Thread: Islam Ctr Planned Next to Ground Zero

Originally Posted by phomsanuk

Islamic extremists are not followers of Muhammad or maybe they just can't read,

• A white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.
  Muhammad Quote
• Even as the fingers of the two hands are equal, so are human beings equal to one another. No one has any right, nor any preference to claim over another.
  Muhammad Quote
  
• Do not consider any act of kindness insignificant, even meeting your brother with a cheerful face.
  Muhammad Quote
• The strong man is not the good wrestler; the strong man is only the one who controls himself when he is angry.
  Muhammad Quote
• A man's true wealth here after is the good he does in this world to his fellow man.
  Muhammad Quote
• The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
  Muhammad Quote
• One hour's meditation on the work of the Creator is better than seventy years of prayer.
  Muhammad Quote
• Do you love your creator? Love your fellow-beings first.
  Muhammad Quote
• Shall I not inform you of a better act than fasting, alms, and prayers? Making peace between one another: enmity and malice tear up heavenly rewards by the roots.
  Muhammad Quote

I find this very interesting - can you quote chapter and or verse ? - I would like to use this information to contradict some extremists with whom I have been debating strongly - would be a nice twist to throw the bastards off?

Originally Posted by Nawty

I hope the muzzies get their mosque right bang in the middle of that sacred area.....would be good to see race relations restored.....

I'd like to see that ! ( hang on , restored to what ?)

Originally Posted by larvidchr

Much can be said about to what extend collateral damage in form of civilian lifes are acceptable, but the numbers speak their own truth, not many wars have ever been fought on such a grand scale with so few civilian "casualities" as the present campaign in Afghanistan, there is no comparison with WWII terror-bombings of the big cities like for-instance Dresden, or the bombings of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

Not sure if comparing numbers of so-called "collateral damage" with deaths caused by the direct targeting in Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia is fair. But anyway.... It was the idea of a few civilian casualties that interested me.

Below is part of an article I found when looking for numbers of civilian casualties in Iraq. Others put the number at 150,000, but I think I've heard higher. You can judge the numbers for yourself used by this study using fairly strict criteria.

It's hard to judge what is a "reasonable number of acceptable civilian casualties" is, but the test I ask myself is what if somebody came over here and started shooting, bombing, droning, herding, killing the place up. Using that perspective is at least one test of what's reasonable for each of us.

We based our data set on the number of Iraqi civilian deaths recorded as of June 13, 2008, for the 5-year period of analysis, March 20, 2003, through March 19, 2008. Of the total of 91,358 Iraqi civilian deaths from armed violence recorded for this period, we excluded 10,027 deaths from prolonged violence (e.g., the two sieges of Fallujah and prolonged episodes of violence during the invasion of March 20, 2003, through April 30, 2003), and 20,850 deaths recorded only in aggregate reports from morgues and hospitals, since these deaths were not reliably linked to specific events of a weapon's use. As our table shows, we focused on the remaining 60,481 deaths of Iraqi civilians and the causative weapons in 14,196 armed-violence events considered to be of short duration (lasting up to two calendar dates), occurring in an identifiable location, and directly causing one or more reported civilian deaths. Each death included in the table is of an individual noncombatant and is linked to a type of weapon used in a specific time and place; these are not estimates extrapolated from a sample.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

Numbers of Iraqi Civilians, Female Civilians, and Children Killed by Particular Weapons in Short-Duration Events of Armed Violence, March 20, 2003, through March 19, 2008. (See interactive table.)

The greatest proportion of victims — 19,706 of 60,481, or 33% — were killed by execution after abduction or capture. Of the bodies of those who were executed, 5760, or 29%, showed marks of torture, such as bruises, drill holes, or burns. (A typical media report about this particularly appalling form of violent death reads: "The bullet-riddled bodies bore signs of torture and their hands were tied behind their backs.") Iraqi civilians also suffered heavy tolls from small-arms gunfire in open shootings and firefights (20% of deaths), apart from executions involving gunfire, and from suicide bombs (14% of deaths).

In events with at least one Iraqi civilian victim, the methods that killed the most civilians per event were aerial bombings (17 per event), combined use of aerial and ground weapons (17 per event), and suicide bombers on foot (16 per event). Aerial bombs killed, on average, 9 more civilians per event than aerial missiles (17 vs. 8 per event). Indeed, if an aerial bomb killed civilians at all, it tended to kill many. It seems clear from these findings that to protect civilians from indiscriminate harm, as required by international humanitarian law (including the Geneva Conventions),4 military and civilian policies should prohibit aerial bombing in civilian areas unless it can be demonstrated — by monitoring of civilian casualties, for example — that civilians are being protected.
Suicide bombers in Iraq are mainly used strategically by sectarian or insurgent forces, with deployment at targets after apparently coordinated planning.5 Although the bomb's blast is undiscriminating, the individual bomber is not. A suicide bomber on foot acts as a precision weapon — a close-quarters "smart bomb" whose pattern of killing many civilians at a time can result only from either disregard for civilians when targeting opposition forces or direct targeting of civilians. When combatant forces intentionally target civilians, they commit a war crime and violate international humanitarian law pertaining to both international and civil armed conflicts.4

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article22432.htm

^ *sob* Of course no Taleban killed any innocents. Oh, and please remind me, how many Kurds did Hussein kill?

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ *sob* Of course no Taleban killed any innocents. Oh, and please remind me, how many Kurds did Hussein kill?

Did you read that?
It clearly states both sides have been killing civilians.
Of course we now have the new leaks that are showing a lot more killed by western forces than they admitted.

Can you excuse the lies about the numbers murdered?

The Community centre (I still don't know if it will actually contain a Mosque, or a prayer room) is not visible from Ground Zero.

It is about a five minute walk from the nearest side of GZ. Maybe more, in crowded Manhattan.

The 911 atrocity was carried out by Saudi's. The organisation behind the Community centre is Malaysian. It is moderate.

The centre will be open to people of all Faiths.

Whats all the fuss about?

The only "fuss" should be about the kind of people who are trying to stir up shit about this. One Lady I've mentioned earlier in this thread (she's an absolute nutter & conspiracy theorist). Another prominent organiser, Mark Williams, was recently ejected from the Tea Party movement along with the organisation he chaired, being the Tea Parrty Express, for making racist comments on his website. In this case about American negroes.

Those two seem to have a lot more in common with the perpetrators of 911 than the organisation and people behind this Community centre.

How many Muslims were killed during the plane crashes on the WT centre and the Pentagon?

Why shouldn't a mosque be built there.

As long as they are not breaking any laws, I don't have a problem with it.

People are getting way too sensitive these days.

Originally Posted by mr Fred

Can you excuse the lies about the numbers murdered?

War is war. The taleban uses women, children and civilian men as shields and also indoctrinates some. Do NATO forces do that? No. There are always civilian casualties in war. We'll ensure nobody ever helps you when you are in need.

Originally Posted by Pol the Pot

How many Muslims were killed during the plane crashes on the WT centre and the Pentagon?
Why shouldn't a mosque be built there.

Hey, why not put a shrine to Pol Pot next to all the Killing Fields museums and memorials? They were mostly all Cambodians that he had slaughtered. You should write to the place in Seattle; they're lefties and would surely agree.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Hey, why not put a shrine to Pol Pot next to all the Killing Fields museums and memorials? They were mostly all Cambodians that he had slaughtered. You should write to the place in Seattle; they're lefties and would surely agree.

Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, better tear down all the churches in Oklahoma City.

Just came across another article on the Mosque at Ground Zero.


The Man Who Would Stop the Ground Zero Mosque

By Pamela Geller


When was the last time you heard a politician talking like Carl Paladino?

Carl Paladino, a Republican candidate for Governor of New York, has come out against the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero.

"As Governor," Paladino said Wednesday in a radio ad, "I will use the power of eminent domain to stop this mosque and make the site a war memorial instead of a monument to those who attacked our country."

I like this guy. I really like this guy. If the Supreme Court could rule, in the notorious 2005 decision Kelo v. City of New London, that the government could seize private property for a private developer and then never develop the property, surely Americans should be able to use eminent domain to designate the Burlington Coat Factory building a war memorial.

That building is a war memorial since part of one of the 9/11 airplanes crashed into it, causing severe damage. That makes the building a war memorial, no less than Gettysburg or Pearl Harbor. There should be no mosque there, and nothing there but a memorial to the people that America lost to that heinous Islamic jihad attack on September 11, 2001.

Instead of a mega-mosque at Ground Zero, we should build on that site a museum dedicated to the 9/11 victims. That will give us the opportunity to redress yet another insult: the current plan for a 9/11 museum is several floors underground, like a dungeon. In contrast, the plan for the "Islamic center" at the Burlington Coat Factory site calls for the mosque to be on the top floor of a thirteen- or fifteen-story building, looking down triumphantly on the burial ground of Ground Zero.

I don't think so.

The Burlington Coat Factory building must be designated a war memorial, a historic landmark. It is part of American history. To do anything less would be sacrilege, let alone build a 15-story mosque. And so far only Carl Paladino has the guts to say so. Three thousand good and decent Americans did not die in vain on September 11, 2001. And we have not forgotten them, even if Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg and the rest of the New York political establishment have. The fact that they ignore the historical significance of the building is outrageous, and disrespects the victims of 9/11.

"I've been driving land-use issues for 40 years," says Paladino, "and I understand the full powers of the governor. If the ACLU or anyone else wants to challenge me in court, I'm ready for the fight."

I like his moxie. Not surprisingly, his Democrat opponent Andrew Cuomo is for the mosque. Paladino explains: "Andrew Cuomo supports the mosque. He says it is about religious freedom and he says the mosque construction should proceed."

Didn't New York suffer enough under Cuomo statism during the gubernatorial reign of Andrew's father Mario Cuomo? Enough with these political dynasties. Paladino knows that the issue of the Ground Zero mega-mosque isn't about religious freedom at all: "I say it is disrespectful to the thousands who died on 9-11 and their families, insulting to the thousands of troops who've been killed or injured in the ensuing wars and an affront to American people. And it must be stopped."

Paladino explains why it should be stopped, too. Ground Zero mosque imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is an open proponent of Sharia, Islamic law, a system that denies free speech and the legal equality of all people. Paladino knows what Sharia, Islamic law, involves -- and the implications of Rauf's open support for Sharia. Paladino said: "There is little to no democracy in the Middle East other than Israel. The Islamic fundamentalists are Fascists -- women have limited rights, there is no free speech or freedom of expression, and citizens are subject to the often barbaric Sharia Law. I oppose a mosque near the site of Ground Zero, not because of race, but because of the ideology of the Islamic fundamentalists."

Do you really want that ideology taught at a mega-mosque in lower Manhattan? If this mosque is built, it will be a lasting blemish on the record of Mayor Bloomberg and all the other politicians who supported it. History will judge them harshly. Very harshly.

When was the last time you heard a politician talking like Carl Paladino? Outside of Sarah Palin, that is.

Let's elect real people who understand real problems, and are unafraid to address real issues. Paladino for Governor.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs website and former associate publisher of the New York Observer. She is the author of The Post-American Presidency (coming July 27 from Simon & Schuster).

Originally Posted by pickel

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Hey, why not put a shrine to Pol Pot next to all the Killing Fields museums and memorials? They were mostly all Cambodians that he had slaughtered. You should write to the place in Seattle; they're lefties and would surely agree.

Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, better tear down all the churches in Oklahoma City.

Better to get the facts right, McVeigh did not claim to be a Christian seeing himself as an agnostic. Just because he was born into a Christian family it is not correct to describe him as one, a Christian has to be a practicing believer, not just one who was baptised as a baby. His motivations, including his Waco support were politically motivated and has nothing at all to do with religion.

Timothy McVeigh: A CHRISTIAN TERRORIST? < Articles < TEAM

How anyone could say McVeigh was a Christian is beyond this writer’s mind. His action and deeds definitely does not reflect that of a virtuous believer. Even more, there has not been any quotation of the Oklahoma City Bomber professing any Christian faith. Barker does not quote a single reference to back his allegation. On the contrary we see that there is documentation that he did not accept the Christian faith.
In an article by United Kingdom’s “The Guardian?about McVeigh’s execution, we find this reference:

“In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife. "If I'm going to hell," he wrote, "I'm gonna have a lot of company." His body is to be cremated and his ashes scattered in a secret location.?Endnote 7

Note the above that McVeigh “said he was an agnostic?but not only that, but that he was defiant about hell itself and remain unrepentant. Then we also find the same statement that he was an agnostic admitted by Lou Michel during a cyber interview with CNN. Lou Michel spent hours interviewing McVeigh in writing a book titled, “American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing? Michel’s words are enlightening:

Lou Michel: McVeigh is agnostic. He doesn't believe in God, but he won't rule out the possibility. I asked him, ‘What if there is a heaven and hell??Endnote 8

He said that once he crosses over the line from life to death, if there is something on the other side, he will -- and this is using his military jargon ?‘adapt, improvise, and overcome.?Death to him is all part of the adventure.?/font>
Conclusion

If McVeigh never admitted to being a Christian but rather stated that he was an agnostic, how did Dan Barker and others come to this false conclusion? It appears that at least in Barker’s case, he desires to hijack this false assertion to take the opportunity to slander Christianity. Whatever is the case, God would be the ultimate Judge and its this author’s prayer that Barker and others like him repent to knowing knowledge of Jesus as Lord and Savior.
By Jimmy Li

Originally Posted by pickel

Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, better tear down all the churches in Oklahoma City.

Erm, is anyone asking for the 90 or so mosques in NYC to be torn down? No. Is the city allowing any new churches to be built?

Originally Posted by Pol the Pot

Pol Potists weren't executed. The KR that were killed were all traitors, remember? So not really a good comparison.

On the other hand, peaceful Muslims were working at the WTC. Don't they deserve a memorial? Not an Islamic supremacist mega-mosque of course.

So, all the people that Pottie killed were traitors? Traitors to whom?

This mosque ain't a memorial. It's the Cordoba House. Do you know why the first Cordoba House was built?
Muslims working at the WTCs in the USA. Crikey; they musta been capitalists. Lemmeesee, memorials to dead Americans in muslim countries...you got some proof of those being built in muslim countries? Give them memorials at home where their families live. Don't sully America with this travesty of faith and remembrance.

So, all the people that Pottie killed were traitors? Traitors to whom?
Most were, in his and the party's eyes. Or Vietnamese.Traitors of the faith, one could say.Look, I'm not American, I'm not that involved with what's happening at the former WTC site. All I'm saying is that if they actually do put up memorials for the different religious denominations that were killed there, they should include one for Muslims. It's not necessarily something I'd agree with but it would be fairer.

Originally Posted by Thaiguy

Just came across another article on the Mosque at Ground Zero.


The Man Who Would Stop the Ground Zero Mosque

By Pamela Geller

Good story from the same site cstill claiming Obama is a Muslim.
American Thinker: Report: Obama said 'I Am a Muslim'

Classy site if you like reading total bollocks.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

This mosque ain't a memorial. It's the Cordoba House. Do you know why the first Cordoba House was built?.

Here we go again.
It's called that because of this.

BBC - Religions - Islam: Muslim Spain (711-1492)

It was considered a time when all the major religions lived together in peace.

Hey, take a virtual walk from the closest edge of WTC to Cordoba house- and see what you think.





It's a bit less than I thought then- about 2.5 minutes. Actually I've walked past Park Place a number of times- pretty sure I've never been down there. It's a particularly nondescript lower Manhattan street.

I think it will be a good thing for the local residents- it's modeled on the 92nd St YMCA, and offers similar facilities. Then again, the local residents are not the ones objecting to the Leisure Centre- they're a pretty cosmopolitan bunch around that end of town.

For that matter, the 92nd St Y has a whole lot of Jewish events going on there- but nobody calls it a Synagogue. Cordoba Place will not be a Mosque either- it's a Leisure centre with a Prayer room, not to mention basketball courts, a food court, meeting rooms and so on.

Anyway it's already been approved, the local residents are in favour of it, and Mayor Bloomberg has already said the small but noisy element that oppose it will get nowhere. Apart from the hardcore Islamophobes, I think most of them are just plain misinformed by the loaded rhetoric- it is not "at" GZ at all! Nothing to see here, don't waste your time.

^ "It's a leisure centre." Ya, I guess taking your shoes off, facing Mecca and praying five times a day is leisurely. They gonna allow women to use the pool without burka dress? I been around that area coz I worked at WTC7.
The name Cordoba is a sign of victory for these folks after they killed off the infidels.

It's already been approved, due to open in 2012. There is another Moslem prayer room a couple of blocks away as well. And Muzzies already pray at the ex-WTC in the open air! Something to do with mourning the dead.

Oh, and the food court will serve Halal food from around the world. So if you feel like a decent kebab, or a satay, do pop by. Betcha it will be a load cheaper than anything available at the new GZ thing, whatever they've got planned!

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

The name Cordoba is a sign of victory for these folks after they killed off the infidels. ________________

No no Jet, it's named after a period in Spain only 1100 years ago when they lived in 'peace' with the filthy infidel ie not quite so many pogroms as later. What an insult where are all the offended and outraged infidel voices? I wonder what the reaction would be to a Church, sorry community center, called the crusader planned somewhere in Mecca?

Of course all they arguments are based around not allowing Muslims in because of 9/11.
Can someone please explain why all Muslims are responsible for the actions of a few.

^ If it came to war, would you stand for England or for allah, Fred?