The Ground-zero mosque, continued

[Solomon2]

Israeli mourners reject ground zero mosque

Family of woman killed in the 9/11 attacks says plan for Muslim center 'like bringing pig into holy place'

Shmulik Hadad
Published: 09.11.10, 22:46 / Israel News

Rosh Hashana is not a joyful holiday for the family of Alona Avraham, who was killed in the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Since September 11, 2001, the family gets together a few days before the holiday for a memorial ceremony, but this year they are coping with even greater pain – the news that an Islamic community center is to be built close to Ground Zero leaves them with no rest.

Alona, from Ashdod, was 30 years old when she went to visit her uncle who lives in the US, on one of her first trips abroad. On September 11, she boarded flight 175 at Boston's Logan International Airport to Los Angeles and died in the terror attack. Though her remains were returned to Israel only seven years later, her family sat Shiva immediately upon receiving news of her death.

Now, nine years after the tragedy, they are doing all they can to prevent the building of the Islamic community center near the place Alona lost her life.

"I contacted the family of Haggai Sheffi, who was also killed in the disaster," said Alona's mother Miriam. "We intend to address the US government together about this. My position is clear – there shouldn't be any mosque there. It cannot happen. I don't understand this government, they invest millions into catching (Osama) Bin Laden but on the other hand they allow this mosque. It's like bringing a pig into a holy place."

Ground Zero. (Photo: AP)

She firmly rejects reports that the Islamic community center is intended to bring religions closer. "All that's just nonsense," she says.

The fight against the construction of the Islamic community center makes coping with her terrible loss even harder. "We are in a very difficult period," she says. "The memorial was last Thursday, and was even harder than in previous years. This holiday is tempered with grief, we're trying to recover, trying not to fall into the abyss. It's really difficult. Nine years have passed and it feels like it happened now. It's tangible all the time."

'Never forgive, never forget'

Tensions over the Islamic community center flared Saturday as demonstrations began shortly after family members of the victims recited loved one's names through tears at a somber ceremony marking the ninth anniversary of the attacks.

After the ceremony, around 1,000 activists rallied about five blocks from the site of the attacks to support the proposed Islamic community center. Opponents gathered blocks away, with the two groups expected to converge near the mosque site.

Toting signs saying, "The attack on Islam is racism" and "Tea Party Bigots funded by corporate $," mosque supporters gathered near City Hall about an hour after a New York anniversary ceremony ended and planned to march closer to Ground Zero.

Just blocks away, demonstrators chanting "USA, USA" gathered to protest plans to build the Islamic center. Some carried signs, including messages like "Never forgive, never forget, no WTC mosque."

Holding a US flag and a copy of the bill of rights, one demonstrator explained, "Not all Muslims are extremists, but all extremists are Muslims.

 

[Rajput Warrior]

Wat can i say abt the israeli .itches!
solomon is the center being built on the ground zero site?

 

[Zeluvaa]

Family of woman killed in the 9/11 attacks says plan for Muslim center 'like bringing pig into holy place'

Shmulik Hadad
Published: 09.11.10, 22:46 / Israel News


"We intend to address the US government together about this. My position is clear – there shouldn't be any mosque there. It cannot happen. I don't understand this government, they invest millions into catching (Osama) Bin Laden but on the other hand they allow this mosque. It's like bringing a pig into a holy place."

So according to her Bin Laden is funding the mosque???

She firmly rejects reports that the Islamic community center is intended to bring religions closer. "All that's just nonsense," she says.

Typical bigotry!

Holding a US flag and a copy of the bill of rights, one demonstrator explained, "Not all Muslims are extremists, but all extremists are Muslims.

Someone should tell these demonstrater's that the same bill of rights give the builders of the Islamic Centre right to build it.

It is interesting how these nutjobs shout freedom of expression granted to them by the constitution when burning Quran and forget all about the constitution when it comes to this mosque.
Hypocrisy at its best

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

^^^^^^^^

Bro, haters gonna hate! let their hate consume them & lets move on.
This thread need to be closed now.

 

[Rajput Warrior]

Dedicated to these bigots,haters,racists and solomon.

 

[fallstuff]

 

[Ghareeb_Da_Baal]

 

[muse]

It's good, very good - the more the opposition, the better as far as i can see - the more they oppose, the more it will awake Muslims of the US and who in turn must awaken the rest of the US - the US must not be thought of as some back water place populated by ignorants - slowly, but continuously the agitation must be legal, must be focused on defeating the notion that it's OK to demean Islam and Muslims in the US because neither Islam nor Muslims belong in the US -- a super opportunity:

The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
US Muslim groups unite, see mosque near ground zero as test of rights

Muslim leaders, meeting at the New York site of the proposed Islamic center and mosque near ground zero, speak of their 'unified stance' against 'religious intolerance and bigotry.'


By Ron Scherer, Staff writer
posted September 20, 2010 at 6:29 pm EDT
New York —

American Muslim leaders are starting to coalesce around the concept of building an Islamic Center and mosque close to ground zero.

Their reason for coming together: The issue has now become a test of their constitutional right to build houses of worship anywhere in the nation.

On Monday, at a press conference outside of Park51, the proposed site of the mosque and community center, national and local Islamic religious leaders said they stood in support “of the building of the mosque in this place.” They said they have had discussions with the property developer about expediting the construction of the controversial facility.

“From the discussion we had with the developer, they are committing to expedite the process, of making sure this project is coherent, has an advisory board from the Muslim community, from the interfaith community, so this project will reflect America in terms of its spirit and its look at the future,” says Zaheer Uddin, executive director of the Islamic Leadership Council in New York.

The group also made clear it views the mosque issue as an important test of American society.

“We are here as religious leaders at a time when there is religious intolerance and bigotry that is prevailing,” said Imam Al-Hajj Talib Abdur-Rashid, deputy amir of the Muslim Alliance in North America. “So we wanted to make clear our unified stance in light of the problems that all Americans are facing because when one group is deprived of their rights, all groups are deprived of their rights.”

The support of the Islamic leaders puts pressure on the Muslim developer of the property, Sharif El-Gamal, to carry through with the mosque building project. For example, Donald Trump, the flamboyant New York developer, wrote Mr. El-Gamal offering $6 million for the property, which was purchased for almost $2 million less.

“Without the support of the Muslim leaders, the construction of the center would have been problematic from the developers’ point of view,” says Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause/New York and a supporter of the planned center.

The Muslim leaders’ meeting comes just more than a week after the 9/11 observance at ground zero, after which groups either opposed to the construction of the mosque or in favor of it peacefully demonstrated in the streets nearby. The night of Sept. 10, a broad coalition called Neighbors for American Values held a candelit vigil in support of the center.

The construction of the mosque has also become a political battleground. Republicans Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich, as well as Sen. Harry Reid (D) of Nevada, the majority leader, have come out against the proposed mosque. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an independent, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) of Utah, and Sen. Richard Durbin (D) of Illinois, the second ranking Democrat, have supported the Cordoba Initiative, as it is sometimes known.

Locally, the Republican candidate for governor, Carl Paladino, has said he will try to take over the project through the right of eminent domain. The Democratic candidate for governor, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, says the group has a legal right to build the center and says he sees no reason to investigate the donors or funding for the building.

The controversy became even more heated when right before the 9/11 anniversary, a Florida preacher, the Rev. Terry Jones, threatened to burn copies of the Quran at his church in Gainesville. Mr. Jones flew to New York after announcing he had an agreement from Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who conceived of the Park51 project, to move the mosque.

That announcement proved to be wrong, but Jones suspended the burning of the religious books.

However, the Council on American Islamic Relations reports that some American Muslims are finding burned copies of the Quran outside their mosques.

That’s one reason the groups meeting in New York have also called for a national week of dialogue starting around Oct. 22, when mosques will hold open houses. The purpose of the open houses, said the group in a statement, is to help allay tensions caused by Park51 and to “build bridges of understanding that unite and strengthen our nation.”

 

[Solomon2]

It's good, very good - the more the opposition, the better as far as i can see - the more they oppose, the more it will awake Muslims of the US and who in turn must awaken the rest of the US - the US must not be thought of as some back water place populated by ignorants - slowly, but continuously the agitation must be legal, must be focused on defeating the notion that it's OK to demean Islam -

The Constitutional right to build the mosque is not in doubt, so portraying this as such a battle is false. The decision to go forward with Cordoba House, then, is seen as a test of Muslim taste. The more support Cordoba House has from Muslims, the more Islam will be demeaned - seen by non-Muslims as a cruel religion that cares nothing for the feelings of the relatives of victims slain by extremists who claim to act in its cause.

Muslims in the U.S. may indeed wake up - and decide they've had enough of Islam. Non-Muslims will conclude that Islam is morally inferior to other religions. Surely the number of Americans interested in converting to Islam will decline.

And I suspect "anti-Muslim" acts by legal authorities will increase. For example, a new trend has been for Muslims to harass non-Muslims for walking their dogs near mosques (but not on mosque property). It's perfectly legal to walk one's dog this way, and for years it wasn't an issue, but now Muslims suddenly find offense. That sort of conduct by Muslims won't be tolerated, and the authorities may choose to prosecute such harassment as religiously-motivated hate crimes.

"If you can have a mosque near Ground Zero, I have every right to walk a dog near your mosque and have it piss on the fire hydrant outside its door (in the public right-of-way) without you complaining about it."

 

[gambit]

The Constitutional right to build the mosque is not in doubt, so portraying this as such a battle is false. The decision to go forward with Cordoba House, then, is seen as a test of Muslim taste. The more support Cordoba House has from Muslims, the more Islam will be demeaned - seen by non-Muslims as a cruel religion that cares nothing for the feelings of the relatives of victims slain by extremists who claim to act in its cause.

Muslims in the U.S. may indeed wake up - and decide they've had enough of Islam. Non-Muslims will conclude that Islam is morally inferior to other religions. Surely the number of Americans interested in converting to Islam will decline.

And I suspect "anti-Muslim" acts by legal authorities will increase. For example, a new trend has been for Muslims to harass non-Muslims for walking their dogs near mosques (but not on mosque property). It's perfectly legal to walk one's dog this way, and for years it wasn't an issue, but now Muslims suddenly find offense. That sort of conduct by Muslims won't be tolerated, and the authorities may choose to prosecute such harassment as religiously-motivated hate crimes.

"If you can have a mosque near Ground Zero, I have every right to walk a dog near your mosque and have it piss on the fire hydrant outside its door (in the public right-of-way) without you complaining about it."

It goes this way:

Muslims' rights trumps non-muslims' sensitivities and muslims' sensitivities trumps non-muslims' rights.

Not just Americans but the Euros are getting fed up with this. This Ground Zero triumphalist structure, or 'mosque', issue will go away. Either it will be built and New Yorkers and the rest of America will put up with it. Or it will be relocate elsewhere. But no matter which way, this will ensure Americans' negative opinions of muslims and Islam for a very long time. Rauf wanted attention for himself and he got it. Whether he cared for the rest of the muslim community in America or not is another issue for debate.

 

[muse]

Sol

Everything you have said is spot on! It's exactly the kinds of things that must happen and I think we should be focused beyond these sorts of "reaction" - Simply by referring to "them" not as Americans but as a religious minority, you and Gambit and many others affirm the position that the struggle is that of a religious minority, and therefore must be based within the framework of rights.

Your assertion that opposers do not deny that Muslims have the same rights as other Americans, is admission of the correctness of framing the issue as a "rights" issue - I hope we see just the kinds of reaction you suggest.

 

[Jigs]

The Constitutional right to build the mosque is not in doubt, so portraying this as such a battle is false. The decision to go forward with Cordoba House, then, is seen as a test of Muslim taste. The more support Cordoba House has from Muslims, the more Islam will be demeaned - seen by non-Muslims as a cruel religion that cares nothing for the feelings of the relatives of victims slain by extremists who claim to act in its cause.

Muslims in the U.S. may indeed wake up - and decide they've had enough of Islam. Non-Muslims will conclude that Islam is morally inferior to other religions. Surely the number of Americans interested in converting to Islam will decline.

And I suspect "anti-Muslim" acts by legal authorities will increase. For example, a new trend has been for Muslims to harass non-Muslims for walking their dogs near mosques (but not on mosque property). It's perfectly legal to walk one's dog this way, and for years it wasn't an issue, but now Muslims suddenly find offense. That sort of conduct by Muslims won't be tolerated, and the authorities may choose to prosecute such harassment as religiously-motivated hate crimes.

"If you can have a mosque near Ground Zero, I have every right to walk a dog near your mosque and have it piss on the fire hydrant outside its door (in the public right-of-way) without you complaining about it."

Is it our fault 70% of the U.S. thinks 9/11 attacks have a direct relations to regular Muslims ? Like i said take it up with the people that did it. You know the few hundred of members of Al-Qaeda. These 9/11 victim families have no say when it comes to their "sensitivity" as the mosque has no relation to terrorists that killed their family members. Of course the Muslims that died on 9/11 are automatically screwed over right ? What a joke. There isn't even a credible argument here.

That last part proves my point.


In fact your playing right into what Osama wants. He wants the "non believers" to stand against Muslims. It proves his point too

 

[SMC]

Muslims' rights trumps non-muslims' sensitivities and muslims' sensitivities trumps non-muslims' rights.

Not really. From what we saw with the prophet Muhammad cartoons, muslims' sensitivities were brushed aside and cartoons were continued to be drawn and freedom of speech was implemented. In other words, your own laws were followed.

So to be consistent, the sensitivities in this case should be irrelevant in front of the law. The law should be followed. If the mosque does not go ahead, the opposite of what you said will be done - i.e. Non-Muslims' rights trumps Muslims' sensitivities and Non-Muslims' sensitivities trumps Muslims' rights.

 

[gambit]

Not really. From what we saw with the prophet Muhammad cartoons, muslims' sensitivities were brushed aside and cartoons were continued to be drawn and freedom of speech was implemented. In other words, your own laws were followed.

So to be consistent, the sensitivities in this case should be irrelevant in front of the law. The law should be followed. If the mosque does not go ahead, the opposite of what you said will be done - i.e. Non-Muslims' rights trumps Muslims' sensitivities and Non-Muslims' sensitivities trumps Muslims' rights.

Now THAT is funny. Do note that this is a publicly available and accessible forum. Anyway...IF this Ground Zero triumphalist structure is not built, it will NOT be because of anyone's right. The American non-muslims infidels who object to this 'mosque' are not asserting any 'right' but voicing their sensitivities. When you convinced someone to your position, whether you asked for a pay raise, or negotiated a lower mortgage rate, or got a pretty girl to drop her panties for you, you asserted no 'right' but that your PERSUASIONS were successful. You have a 'right' to present your arguments, aka 'persuasions' or 'sensitivities', but you do not have any 'right' to impose your sensitivities upon your targets. This confusion between the two I have seen many times in my experiences in the ME.

 

[SMC]

Now THAT is funny. Do note that this is a publicly available and accessible forum.

I am assuming you didn't read the rest of the post, because if you did, what I said makes perfect sense and several other Americans have acknowledged that.

Anyway...IF this Ground Zero triumphalist structure is not built, it will NOT be because of anyone's right. The American non-muslims infidels who object to this 'mosque' are not asserting any 'right' but voicing their sensitivities. When you convinced someone to your position, whether you asked for a pay raise, or negotiated a lower mortgage rate, or got a pretty girl to drop her panties for you, you asserted no 'right' but that your PERSUASIONS were successful. You have a 'right' to present your arguments, aka 'persuasions' or 'sensitivities', but you do not have any 'right' to impose your sensitivities upon your targets. This confusion between the two I have seen many times in my experiences in the ME.

Yes.

But your point is? I am assuming you meant that muslims tried to impose their sensitivities on the westerners in the case of Prophet Muhammad cartoons, but I don't see how that's the case unless you mean those who made death threats represent all muslims.

It is irrelevant to what I said anyway, and bringing in irrelevant points (i.e. making a diversion) is not a good argument technique.