint effort between the survivors and the muslim population who is against the Taliban.

now THAT would be building worth building, and an effort worth making. And if i do say so myself, i think itd go a long way in easing distrust.
__________________
something witty goes here......



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
A long time ago they read Americans the Bill of Rights and asked them their opinions and most didn't recognize it and expressed strong opinions against it.



A long time ago they read Americans the Bill of Rights and asked them their opinions and most didn't recognize it and expressed strong opinions against it.
This scares me
Not everything, no.
oh boy this could get awkward



Yeah he's a satirist by trade, but one who's dabbled successfully/accurately in political commentary too on his TV shows, so I'm giving him some leeway. Mainly wanted to see how accurate his core accusations were (I agree he doesn't back them up in the article, as the column is primarily 'rant' themed). Soz if it caused any offence incidentally.
Oh, not at all. I'm a little aghast that he would say that without really propping it up a bit, but I'm not mad that you linked to it or anything.

There's a number of interesting points emerging for me as an outsider tho:
  • Is it 'two minutes walk away'? (And here I think Brooker's point is fair - 'How far away would make it acceptable?'. For myself I'd think it could be very close indeed, so long as it wasn't promulgating an extremist brand of Islam - and Lord knows, people will keep an eye on it)
  • Is it visible from GZ? (Altho if it doesn't look 'provocatively' like a mosque, does it matter massively?)
  • Is it audible from GZ? (Call to prayer etc).
  • Does the prayer room perform the same function as a mosque? (I'm assuming it must to a degree, as a core argument for its placement is that it's replacing a previous community mosque).
Good questions, all; I think the visible/audible ones are the biggest; particularly the latter. I'm not sure. From what I can piece together there is at least one sightline where it's visible, but I don't know what it actually looks like. Dunno about two minutes walk, but it usually takes no more than a minute to walk a block, so that seems quite plausible.

I still feel the second point remains however. Should average Islamic believers be treated as terrorists-by-association?

So long as the centre is run respectfully (and there are signs that it will be, in terms of the memorial etc), I'd say that association is a step too far, and unhelpful in terms of moving on from 9/11.
I honestly don't see it as treating Islamists like terrorists. I think Fiscal's point about their religion being disgraced there is very well put, and pretty nuanced, because it doesn't equate Islam with its extremists, but it acknowledges that terrible things were done in its name. I understand that you can go the opposite route and say that a place where a name is disgraced is the MOST logical place to put things right, rather than the least, but I think that needs to be accompanied by enough time, distance, and general receptiveness to the idea, and I think this is lacking all three.

That said, yes, the type of place it ends up being will be huge. I've heard some pretty unsettling things about the Imam behind all this, but it's hard to sort fact from fiction at the moment. I think the best thing you can say about this is that it's a misguided attempt at increasing communication between faiths, and the worst is that it's a provocation. Whether or not the creators of the mosque mean well, I have to imagine extremists will see this as planting a flag on the site of a triumph. I don't want to get in the habit of allowing the pleasures of terrorists to dictate my feelings towards these things, but it's worth thinking about.



A long time ago they read Americans the Bill of Rights and asked them their opinions and most didn't recognize it and expressed strong opinions against it.
I'm not saying this as kneejerk skepticism, honest, but do you have a cite on this? This sounds so very much like the kind of thing that gets passed around and tweaked each time from year to year.

Not everything, no.
Not most.

Anyway, we've got plenty of threads on the topic if you care to discuss the role of religion in suffering and conflict, but I'm guessing this is just a drive-by.



the state of our life is nothing more than a reflection of our state of mind



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
I'm not saying this as kneejerk skepticism, honest, but do you have a cite on this? This sounds so very much like the kind of thing that gets passed around.
I can't cite it because like I said it was a long time ago, early 1970s, but it was widely reported at the time in the newspapers and newscasts. It was one of those scientific university studies. They had the percentages and all that, but I don't remember specifics.



A system of cells interlinked
You should get more experience reading the thread titles and staying on topic.

Consider yourself observed...
__________________
“It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance.” ― Thomas Sowell



To the people who oppose the building of the mosque outright (not those with no strong opinion who simply think it's a bad idea): Is the general consensus here that it is an irreverent, tasteless act that would disparage the sanctity of the site, or that it would likely spark violence in the area against the mosque/center, and therefore poses a danger to both Muslim and non-Muslim New Yorkers?

Well, I doubt anyone will say it isn't the safety factor. Of course, people opposed will say it's a bad idea because it will likely provoke violent reactions in the area, and probably toward the Muslim community at large in New York. But is the opinion that building on a site so close to Ground Zero is just 'wrong' or represents a slap in the face of Americans anyone's primary reason for opposing it's construction?
__________________
"I want a film I watch to express either the joy of making cinema or the anguish of making cinema" -Francois Truffaut



As a nation, we should not do this. We should not build a mosque at Ground Zero. We haven't become some kind of hippie dippy, spiritual, all-loving, all-embracing culture yet. Next year is the 10th anniversary of 9/11 -- oh, yeah, let's all put a MOSQUE right by Ground Zero.

Haven't we spent a lot of time thinking about our own kind of tribute to 9/11 to put at Ground Zero? Where has that been placed? Oh, I'm sorry, we should put a mosque by Ground Zero first? Come on.

And of course the people who would go to this mosque would not be safe. Whoever they may be -- those would either be some very stupid or very brave Muslims. I think they would scare every Muslim hating person to death. They'd be called members of Al-Qeada's American Academy Base, or something.

Construct a mosque at Ground Zero, have the firemen ready. It probably wouldn't last two days. Someone would burn it. The idea of this mosque being put up is like a ridiculous joke come to life. I AM NOT ANTI-MOSQUE. But I am also not Anti-American. I cannot see a mosque being put up at Ground Zero for at least 100 years, if not more. This is just somebody's idea of a way to get attention and more fame than he already has. It's not surprising that this mosque talk is happening now when we're nearing the 10th anniversary of 9/11 -- in a few days, it will be the 9th.



I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either side in this particular case. I still haven't formulated a strong opinion either way because I don't know enough of the details.

As a nation, we should not do this. We should not build a mosque at Ground Zero. We haven't become some kind of hippie dippy, spiritual, all-loving, all-embracing culture yet. Next year is the 10th anniversary of 9/11 -- oh, yeah, let's all put a MOSQUE right by Ground Zero.
I don't think a mosque in itself should represent a kind of affront to the solemnity of 9/11 or inherently disgrace the memory of people who died that day. It's a place of worship like any other. Christians waged Crusades for like 200 years in several countries, but I don't think a church should represent an intrinsic hatred for the people killed in Christ's name. Some cathedrals built as a result of the Crusades, when the wounds of war were still fresh, have become internationally recognized places of worship, even monuments.

But I'm not too naive to think that we can be blind to the fact that the attacks were carried out in the very name of the religion the mosque represents, or that we can just forget this fact and accept its construction without some trepidation. Personally, I respond to the construction of a mosque the same way I respond to the construction of a house of worship for any religion, but I'd be ignorant and inconsiderate of people who were closely affected by the attacks if I said the denomination of the faith shouldn't matter--it does for many people, especially in New York.

I don't really understand your "hippie dippy, spiritual, all-loving, all-embracing culture" criticism. Is this bad? Should we not be all-loving and all-embracing? I think religious tolerance is one of the pillars of this country's foundation. I don't think this statement really adds anything to the argument. I mean, maybe, if you're trying to say, we've become so lax in acceptance that we'll embrace anything, even if it's evil. But a mosque isn't evil.

Haven't we spent a lot of time thinking about our own kind of tribute to 9/11 to put at Ground Zero? Where has that been placed? Oh, I'm sorry, we should put a mosque by Ground Zero first? Come on.
The fact that nothing has been constructed on the site as a tribute to the tragedy is completely our own fault. Several structures have gone through various stages of development, with contractors, architects, and building committees falling out for various reasons, even political and financial. These aspects should not have been a factor in building a memorial. They're finally underway I think, but the fact that it took a decade is sad for us and even represents a certain lack of conviction and focus as to the real soul of the project.

And of course the people who would go to this mosque would not be safe. Whoever they may be -- those would either be some very stupid or very brave Muslims. I think they would scare every Muslim hating person to death. They'd be called members of Al-Qeada's American Academy Base, or something.
Are you saying that's what you'd call them, or that many racists in New York will call them that? I'm non-Muslim and it doesn't scare me at all. I wouldn't call them anything, they're just people practicing their faith. We have no real reason to think otherwise, other than the location.

Construct a mosque at Ground Zero, have the firemen ready. It probably wouldn't last two days. Someone would burn it. The idea of this mosque being put up is like a ridiculous joke come to life. I AM NOT ANTI-MOSQUE. But I am also not Anti-American. I cannot see a mosque being put up at Ground Zero for at least 100 years, if not more. This is just somebody's idea of a way to get attention and more fame than he already has. It's not surprising that this mosque talk is happening now when we're nearing the 10th anniversary of 9/11 -- in a few days, it will be the 9th.
I don't think supporting the mosque would be anti-American at all. I think it's sad that many Americans automatically equate Islam to terrorism. Terrorists working under misinterpretations of religious tenets of Islam represent a very small fraction of a very small faction of Muslims.

I do agree, though, that this for better or worse, is a ploy for attention. The proposal could not have been made by people so clueless as to think it wouldn't spark national discourse. But I think this doesn't have to be a bad motive. It may indeed encourage interfaith communication, and that is something badly needed around the world.

BTW what is the significance of the 9th being a few days away? Did something happen on that day?



will.15's Avatar
Semper Fooey
[quote=Yoda;669651]I'm not saying this as kneejerk skepticism, honest, but do you have a cite on this? This sounds so very much like the kind of thing that gets passed around and tweaked each time from year to year.

[/quote

Here is a recent survey with similar results. The difference is the other study asked Americans what they thought of them (without being told what it was).

http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2006/03...eir-rights.htm



Yeah, not that I'm an authority at all Yoda. But I did have a class once where our professor brought us several published studies conducted by Yale students and groups from other schools. So this is legit. There are documented case studies of large populations knowing alarmingly little about the foundation of our nation or most of its laws, beliefs, political process, etc... Not that you're just gonna blindly take my word for it. But I just wanted you to know will.15 isn't pulling this out of his ass from something he heard from someone who read something from someone who said something...



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
I pretty much said all that I wanted to in my earlier post, but I wonder about things sometimes when they just "pop into my head".

I realize that the 9/11 hijackers all practiced their faith at legitimate mosques where supposedly nobody else knew what they were going to do. So, in that case, I suppose any mosque could harbor a terrorist. Now, this is what just lightbulbed above my head. It may be misplaced but hear me out. After the Oklahoma City bombing, would citizens have been outraged if any Army bases or veterans hospitals were built in OKC? I really don't believe so. Yet, Timothy McVeigh was an Army veteran.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



Hah I just pictured Buster from Arrested Development

"I blew up this building for army"
__________________
If I had a dollar for every existential crisis I've ever had, does money really even matter?



I don't think a mosque in itself should represent a kind of affront to the solemnity of 9/11 or inherently disgrace the memory of people who died that day. It's a place of worship like any other. Christians waged Crusades for like 200 years in several countries, but I don't think a church should represent an intrinsic hatred for the people killed in Christ's name. Some cathedrals built as a result of the Crusades, when the wounds of war were still fresh, have become internationally recognized places of worship, even monuments.
Earlier, Yoda said:

Originally Posted by Yoda
but the point that always brings 9/11 home for me is that these were just people going to work. They weren't soldiers, or on some foreign battlefield. They didn't live near an airfield, a nuclear reactor, or a missile silo. The target was not crucial or strategic; just symbolic. It was the very definition of terrorism: targeting civilians to inflict horror and despair, and it killed 3,000 people.
Mosques can be beautiful places of worship (I assume - I've never been to one). Putting a mosque at Ground Zero... and trying to say it's a MONUMENT... is the biggest slap in the face to those 3,000 innocent dead people.

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
I don't really understand your "hippie dippy, spiritual, all-loving, all-embracing culture" criticism. Is this bad? Should we not be all-loving and all-embracing? I think religious tolerance is one of the pillars of this country's foundation. I don't think this statement really adds anything to the argument. I mean, maybe, if you're trying to say, we've become so lax in acceptance that we'll embrace anything, even if it's evil. But a mosque isn't evil.
Honestly, I would recommend that we don't try to be all-loving and all-embracing. I don't recommend being racist or not having a heart or not loving anything at all -- far from it. I just don't think we can be hippies about this. We should not become Bono or Yoko Ono or one of the other "ono" people -- especially Yoko Ono. Do you think she'd support the Mark David Chapman Library if they put it across the street from The Dakota? O, no.

My statements here might seem kind of goofy, but my point is -- we are not a bunch of saints. We are not all wishing peace on Earth. New York is not heaven and it's not paradise. It may be to some people, sure, but basically what I'm saying is... this is not the time to try to be God-like, in some new agey sense, and open our hearts to the idea of a mosque at Ground Zero.

I can see why people would think a mosque right by this nightmare area would be a beneficial thing to Muslims and to our country, but I highly suspect that many people would oppose this and rise against it. In the long run, it might even make things worse. This is a terrible idea. You don't get divorced and then run out and get your ex-wife's name tattooed above your penis, do you? You don't let the next wife see that coming at her. You don't put a mosque up in a place where Muslims killed 3,000 Americans only ten years ago. Put it somewhere else. That's just your best bet.

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
The fact that nothing has been constructed on the site as a tribute to the tragedy is completely our own fault. Several structures have gone through various stages of development, with contractors, architects, and building committees falling out for various reasons, even political and financial. These aspects should not have been a factor in building a memorial. They're finally underway I think, but the fact that it took a decade is sad for us and even represents a certain lack of conviction and focus as to the real soul of the project.
So what? Maybe we want it to be perfect. Just because we've spent too long trying to come up with the right plans, we should give up and drop a mosque down instead? We're talking about a major part of American history -- RECENT history -- 3,000 people died. We should punish ourselves for not coming up with something yet? If we can be THAT serious about putting our own tribute up, let's be THAT serious about this mosque idea. Let's think about that for ten years. Why do we need to automatically give in and construct this mosque just because it's a religious place. It's not evil. F RELIGION! (sorry, everyone)

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
Are you saying that's what you'd call them, or that many racists in New York will call them that? I'm non-Muslim and it doesn't scare me at all. I wouldn't call them anything, they're just people practicing their faith. We have no real reason to think otherwise, other than the location.
I'm not saying I'd call them that. I'm saying that's a scenario I see happening -- others would come up with names and say stuff about them. That's freakin' obvious.

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
I don't think supporting the mosque would be anti-American at all.
I never said it was.

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
I do agree, though, that this for better or worse, is a ploy for attention. The proposal could not have been made by people so clueless as to think it wouldn't spark national discourse. But I think this doesn't have to be a bad motive. It may indeed encourage interfaith communication, and that is something badly needed around the world.
I don't know. I suspect that this mosque discussion is just getting people fired up and angrier. I mean, I even have an opinion about this subject and I hardly ever talk about subjects like this.

If you wanna talk interfaith communication, talk interfaith communication. Get on TV or the internet and do it. Don't go to Ground Zero and build a mosque then stand outside it waving a sign reading, "Ground Zero Mosque Grand Opening! Come in and discuss Interfaith Communication!"

You will be shot.

Originally Posted by Cries&Whispers
BTW what is the significance of the 9th being a few days away? Did something happen on that day?
The 9th anniversary of 9/11 is coming up in a few days. Wasn't referring to September 9th.



I realize that the 9/11 hijackers all practiced their faith at legitimate mosques where supposedly nobody else knew what they were going to do. So, in that case, I suppose any mosque could harbor a terrorist. Now, this is what just lightbulbed above my head. It may be misplaced but hear me out. After the Oklahoma City bombing, would citizens have been outraged if any Army bases or veterans hospitals were built in OKC? I really don't believe so. Yet, Timothy McVeigh was an Army veteran.
None of this is really logical. It's all based on the emotional magnitude of the situations. We can't ignore our irrational sides and when we're dealing with 9/11 and Muslims and Americans, that's a lot more weight than Timothy McVeigh and the fact that he was an Army veteran.

Until the Army takes to the streets and starts killing Americans for no reason, a majority of Americans will love the Army. As for the foreignness of Muslims and Islam and all of that... the less we know them, the less we trust them, especially after something like 9/11 takes place. We know our Army more.

I'm not saying we're ALL like this and that we're all racist and mean -- I'm thinking about the collective consciousness, you could say, of America. May not be something to be proud of, but it's there.



Keep on Rockin in the Free World
Personally I think its awfully sad that almost 9 years has passed and the area is still referred to as "ground zero".
__________________
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it." - Michelangelo.