Ground Zero mosque wins approval !!

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

At one point, a portion of the crowd menacingly surrounded two Egyptian men who were speaking Arabic and were thought to be Muslims.

"Go home," several shouted from the crowd.

"Get out," others shouted.

In fact, the two men – Joseph Nassralla and Karam El Masry — were not Muslims at all. They turned out to be Egyptian Coptic Christians who work for a California-based Christian satellite TV station called "The Way." Both said they had come to protest the mosque.

"I'm a Christian," Nassralla shouted to the crowd, his eyes bulging and beads of sweat rolling down his face.

But it was no use. The protesters had become so angry at what they thought were Muslims that New York City police officers had to rush in and pull Nassralla and El Masry to safety.

"I flew nine hours in an airplane to come here," a frustrated Nassralla said afterward.

"Ground Zero Mosque" protest ends up, predictably, with racially-motivated hatred - War Room - Salon.com

 

[Solomon2]

Yes, the mosques may meet opposition - but they get approved anyway. Minority rights, not "tolerance". We have true freedom of religion here.

 

[waraich66]

Yes, the mosques may meet opposition - but they get approved anyway. Minority rights, not "tolerance". We have true freedom of religion here.

I appreciate freedom of religion .Infact 9/11 attackes were planned to destroy the image of Islam and Muslims.Islam is most favourite religion in Western Countries and America that is reason 45 persons daily converting to Islam in America.

 

[muse]

At one point, a portion of the crowd menacingly surrounded two Egyptian men who were speaking Arabic and were thought to be Muslims.

"Go home," several shouted from the crowd.

"Get out," others shouted.

In fact, the two men – Joseph Nassralla and Karam El Masry — were not Muslims at all. They turned out to be Egyptian Coptic Christians who work for a California-based Christian satellite TV station called "The Way." Both said they had come to protest the mosque.

"I'm a Christian," Nassralla shouted to the crowd, his eyes bulging and beads of sweat rolling down his face.

But it was no use. The protesters had become so angry at what they thought were Muslims that New York City police officers had to rush in and pull Nassralla and El Masry to safety.

"I flew nine hours in an airplane to come here," a frustrated Nassralla said afterward.

"Ground Zero Mosque" protest ends up, predictably, with racially-motivated hatred - War Room - Salon.com

Here's a picture - looking at this, what are people to think ? Why is it that groups hating Islam are in the forefront of political dialogue in the US? Where are ordinary Americans? Is this an unfair thing to ask? After all, Are Muslims not harassed asking why thye did not protest, why they did not act?

Reality of it is that it's unfair to ask this question, most people are busy with their lives -- this issue, really a non-issue, is being used by politicians, it does say something about the quality of the politics, that now has people around the world just compounded.

 

[linkinpark]

Thomas Friedman in NYTimes

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/opinion/04friedman.html?_r=1

Which brings me back to the Muslim community center/mosque, known as Park51. It is proposed to be built two blocks north of where the twin towers stood and would include a prayer space, a 500-seat performing arts center, a swimming pool and a restaurant. The Times reported that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the Muslim leader behind the project, who has led services in TriBeCa since 1983, said he wants the center to help “bridge and heal a divide” among Muslims and other religious groups. “We have condemned the actions of 9/11,” he said.

I greatly respect the feelings of those who lost loved ones on 9/11 — which was perpetrated in the name of Islam — and who oppose this project. Personally, if I had $100 million to build a mosque that promotes interfaith tolerance, I would not build it in Manhattan. I’d build it in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. That is where 9/11 came from, and those are the countries that espouse the most puritanical version of Sunni Islam — a version that shows little tolerance not only for other religions but for other strands of Islam, particularly Shiite, Sufi and Ahmadiyya Islam. You can study Islam at virtually any American university, but you can’t even build a one-room church in Saudi Arabia.

That resistance to diversity, though, is not something we want to emulate, which is why I’m glad the mosque was approved on Tuesday. Countries that choke themselves off from exposure to different cultures, faiths and ideas will never invent the next Google or a cancer cure, let alone export a musical or body of literature that would bring enjoyment to children everywhere.

 

[muse]

Again, the Indian missed the forest for the trees, it had the words Islam and Pakistan in it and he can be forgiven :

That resistance to diversity, though, is not something we want to emulate,

 

[Dance]

Thomas Friedman in NYTimes

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/opinion/04friedman.html?_r=1

I think this Tom Friedmans job is just to sprout BS against Pakistan. I'm not saying Pakistan is as tolerant as the US and I think we should be even more tolerant but then how is our prime minister/president Shia? Why are Hindu temples, churches, etc allowed to be built in Pakistan. Pakistan isn't the most tolerant nation in the world but it certainly isn't as intolerant as Saudi Arabia and some countries in the middle east.

 

[muse]

Friedman and Pakistan-bashing [/B][/SIZE]
Yasser Latif Hamdani



Oscar Wilde once described patriotism as “the virtue of the vicious”. In the many articles published in this newspaper, I have tried to steer clear of the vicious kind of narrow chest-thumping patriotism, preferring Benjamin Franklin’s version instead — a patriot ought to remain true to his country, right or wrong, provided that when his country is wrong, he considers it his patriotic duty to correct it. However, there does come a time when even the most right thinking of patriots are driven into a corner.

In an article that should have had nothing to do with Pakistan, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times subtly dropped the nugget that Pakistanis espouse the most puritanical form of Sunni Islam along with Saudi Arabia (‘Broadway and the Mosque’, NYT, August 4, 2010). As a Pakistani of an entirely non-Sunni background, I am taken aback by this utterly ill informed claim. The reason for my angst: Pakistan is not only the second largest Shia country in the world after Iran, but also houses the largest populations of Ahmedis and Ismailis in the world.

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[Solomon2]

In an article that should have had nothing to do with Pakistan, Thomas Friedman of the New York Times subtly dropped the nugget that Pakistanis espouse the most puritanical form of Sunni Islam

I am not sure that was Friedman's intent. Rather, he may have wanted to highlight Pakistan's role in supporting the Taliban which supported Al Qaeda. Why not write a letter to him and ask?

 

[muse]

Sol

Why not highlight that Israel sold weapons that the US paid for that Pakistan bought to arm the Mujahideen, who morphed into Talib and the talib and US supported Al-Qaida - after all, weren't these arbi US blue eyed boys during the anti-soviet jihad? Maybe you write to freiedman and ask what he thinks about that

 

[Solomon2]

who morphed into Talib -

That "morphing" occurred by the hand and direction of Pakistan, not the U.S. or Israel. As for me writing to Friedman - I'll write my own questions, not those of others. You have as much of the Internet as I do.

 

[muse]

This morphing happened with the full knowledge and acquience of the US - recall what was going on in Afghanistan at the Time the Talib arrived on the scene - review how they arrived and why.

And the fact that they were supported not just by Pakistan but also US and it's allies - The Muj nightmare had to be ended

 

[Solomon2]

This morphing happened with the full knowledge and acquience -

Not by my reading of the relevant diplomatic cables. Example: link. The U.S. originally saw the Taliban only one facet element of Afghanistan, an element in the reconciliation process, not exclusive political rule. Pakistani support was seen (as was an "extremist" anti-American element, i.e. Al-Qaeda) but the extent of Pakistani support was not immediately appreciated.

 

[muse]

Perhaps you may wish to examine much earlier diplomtic cables -1995/96.

The Talib movement started when Mujahideen were less than respectful with two local girls in Kandahar - Mullah omar was a simply a mullah, locals brought this complaint to him and asked for his help to secure the two girls from the Muj warlord -- Omar asked his friends who were former mUj to help him and locals also joined in - this small armed crowd overcame Muj guards at the warlords' complex - this attracted the attention on Pakistani "advisors", new talent, acceptanceby local populace and soon education followed.

At this time Muj groups had begun to take over areas in the country to keep themselves alive by draining the local population - a man I met, who later came to hunt Osama, related that in Kab ul one might leave their house with a bicycle and would have to turn it over to Muj at some checkpoint - in other words the local population was sick of the Muj -- The Talib, he told me, brought order, they were welcomed by all - Once Talib were "victorious", recall none of those victories involved any shooting deaths, gthe suspicions of other groups, read jamiat, were aroused -

Now I mentioned that "education" followed earler Kandahar experience - this was administerd by the ISI, with the full knowledge of the US - that the US did not want Talib sitting on the throne in Kabul is quite true, but that does not mean that theyh did not know who the talib were and did not agree with their tuitleage.

 

[Thomas]

I don't understand ..what is the problem with mosque being built near ground zero...Does any body in US relate 9/11 with Islam??


Would anybody would have found it strange, if instead of mosque a church was being built near ground zero ..I think not, because Christianity as a religion had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks.

Similarly Islam as a religion had nothing do with 9/11 attacks!!

When one can build a mosque any where in US then why not Manhattan ??

Because the attacks are perceived as being done in the name of Islam.