The Controversy of building a mosque in close proximity to WTC?

[wellendowed1911]

Hello, I would love to hear what you gusy think of the proposed idea of building a mosque within 2 blocks from the WtC? I have been paying close attention to this topic, because I am originally from New York and actually had a classmate that died in the WTC so it does hit home, however I must be honest with myself- for those individuals who are against building the Mosque I believe it sends a signal that all muslims were responsible for 9-11- which just isnt the case.
How would Christians react if someone said you couldn't build a church near the site of the OKC bombings because Timothy McVeigh was a Christian. Yes, I do see the the difficulty of having a mosque near the WTC because many will never forget the pain, but to punish the good law abiding muslims is not the right idea.

[dirty dog]

I have heard that there are some questionable associations with the cleric and radical Islam, if this is in fact not true then. I would not be in opposition to their building it there.

[Cheaper2buyit]

I think it would be good & healing however all the money should come from the usa. Good thread.

[john_galt]

The problem with the McVeigh analogy is that no modern christian religion demands that you kill non-adherents but Islam does just that. So McVeigh would be acting against his religion whereas the hijackers were promoting their religion by killing infidels. Yes, there are sects of Islam who claim to be peaceful but I don't hear much from them.

Restoring or building a building is not a right especially in NYC. Since it is not a right the authorities have within their power to just say NO!. The will of the people of NYC should be observed. Is it because it is a mosque? Probably but haven't we stop strip clubs from being built near churches? The answer is, Yes we have.

Do I trust this a**hole who is behind this? Not a chance. We should investigate his funding and any other related organizations. Too many radical associations with suspected terrorist funding organizations.

Imagine the US having an opportunity to build a base inside our enemies territory with their okay!!! That is what we have here.

[lookn2u4fun69]

Let em build it so we can blow it up! I am definitely firmly against any mosque being constructed anywhere close to the WTC. To me its like a slap in the face and disrespectful to who were killed, injured and or participated in the rescue operation.

[dirty dog]

It should be pointed out that there were in fact muslims killed in the WTC on Sept 11th, would there be an objection to building a christian church there. To those who claim that christianity is not used as a pretext for murder, might want to read up on the crusades. Have you read the koran, show me what page in the koran that it says to kill. I think what you will find is that like the bible the koran has been used by radicals who bastardize it for their own beliefs, much as the catholic church did during the crusades Hitler did during the jewish genocide.

[Guest052813-01]

Quite frankly, I am opposed to erecting any building at the site of the WTC except for a tower (or pair of towers) that equal or are greater than the height of the Twin Towers. As to who occupies the buildings would be up to the owners - they could put a non-denominational prayer room in one of the floors to allow all religions to practice there. I would not want to build a church, synagogue or mosque in the area unless there was one there that was destroyed on 9/11. Put the money to better use than to waste it on religion.

[lacrew_2000]

If its private property, I say let them...I certainly don't like it one bit...but what can you do. Now, I don't know much about the ins and outs of the property...is it controlled by the Port Authority? Is the property taxable? Does the Port Authority typically have a say in what is built?

What I'm getting at is, if typically a relious building would not be permitted, because it takes precious Manhattan real estate without being taxable, I don't think any sort of exeption should be made.

[1963Cobra]

I would agree with DD as with all religions some radical fringe will and has made their version of the religion match there choices. There are good muslims as there are bad christians. We have freedom of religion in this country and no where does it say that because something bad happened you can't have a place of worship. Is it in bad taste yes should it be stopped i don't think so. But i can certaintly agree with those who lost someone on 911 putting up a fight to stop it. No federal funds - no state funds, if it's all private funding and it meets building codes and development codes then i don't think it can be stopped.

[nsafun05]

Originally Posted by dirty dog

It should be pointed out that there were in fact muslims killed in the WTC on Sept 11th, would there be an objection to building a christian church there. To those who claim that christianity is not used as a pretext for murder, might want to read up on the crusades. Have you read the koran, show me what page in the koran that it says to kill. I think what you will find is that like the bible the koran has been used by radicals who bastardize it for their own beliefs, much as the catholic church did during the crusades Hitler did during the jewish genocide.

It should be pointed out the John Galt hit on one very important point and that is "no modern christian religion demands that you kill non-adherents".

The Bible can essentially be broken into two halves, the Old Testament and the New Testament. While the Old Testament contains good information, it is the New Testament that Christianity is based (the teachings of Christ). In the New Testament the 'eye for an eye' philosophy was rejected by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount where he says:

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
-Matthew 5:38-42

For those who would argue that the Crusades where a Christian or Catholic war against Muslims and advocated violence, I suggest that your history be reread. For the Crusades ORIGINALLY had the goal of recapturing Jerusalem and the Holy Land from Muslim rule and were launched IN RESPONSE to a call from the Christian Byzantine Empire for help against the expansion of the Muslim Seljuk Turks into Anatolia.


From the website answering-islam.org, here are some explanations of surah that refer to killing infidels.

2.1.1 Those that rejected Islam were to be killed. This was to be obeyed even if it meant a son had to help murder his father.
2.1.2 Muhammad intended for jihad against non-Muslims to go indefinitely.
2.2.1 The general rule was to invite people to convert to Islam and give them 3 days to consider. If they refuse, make war upon them and kill them.
2.2.2 Muhammad’s blanket of domination spread much farther than the Hijaz.
2.3.1 A great amount of killing was done to force people to become Muslims, either willingly or unwillingly.
2.3.2&3 The early Muslims used the sword to "convert" people to Islam.
2.3.4 People who chose to leave Islam were forced to re-convert or suffer and die.
2.4.2&3 The people of Iraq were forced to convert to Islam, pay extortion, or fight and die.
2.4.4&5 The people of Persia were forced to convert to Islam, pay extortion, or fight and die. Notice the similarity between what Khalid wrote and what Muhammad said in 9:5?


"In sum, force was used to compel a hell of a lot of people to become Muslims. This included people who were intimidated into joining Islam while Muhammad lived, as well as people far away from the local Pagan tribes in the Hijaz, after Muhammad died. The "People of the Book" were treated in a nearly identical fashion to how the polytheists were treated but had the option to pay an extortion tax to remain true to their faiths, otherwise they too had to convert or die. We’ll be taking a look at verse 9:29 which describes how they are to be treated later.
In every example above, when Muslims confronted non-Muslims, the threat of war and death was used to convert people. Here, the actions are speaking and they are saying the same thing that the words said: "convert to Islam or die." These actions depict exactly what 9:5 (or 9:29) command on both a local and global scale. These actions say that jihad was to be a worldwide effort."


As far as Muslims being in the Towers when they were attacked, radical muslims didn't care because:


Sura 5:51: “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.” This friendship makes any Muslim a enemy of their own and deserving of the same fate as the unbeliever.


So while there are peaceful muslims, they essentially go against a great deal of what is taught in the koran and thus they are not true followers of the faith.

[Cheaper2buyit]

After my first post I don't know if I should comment on what I have read. Are we in the 21st centry or what. Look I have read the koran & i have read a lot of jewish text & a lot of bible torah & other scripts. But what we have is fear here of something people don't understand. I mean what if blacks were scared of churches because the kkk loved to burn crosses on peoples yard & they really loved to burn down churches. Or what about whats going on in ireland. The koran is no more violet then the whole bible now let me add that their is a lot that is not in the king james bible things that have been censored to keep it in a good light & there are things that the vatican has hidden. & last don't forget who killed Jesus. The old world was violet lets move on in life & get along

[john_galt]

violet??? Don't you mean posies?
Blacks and churches??? Non sequitor...
Ireland? maybe you haven't heard things have been very quiet there for a number of years now.

Okay, enough jumping on Cheaper but his writing impediment makes it soooo easy.

The Torah does not say kill unbelievers. They did make war in the old testament and often committed genocide but that was 2,000 years ago. Remember, Jesus told the Jews not to make war against the Romans. Christians evolved over a couple hundred years after the time of Jesus and a lot of that had to do with Paul. He put forth the idea that violence was wrong (which explains the number of martyrs in Rome). The Buddhists? non-violent. The Muslims? Wow, where to begin? I can't top what NSA has written because my copy of the Koran is a paperback version that is probably not the same as yours so the pages don't match. Still the Koran is chocked full of kill the non-believers. Lets see what Islam has done starting with Mohammed. The Kabba existed long before Islam but when Mohammed rolled into Mecca he built a mosque over it. When the Muslims rolled into Jerusalem they built a mosque on the Temple Mount the holiest site for the Jews. When the muslims rolled into Valencia, Barcelona, Constantinople, mosques next to or on top where a church was sitting. The muslims believe in symbolism and how can you argue that putting a mosque on the site of their biggest coup would net them mucho brownie points in their idea of heaven. They may even get a couple of virgins with some professional training.

About who killed Jesus, Jesus was Jewish or did you know that? So we can knock off the anti-semetism.

[dirty dog]

Originally Posted by john_galt

violet??? Don't you mean posies?
Blacks and churches??? Non sequitor...
Ireland? maybe you haven't heard things have been very quiet there for a number of years now.

Okay, enough jumping on Cheaper but his writing impediment makes it soooo easy.

The Torah does not say kill unbelievers. They did make war in the old testament and often committed genocide but that was 2,000 years ago. Remember, Jesus told the Jews not to make war against the Romans. Christians evolved over a couple hundred years after the time of Jesus and a lot of that had to do with Paul. He put forth the idea that violence was wrong (which explains the number of martyrs in Rome). The Buddhists? non-violent. The Muslims? Wow, where to begin? I can't top what NSA has written because my copy of the Koran is a paperback version that is probably not the same as yours so the pages don't match. Still the Koran is chocked full of kill the non-believers. Lets see what Islam has done starting with Mohammed. The Kabba existed long before Islam but when Mohammed rolled into Mecca he built a mosque over it. When the Muslims rolled into Jerusalem they built a mosque on the Temple Mount the holiest site for the Jews. When the muslims rolled into Valencia, Barcelona, Constantinople, mosques next to or on top where a church was sitting. The muslims believe in symbolism and how can you argue that putting a mosque on the site of their biggest coup would net them mucho brownie points in their idea of heaven. They may even get a couple of virgins with some professional training.

About who killed Jesus, Jesus was Jewish or did you know that? So we can knock off the anti-semetism.

Would like to sound like a racist, right JG

[Guest052813-01]

I'm just surprised that Cheaper had a post that was very intelligible. Congrats!

This is why I gave up on religion some time ago. I am of the opinion that man created God (or Allah or Yahweh or I Am Who Am, etc.) to keep children and the uninformed "in line" and to do the bidding of the people in charge - why else say "give to the church and your soul will be clean" or "kill non-believers and you'll go right to heaven and have seven vestal virgins waiting for you" - or the fact it took over 400 years to decide whether Jesus was immortal and divine rather than a political prisoner who was executed for challenging the authority of the ruling class.

If you believe in it - more power to you. Shalom. Pax Vobiscum. Assalamu Alaykum.

[lacrew_2000]

Back to the mosque topic...I don't like it being built there, but if its private property, I say let them.

Now, on to the discussions of religion. I don't care about the crusades. I don't care who killed Jesus. All I care about is the right Here and Now. And right Now, we (the western world) have been targeted by muslims. No, not all muslims...but you will have to search very hard to find any prominent muslim leaders who unequivocally denounced the Sep 11 attacks, and follow on attacks in Indonesia. I grow very tired of re-hashing the crusades, when my immediate concerns have nothing to do with that.

This is why I don't like the mosque being built, I am suspicious about their motives, and I think it is a political statement more than the erection of a house of worship....but, I say let them build it. I do have faith that the majority of muslims, once exposed to true American culture, like it...and like Americans...it would be impossible to shut them out, and probably more productive to have them 'mingle' with westerners more.