Mosque to go up near New York's ground zero

[Kompromat]

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

One way to convince that you do not belong with extremist ideology is by listening to the victims of the 9/11 and being sensitive to their feelings. My 2 cents. No point arguing here, your religion, your future, you decide.

So you are suggesting that I have to put up with discrimination and prejudice because of someone elses actions?

No can do. The 'victims', if they are against the construction of this mosque on the basis of one particular religion, are the ones that need to show that they do not subscribe to prejudice and support discrimination against a community on the basis of their faith.

 

[EjazR]

Just remember that out of the 3000 victims, more 300+ were muslims.

Moreover, as Daisy Khan who is leading the project mentioned, this is being built on private property and is not being donated by the govt. The NY council is only giving permission for the community centre to be built.

I appreciate the reps of NYC who voted 29-1 in favor of this despite a section of public (wrongly) opposing it for mostly misunderstood reasons.
This ability of these NYC reps to uphold justice rather than play to "public sentiment" shows why America (despite its many flaws) will continue to be one of the greatest civilizations in history.

Its a slap on the face of those Muslim extremists who can't seem to get seem look beyond their American centered conspiracy theories of its war against Islam and at the same time a message to the non-muslim community to change the narrative that look here, Muslims/Islam did not attack us, it was a bunch of criminals and thats it.

The NYC council has got two birds with one stone so to speak

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

At that they do a good job of getting noticed. For non muslim moderates this would be relatively non issue since issues such as these are strictly confined to a very limited people and further there are few instances of violence when you compare it with the situation muslim moderates are in. These makes it even more important for the liberal voices to be heard.

Oh, so now we have double standards for how 'non-Muslim moderates' and 'Muslim moderates' behave. Extremist Muslims don't speak for me, I see no reason why I should do any more than a 'moderate non-Muslim' in the US, and to hold Muslims to a higher standard, compared to non-Muslims, in terms of condemnation of terrorism is one more a discriminatory approach that implicitly seeks to denigrate, vilify and make life harder for an entire community because of the faith they belong to.

As I said before, liberal voice are there, you are the on who chooses to ignore them because to acknowledge them means a blow to your preexisting biases and prejudice.

REally , thats nice to know that arm chair generals have been debating this issue. I used to have debates in my schools. Anyways Any protests ? Any one went on road and made a speach against the government on this issue ? Any peace marches againts this action? And may i know what was the outcome of the debate on our forum? Bet you , you didnt have even a sizeable majority with you, did you?

The outcome of the debate on this forum was the same as the outcome of debates between conservatives and liberals - both sides put their POV across. Op-eds, editorials and discussions on Pakistani media did much the same - some supported the ban and others opposed it.

As for peace marches in Pakistan, there have been several against terrorism over the past few years. I know since I cover multiple Pakistani media outlets to stay abreast of events in Pakistan. How many of those peace marches did you get to watch on the Indian or Western media? I know that I haven't seen a single one covered.

As for protests against censorship, if the people really do feel that the censorship of a particular site is leading to a broader crackdown on access to information, there will probably be protests. As for now it is primarily a couple of sites, and we'll see how long the ban is in place.

Further more this very forum has considerably high number of people who supported this prejudice.

Censoring a site for perceived blasphemous content is not 'prejudice', you are clutching at straws here. Discrimination and resentment against, and vilification of, a particular community on the basis of their faith is prejudice. Pakistan has plenty of that as well, but trying to argue that banning facebook is 'prejudice' is a little silly.

 

[Mogambo]

"The number of mosques in New York City has increased dramatically in a generation, going from under 10 in 1970 to over a 100 in 2001, including 17 in Manhattan. That number is much higher today."


If above is true why provoke local people? How many more mosques are needed. When there is already 17 mosques in Manhattan area where is the 9/11 ground zero is located why build another mosque??

When there is more number of mosques then Muslims in Manhattan why provoke locals?

And when people get provoked call them islamphobic etc. etc.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"The number of mosques in New York City has increased dramatically in a generation, going from under 10 in 1970 to over a 100 in 2001, including 17 in Manhattan. That number is much higher today."


If above is true why provoke local people? How many more mosques are needed. When there is already 17 mosques in Manhattan area where is the 9/11 ground zero is located why build another mosque??

When there is more number of mosques then Muslims in Manhattan why provoke locals?

And when people get provoked call them islamphobic etc. etc.

Why on earth would a mosque 'provoke' people?

I see a Church on almost every block in my neighborhood, and a liquor store on every corner (sometimes two!). I'm not 'provoked' by the sight of all these Churches.

 

[Mogambo]

Why on earth would a mosque 'provoke' people?

I see a Church on almost every block in my neighborhood, and a liquor store on every corner (sometimes two!). I'm not 'provoked' by the sight of all these Churches.

I am not saying "it will" it is provoking local people.

The terrorist who have done 9/11 were Muslims and have done it due to the religious reason/duty (in their point of view).

Now, people get scared and when they will see more and more mosque without substantial reason they will feel more and more Muslims will gather at their city's main business district and possibly some hardliner will brainwash them resulting in danger to their life and property.

It is their land and their culture but it looks to them that immigrants are taking over them. The churches and liquor store are there for hundreds of year now everyone is used to them.

Bu people get scared by unknown things. Specially when they are attached with some bad memories.

 

[gambit]

Oh, so now we have double standards for how 'non-Muslim moderates' and 'Muslim moderates' behave. Extremist Muslims don't speak for me, I see no reason why I should do any more than a 'moderate non-Muslim' in the US, and to hold Muslims to a higher standard, compared to non-Muslims, in terms of condemnation of terrorism is one more a discriminatory approach that implicitly seeks to denigrate, vilify and make life harder for an entire community because of the faith they belong to.

Extremist muslims do not care for you. If anything, extremists are contemptuous of moderates. They may not speak for you but by virtue of shared faith they will act on your behalf whether you wish or even like it or not. We do not expect muslims to condemn child abuse by Catholic priests, do we? No, we expect the most vehement condemnations to be from the Catholics themselves and in doing so we applied an alternate and stricter standard against the Catholics. Additional condemnations from any other quarters would be taken as a unified stance against an atrociousness. But when it comes to Islamist terrorism, we are expected to keep silent?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Extremist muslims do not care for you. If anything, extremists are contemptuous of moderates. They may not speak for you but by virtue of shared faith they will act on your behalf whether you wish or even like it or not. We do not expect muslims to condemn child abuse by Catholic priests, do we? No, we expect the most vehement condemnations to be from the Catholics themselves and in doing so we applied an alternate and stricter standard against the Catholics. Additional condemnations from any other quarters would be taken as a unified stance against an atrociousness. But when it comes to Islamist terrorism, we are expected to keep silent?

Gambit,

I expect vehement condemnations from the Catholic Church of abuse by Catholic priests that operate under the Catholic Church and are appointed by the Church. I do not expect nor demand condemnation from every Catholic I see on the street. I have Catholic and Jewish inlaws - I don't expect them to, nor ask for, condemnation for the Church's mistakes nor for the Israeli State's atrocities.

Now if you think that all Catholics and Jews should be held to a higher standard because of what some in the Church and Israel have done, then I disagree with you just as I disagree with the argument that Muslims have to be held to a 'higher standard' when it comes condemning terrorism.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Bu people get scared by unknown things. Specially when they are attached with some bad memories.

Again, 'two wrongs don't make a right'.

People need to deal with their memories and not start subscribing to the same sort of prejudice that the attackers of the WTC harbored.

 

[gambit]

Gambit,

I expect vehement condemnations from the Catholic Church of abuse by Catholic priests that operate under the Catholic Church and are appointed by the Church. I do not expect nor demand condemnation from every Catholic I see on the street. I have Catholic and Jewish inlaws - I don't expect them to, nor ask for, condemnation for the Church's mistakes nor for the Israeli State's atrocities.

Now if you think that all Catholics and Jews should be held to a higher standard because of what some in the Church and Israel have done, then I disagree with you just as I disagree with the argument that Muslims have to be held to a 'higher standard' when it comes condemning terrorism.

No one is asking you to walk up to any Catholic and demand that he/she condemn those child abuse for your sake. What I am saying is that whenever an atrocious act was done by a member of a community, it is reasonable to expect that community to speak up the loudest, especially if the actor is a part of the leadership or heavily identified his act with a particular religion. Am certain that you must have heard of the 'silence equal consent' argument. Perhaps 'consent' is a bit extreme as no Catholic would give consent to any child abuse, but silence or being considerably less vocal does give the impression that the community is ambivalent about its moral revulsion regarding an act. For the muslim community in the US, regarding 9/11, we see the most vocal being how 9/11 was 'caused' by US support for Israel...etc...ad nauseum. And we are tired of it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No one is asking you to walk up to any Catholic and demand that he/she condemn those child abuse for your sake. What I am saying is that whenever an atrocious act was done by a member of a community, it is reasonable to expect that community to speak up the loudest, especially if the actor is a part of the leadership or heavily identified his act with a particular religion. Am certain that you must have heard of the 'silence equal consent' argument. Perhaps 'consent' is a bit extreme as no Catholic would give consent to any child abuse, but silence or being considerably less vocal does give the impression that the community is ambivalent about its moral revulsion regarding an act. For the muslim community in the US, regarding 9/11, we see the most vocal being how 9/11 was 'caused' by US support for Israel...etc...ad nauseum. And we are tired of it.

I have never heard the 'Catholic community' (however that is to be manifested) condemn child abuse, nor do I expect the 'Catholic Community' to take responsibility for the actions of a few and be held to a higher standard in any way on that issue. I do not look for Catholics on the news condemning child abuse, though the views of the congregation that attended an affected Church and the views of those that knew the individual are interesting from a 'human story' perspective.

Is the 'silence' from Catholics indicative of 'consent'? Or are you setting up standards that are impossible to meet? Who speaks for the 'community'? Can the community even come to agreement on who represents them? What percentage of Catholics or Muslims should be on the streets of North America for how many minutes and holding specifically what kinds of banners and chanting specifically what kind of condemnation for it to be 'acceptable' condemnation?

The fact that you expect an entire community to 'do more' than the rest when a crime occurs indicates that you are holding them to a different standard than the rest and that you are implicitly discriminating against them.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

For the muslim community in the US, regarding 9/11, we see the most vocal being how 9/11 was 'caused' by US support for Israel...etc...ad nauseum. And we are tired of it.

Sorry you are tired of it, but those people have an opinion and they are free to express it.

Whether their opinion on the causes behind 911 has validity or not is irrelevant, so long as when they are voicing that opinion they are clear that the act itself cannot be condoned under any circumstances.

 

[gambit]

I have never heard the 'Catholic community' (however that is to be manifested) condemn child abuse, nor do I expect the 'Catholic Community' to take responsibility for the actions of a few and be held to a higher standard in any way on that issue. I do not look for Catholics on the news condemning child abuse, though the views of the congregation that attended an affected Church and the views of those that knew the individual are interesting from a 'human story' perspective.

Is the 'silence' from Catholics indicative of 'consent'? Or are you setting up standards that are impossible to meet? Who speaks for the 'community'? Can the community even come to agreement on who represents them? What percentage of Catholics or Muslims should be on the streets of North America for how many minutes and holding specifically what kinds of banners and chanting specifically what kind of condemnation for it to be 'acceptable' condemnation?

The Vatican is final authority and top of the leadership of Catholics worldwide. The Islamic ummah have no equivalent, or at best, that odious regime in the ME that controls access to your holiest cities -- Saudi Arabia. Locally, the Catholic community is represented by the local diocese and yes, we have every right to expect the local leadership to speak the loudest.

The fact that you expect an entire community to 'do more' than the rest when a crime occurs indicates that you are holding them to a different standard than the rest and that you are implicitly discriminating against them.

Nonsense...You hold the local police force to a higher standards of conduct than the citizenry. Does that mean you negatively discriminate against police officers?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The Vatican is final authority and top of the leadership of Catholics worldwide. The Islamic ummah have no equivalent, or at best, that odious regime in the ME that controls access to your holiest cities -- Saudi Arabia. Locally, the Catholic community is represented by the local diocese and yes, we have every right to expect the local leadership to speak the loudest.

Correct, the Muslim community does not have one single representative to speak for them, and in fact another flaw in your position is to make a distinction between Catholics and other Christian denominations, while ignoring the various denominational/sectarian divides in Islam. If one subscribes to the argument that Catholics alone must speak up above and beyond everyone else on the child abuse scandal, then it is Saudi Arabian Wahabbis who must be expected to speak up the most against the 911 attacks, not all Muslims.

That said, I only expect the Church to condemn that which falls directly under its purview - events in the Church itself, such as the Catholic priests sex child abuse scandal. I don't expect the Church to take responsibility for the actions of every Catholic nutjob out there, nor do I wish them, or the Catholic community, to go 'above and beyond' the actions expected of non-Catholics in condemning a particular incident that the Church had nothing to do with and did not endorse.

I expect the same standards to be applied to Muslims - if a religious extremist attended a particular mosque, the mosque should openly condemn any crimes by that individual, but that 'show of condemnation' should not be extended to the larger Muslim community as some sort of 'litmus test' of their views.

But for what its worth, CAIR (and a Pakistani American group after the Faisal Shazad attempt) issued statements condemning the incident. Reporters sought out Pakistani Americans for interviews and asked them their views. I think that is appropriate enough.

Nonsense...You hold the local police force to a higher standards of conduct than the citizenry. Does that mean you negatively discriminate against police officers?

The police force is held to higher standards than the citizenry because of the nature of their profession, not because of the religion, race, nationality gender, sexual orientation or political views of the members of the force.

People join the police force as adults knowing full well what the job entails and what is expected of them. This is by no means an apt comparison to singling out a particular community on the basis of their religion and holding them to a different standard than others.