New York City Panel Clears Way for Mosque Near Ground Zero:

A New York City panel voted unanimously Tuesday to reject landmark status for a building near the World Trade Center site, paving the way for construction of a mosque and an Islamic community center.

Rest of the article

I don’t see this as turning the other cheek, because (presumably) the Muslims who want to build the mosque weren’t involved in the terrorist attack. These are, as far as we know, law-abiding citizens who simply want to build someplace to peacefully assemble for purposes of religious expression.

I think putting *any* religious edifice on Ground Zero is an affront to the bereaved. I don't care if said bereaved would like a church, temple or ecumenical place of worship - it would still demean the place.

I was in full support of rebuilding the towers exactly as they stood before. Not sure what happened to that plan.

Apparently, Muslim patriots do exist.

Yet to ensure due freedom for everyone, the freedom of each must be curbed, restrained and regulated.

Legal considerations aside, I agree that the move to build a mosque near Ground Zero is incredibly tacky. I mean, of all the places in New York to build, why there? A group truly committed to reconciliation would take the hint and build somewhere else. If the group made a public statement that they were voluntarily moving the location out of respect for those killed on 9/11, it would cast American Muslims in a more positive light in NY and around the country. As it is, they’re creating a PR disaster.

One might wonder if there’s something more dastardly here than a simple “it’s private property, we can build here if we want." Perhaps the group wants retaliation, be it in the form of bacon or planes or whatever, because it perpetuates the idea of jihad. If so, then they may just get their wish.

Sharia Law in the US is sure to piss off a lot of people, myself included. If Muslims want to live somewhere under Sharia Law they can go to their piece of shit desert. That shit has no business over here in the "civilized" world.

A quote from the article: "The existing building is owned by the Cordoba Initiative, a Muslim outreach group, and already serves as a site where prayer services are held. The group wants to demolish the existing structure and build a "$100 million, 13-story community center with Islamic, interfaith and secular programming," the Cordoba Initiative website says."

My gut tells me, “Fuck Islam and their rights to religion, for it seeks to destroy MY rights.”
Reason tells me, “The land in question is owned by Muslims, and if I truly believe in freedom, let them have their way, because freedom is more important then patriotism and ego.”

Once again the cold, hard truth is that men habitually, routinely, and carelessly oppress women in every culture, in every religion, all around the globe. Women endure this, do their best to work around it, because that's all they can do. But it's a lousy, cruel stacked deck; and it's been dealt them all through history [with two exceptions: ancient Crete and ancient Egypt, in which the sexes were equally respected and empowered].

Beh. Where are the National Socialists when you need them?

and it is blood which is Haram (unclean/forbidden/anti-Islamic).

So all the bombing all over the world, the airplane bomb attempts, the attempted car/van bombing in times square a few weeks ago by muslims mean nothing. Maybe you in your small city have nothing to worry about, but the big cities do. We are targets, and shit happens. You have to be aware because like it or not, the fundamentalists want to kill American and will find ways.

Fine don't buy into the media propaganda, keep your head in the sand. Nothing is wrong, everything is fine, and your mom is baking you an apple pie. Its not a matter of just watching one tv news show or one newspaper, its about seeing what is going on in the world through multiple media sources, and making an informed judgment about how screwed or fucked up things are or are not.

I see, so you just don't give a shit about what happens as long as it entertains you.

Can they kill us all, no, not in one shot. Iran is working on nukes, and I am sure if the Taliban in Pakistan gets their hands on some we can expect to get hit somewhere, sometimes soon. If they manage to nuke, New York, or Washington, or California, will any of that affect you? How would it affect the country?

"Without that news you wouldn't be afraid of losing "american values", whatever the fuck they are, and life would be no different."

I think that is a very naieve thing to say. BUT, you are entitled to stick you head in the sand and ignore everything that is going on in the real world.

Whatever I say won't make a difference to you so next....

What the city elders did not know at the time was that the women came from households in which several men had embraced radical Islam and joined a terrorist network that was setting up sleeper cells across Europe, according to Belgian federal prosecutors and court documents from Italy, Spain and France.

Over the next nine months, Belgian federal police arrested five men in Maaseik, a town of 24,000 people tucked in the northeast corner of Belgium. Each was charged with membership in a terrorist organization, the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, a fast-growing network known by its French initials, GICM.

With each arrest, investigators uncovered fresh evidence that placed small-town Maaseik at the center of a terrorist network stretching across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. The town had served as a haven for suspects in the Madrid train explosions that killed 191 people in March 2004, for instance, as well as an important meeting place for the GICM's European leadership.

The Belgian investigation underscores the challenges that authorities in Europe face in tracking down sleeper cells and in sorting vaguely suspicious behavior from imminent danger. Police have made scores of arrests in Berlin, Paris, Rome, Stockholm and Amsterdam in the past two years to disrupt what were described as terrorist plots, although in many cases it remains unclear whether the threats were overstated or false alarms.

... Despite an investigation that has reached into eight countries, Belgian authorities remain uncertain about the Maaseik cell's true mission . Police found no bombs, no guns, no blueprints for an attack -- just lots of worrisome evidence that the defendants were consorting with terrorism suspects from elsewhere and could have been planning something big.

"We are quite sure that we have proved that they were a logistical support cell," said a senior official with the Belgian State Security service, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "But the fact is, the potential was there to do something more serious."

... At first, intelligence officials suspected the Maaseik group was a ring to smuggle illegal farmworkers into Limburg. The agents dubbed their mission Operation Asparagus, after the vegetable that is widely grown in the region. As months passed, concerns grew.

In November 2003, several key figures in the GICM traveled to Maaseik from Spain and France for a rare meeting, according to Spanish and French court documents.
The GICM's European cells normally avoided direct contact with each other so that they wouldn't attract attention from police. But the network had seen several of its leaders arrested in Morocco after terrorist bombings in Casablanca six months earlier and was trying to regroup, the court documents show. Maaseik was emerging as an important hub.

Among those attending the meeting was Lahoussine Haski, a Moroccan with a history of fighting for radical Islamic causes in Chechnya, Afghanistan and other places, according to Belgian investigators and court documents.

Haski arrived in Maaseik holding a false passport, on the run from authorities in Morocco who had issued a warrant for his arrest on terrorism charges. In Saudi Arabia, he was listed by the government as one of the 26 most-wanted terrorist suspects in the kingdom for his alleged role in a series of bombings.
After months of hiding out in Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey, Haski needed a refuge. Maaseik seemed safe. He married a local woman. Later, she would become one of the half-dozen women who caused a ruckus in town by donning their black burqas.

Construction of Mosques

The construction of mosques occasionally arouses hostile reactions in the neighborhoods concerned. For example, in 2007 an attempt by Muslims to build a large mosque in Cologne sparked a controversy.


Fears of Islamic fundamentalism

Fears of Islamic fundamentalism came to the fore after September 11, 2001, especially with respect to Islamic fundamentalism among second- and third-generation Muslims in Germany. Also the various confrontations between Islamic religious law (Sharia) and the norms of German Grundgesetz and culture are the subject of intense debate. German critics include both liberals and Christian groups. The former claim that Islamic fundamentalism violates basic fundamental rights whereas the latter maintain that Germany is a state and society grounded in the Christian tradition.

... like John Dillinger reportedly said, "They can't stop me. They have to be at every bank, every time. I just have to be at one bank one time."

Not only money rules our current state of affairs, guilt runs rampant too. The whole Left is ridden by white guilt. The effects are easily noticed when your own culture is put into jails for spreading hate, or considered a sub-group because they uphold white cultural values or tradition while at the same time those other cultures acting identical, get rewarded with community centers in which they may fully explore their cultural tradition and revel in it. In Europe, in those very community centers the cancer grows. Where do we find sharia4europe gathering? Not in dark alleys or in secret houses; they gather in those very community centers because none wants to interfere with those different cultures exploring their values. We don't interfere because we still feel bad because granddaddy got rich on their expense in the rubber plantation, or spice and cotton trade. We have put the minorities on a pedestal at the expense of the majority and the very reason for doing so is guilt.

[MindWar Rant Mode ON]

... do you think the government collective uses the media as a means to sway public opinion?

The argument that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world is a bit of a misnomer, because it implies that it is attracting more converts, when in reality it is simply a matter of Muslims producing more children who are raised in the faith.

Of course, those Lefties may really be on to something. The blood of menstruation is horrifying to Muslim men. It is from a woman (and we know how they feel about 'them') and it is blood which is Haram (unclean/forbidden/anti-Islamic). Imagine the shock and horror of finding a big used Kotex on their front stoop! "Oops, sorry. It must have fallen out. You know how dirty we women are."

Or one could take the gay and merry approach...

Felicitations!

There are now bus ads up questioning why.

... Guys like Jim Marrs have been shouting about a government/press collusive effort to fool Americans for a long time (JFK forward) but he comes across as a bit zany at times. Michael Moore also tries to make the link but never quite gets there successfully, though he does prove (to me at least) that the press and some large corporate interests are in bed together ...

Think you know what's going on in the Mideast right now? Give a listen to "Guns & Butter" today, and I promise you'll be in full WTF mode.

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/dmspo/Publications/Information%20Operations%20Primer%20AY10-Web%20Version%20%28Nov%2009%29.pdf

Aquino, I would love your take on this 'new' material.

Think you know what's going on in the Mideast right now? Give a listen to "Guns & Butter" today, and I promise you'll be in full WTF mode.

I'm inclined to give some merit to this guy's ideas... things are looking ominous over there and Obama's sending troops to Afghanistan as we speak.

The next few months are going to be interesting.

I've noticed that the Imam that wants to build this center seems to think all this commotion is a good thing. That somehow this will open communication and will lead to healing. I'm wondering what kind of healing it is when people are yelling back and forth over protest lines.

I know they have the freedom to build the center, and I know it's their constitutional right, but when will it be considered the "wrong" thing to do for all concerned? When there is fighting in the streets? When someone gets angry enough to start shooting or set off a bomb? When does the cost of freedom become too much for everyone concerned? All over a building....

I've noticed that the Imam that wants to build this center seems to think all this commotion is a good thing. That somehow this will open communication and will lead to healing. I'm wondering what kind of healing it is when people are yelling back and forth over protest lines.

I'm also wondering if anyone has thought of another "whatif". What if an American does decide to wage their own personal war against this center (and I mean more than just spray painting slurs)? Where will this whole thing be then? Will we be attacked again for something ONE person decided to take upon themselves to do? Where will the healing be in all of that? I know they have the freedom to build the center, and I know it's their constitutional right, but when will it be considered the "wrong" thing to do for all concerned? When there is fighting in the streets? When someone gets angry enough to start shooting or set off a bomb? When does the cost of freedom become too much for everyone concerned? All over a building....

During protests there is always a frontman (with, preferably, the most brain capacity) who will try to state the opinion of the protesting masses in an objective way to open up a discussion. This "healing" is nothing more then a metaphore for indicating a possible discussion between them and the frontmen/women wherein points of views are shared during a constructive chat in hopes of a compromy.

The question which should arise would be if the persons doing the debate stand strong enough and manage to persuate the idea out of their minds. Why not try organising a major protest yourself and pulling yourself up as the frontman and discuss the points of view with them? I'm sure enough it'll be much better then throwing eggs.. (you can always keep it as a last resort when they are just narrow-minded and you really want to make the idea feel unwelcome).

It is also your constitutional right to stand up and adress your negative feelings. Do not also forget you are living in a democracy ("cough cough") wherein the idea of "what the majority wants shall be endorsed/happening". Try opening up a sort of "voting" campaign wherein the people must choose if the mosque will be built or not.

In the long term, he is probably right. If he can remain standing against the attacks of the unthinking multitude, he should prevail (usual caveats apply: skeletons in his closet, shady funding sources or relationships, etc.).

It will never be "wrong", from an intellectual point of view (assuming those wanting to build it have no ties back to the 9/11 perpetrators), even if there's fighting in the streets or bombs, because in this country everyone is equal under the law.

It will always be "wrong", from an emotional point of view, because humans are tribal (as Diavolo said) and "they" attacked "us".

You may choose your own point of view, but I advise against basing it on your "whatif"s, because that's basing your life on fear.

The essence of life is struggle and conflict. We've been fortunate enough in the U.S. to have an easy, tranquil life, relative to most of the rest of human existence, but it's not free, and it's not guaranteed. The price of that freedom is tolerance of those we disagree with; demanding that people be responsible for their own actions; and a volunteer military made of people like your son's friend (and others here at the 600C), who's not afraid to stand up for what he believes in and to risk his life so others can live free.

There is no Utopia. Some humans will always try to dominate others, some forcefully. Some humans will always be emotional and tribal, not understanding how you can defend "them". Some humans will always be intellectual, not understanding how you erroneously lump in "these" with "those". Even when everybody's peaceful, people will have different interests and goals.

In the end you can be responsible only for yourself. The best you can do, IMNSHO, is to understand as much as possible about what you want, what everybody else wants, and how best to get what you want. Know what you will and won't compromise on, and why. Know the consequences of your actions. Stand up to those who would push you around. If they attack with intent to kill, destroy them without mercy or remorse.

You won't always win, but that seems the path with the best odds to me. The U.S. usually (but not always) seems to follow this general line.

Otherwise you live in fear, and someone will own you through it.

I haven't forgotten that I "can have a voice" in what is happening in my country. Money is what does override anyone's voice in this country though, and because I don't have money to just throw at something like this, my voice will not be heard.

I would love to think your scenerio is true, but sadly I've watched many protests and that's not always the case.

I know my own limits at this current time in my life.

In case anyone hasn't seen it. Here's a video by British comedian Pat Condell on the building of the Mosque. It's pretty insightful: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dWcB5zbV-A&feature=related

I think we're basically on the same page, though we're using the word "fear" in slightly different manners.

The "whatif"s I was referring to were what you wrote in your original - basically, "if we do something, somebody else might choose to do something 'bad' in response", which is equated by fear slaves into "if we don't do anything, therefore, nothing bad will happen".

The thinking-through of consequences doesn't have to be motivated by fear; AAMOF, in the sense I'm using it, fear precludes such thinking; but yeah, I think we're essentially saying the same thing there.

The behavior of the various factions in this issue - or, indeed, most issues nowadays, it seems - is predictably polarized. Pro and con, right and wrong, them and us. Observe and ponder - who these emotionally-driven people typically are, why they act like that, what information they get. Compare and contrast with your own method of thinking and acting. (Bonus question: after working out the why and the how, think about how you would push an agenda you felt strongly about, given massive resources)

Then consider if there are further modes of thinking beyond these two. Then think about stratification.

We may all be created equal - do we all remain equal?

(Hm, too much gin results in me waxing scholastic. Apologies )

I agree on the point where "money makes power" is a philosophy in our current society. But not having much money does not mean you can't let things happen.
I like to refer to the idea we Belgians once had "Eendracht maakt macht/ l'unité faites la force", which can be loosely translated in "power to the masses". Sometimes you don't need to use explosives to move a mountain, sometimes just throwing a little pebble might result in an avalanche.

That's why I asked the question why you don't take matters at hand. A discussion like this can be insightfull and a relief to some to give opinions about this topic, but it is in no way constructive in making actual changes. Most people will be disappointed/angered when the thing is being built, they had it comming. Some of them had the time and resources to make a change, they simply didn't fucking stood-up and made a change. They decided to rant about it, voicing their opinions in places which had no influence or direct impact on the situation (such as this discussion/topic btw).

If my memory serves correctly: wasn't life outside the virtual reality not the biggest teacher and the Satanists class room and practice area?

I can quite understand the reasoning for not being able to do so, but hell, sometimes emailing to the frontpersons of the opposite party itself can be much more enlighting.

How about pushing those limits? There are many things you can do as long as your goals are steady set, are creative enough and have the willpower to try and make a change.

LOL! Fuuuuuuuuuucked it up... but I actually remember this when it aired LIVE.

Can you be a Muslim and an American patriot? You can if you don't care very much about being a Muslim. If you squint and look away, you can avoid thinking about the very basic clashes between the submissive, collectivist values of Islam and the individualist, libertarian values of the democratic West.

In a 2007 poll by the Pew Center, 63 percent of U.S. Muslims said they saw no conflict between being a devout Muslim and living in a modern society. But 32 percent conceded that, yes, there is such a conflict, and almost 50 percent of the Muslim American questioned in that poll said they think of themselves as Muslims first, Americans second. Only 28 percent, little more than a quarter, considered themselves Americans first.

Asked whether suicide bombing can be justified as a measure to defend Islam, 26 percent of American Muslims age eighteen to twenty-nine said yes. That is one quarter of the adult American Muslims under the age of thirty, and no matter how you count the number of Muslims in America (estimates vary from 2 million to 8 million), that is a lot of people.

Religious extremists (goes the official version) attacked the financial center of the US.

Proponents of that same religion then seek to build a place of worship where that financial center used to be.

Do you not see that as symbolic of a victory of religion over commerce?

Why pick that exact location?

Honestly soulds like you're watching to much Fox News, because as Mr. Acquino put it I would expect a Satanist to know better than this.

but religion is never the cause it.

At the heart of all conflict is the competition for resources.

I see no problem with the new mosque, that is, unless extremists are going to use it as a way to gain access to America.

I truly don't care much about the issue as long as it doesn't affect me!

Has conventional religion been used as a PSYOP device for war? Sure. Is it the underlying motivation for wars? Not unless kings, clergy, presidents, or dictators sell it as such.

Muslim Martyrs & Jihad

Compiled by Jennifer King

2005/08/02

Islamic law is based on the Koran and the Sunnah, the life of Muhammad, which is recorded in the hadiths, traditions, the stories of Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari and Muslim, and enforced in the Islamic fiqh, sharia law. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, inspired a religious ideal of killing non-Muslims and death in Allah’s Cause, Holy War, Jihad. All Muslims who fight and kill infidels are obeying this obligatory religious law, copying the ‘perfect example’ of Muhammad, who was a professional bandit and warlord, the first and most successful of all Muslim terrorists.

ISLAMIC LAW: ISLAM Q&A

Islam Q&A (www.islam-qa.com)

These laws for all Muslims today explain that Jihad, holy war, is the highest virtue for Muslims ‘the pinnacle of Islam’. Martyrdom - fighting, killing infidels and dying for Islam is the very highest goal for all Muslims, the ‘perfect example’ of their prophet, Muhammad. Muslims who fight non-Muslims and die are the very best of all Muslims, the holy martyrs, shaheed, the only Muslims to attain Allah’s highest paradise. The Hypocrites are peaceful, tolerant Muslims who join or support non-Muslims in any way. They are the very worst Muslims, doomed to Allah’s hell.

RULINGS ON JIHAD:

Questions #8961,

Is jihad considered obligatory?

Answer:

Jihaad to make the word of Allaah supreme, to protect the religion of Islam, to enable spreading the faith and to protect the things it holds sacred, is an obligation upon everyone who is able to do it. If jihaad begins and the Muslims are mobilized, then everyone who is able should answer the call, sincerely for the sake of Allaah, hoping for truth to prevail and to protect Islam. Whoever holds back from that when the call has been made, with no valid excuse, is a sinner.

Question #5275,

Can we really participate in Jihaad when we don't have any khalifa to organise us, or we don't have the strength to fight them?


Answer :

Jihaad for the sake of Allaah is the pinnacle of Islam, and is one of the principles of the religion. It does not depend on there being an imaam (khaleefah or ruler)… But obviously jihaad requires preparation and organization, and the existence of a leader of the army who can weigh up the pros and cons.

Question #26125

What is the difference between "Jihad" and "Qitaal" ?.


Answer :

The word jihad is more general than the word qitaal (fighting). Jihaad may be with the tongue (by speaking out), or with weapons (which is qitaal or fighting) or with money. Each of these categories includes numerous subcategories.

Qitaal may only be done with weapons; it includes fighting the kaafirs, fighting the wrongdoers and fighting the Khawaarij.

The greatest kind of fighting is fighting those who disbelieve, for Allaah has commanded us to fight them. Allaah says:

“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allaah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger (Muhammad), (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” 9:29

“O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you” 9:123

Jihaad against the kuffaar with weapons is of two types: jihad talab (offensive jihad) and jihad daf’ (defensive jihad).

Jihad talab means attacking the kuffaar in their own lands until they become Muslim or pay the jizyah with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they bear witness that there is no god but Allaah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah, and establish regular prayer, and pay zakaah. If they do that, then they have protected their blood and their wealth from me, except in cases decreed by Islamic law, and their reckoning with be with Allaah.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 25; Muslim, 20.

The second type is jihad al-daf’ (defensive jihad). If the enemy attacks a Muslim country or fights a Muslim country, then jihad is obligatory in that case. If the people of that country are able to undertake this obligation, then all well and good, and the others should support them.

Regardless of their location, and what they want you to believe they are mandated to attack, or support anyone who attacks non believers. They support Jihad either by fleshly means, or financially.

They are using our laws and culture of tolerance against us to stage attacks, and create chaos. We, meaning society where you live has softened to the point where "we" turn the other cheek and hope what they say is what they mean. "Islam preaches peace"....

I didnt write the Koran, read it, or touch it even if it was on a bookshelf.

As for not touching it.....its usually in Arabic. I dont speak Arabic. Second why would I touch it, it holds no value to me at all.

And for the record Muslims hating Jews is still current news in case you dont listen to news from the middle east.

As for not touching it.....its usually in Arabic. I dont speak Arabic. Second why would I touch it, it holds no value to me at all. So I ignore it completely as a object. Since I cannot translate its writing, I have little choice but to read what others have transcribed from its contents for themselves.

Would be terrorists know only what their local Imams tell them. Most dont have the internet, or TV when they grow up so they are immersed in a world of religious rhetoric.

I also have too many Muslim friends to make blanket judgements based on a single label, because I've seen how frustrating it is for them to be treated like "sleeper terrorists" just because of their race and creed.

Seriously? That's one of your excuses? Whatever happened to "know thy enemy?" If you aren't knowledgeable about something (not necessarily an expert, but at least well-versed), then how does that help your credibility in a debate? Or refuting the various points of individual Suras? Just as many atheists can pull quotes from Scripture to suit their needs and highlight the inherent hypocrisies of those which Christians like to tout, the same should be done with Islam and the Quran. Just because you don't trust the English interpretations, is not a good enough reason to eschew reading it at all.

Quite a few would-be terrorists come from families which are well-off and have access to the internet and resources to donate to terrorist organizations. There are hundreds of these websites on the web today. What do you think the CIA and FBI are monitoring? How else do you think they stay on top of possible attacks? On top of being schooled in fundamental interpretations of Islam, these recruits are often motivated by political disaffection with the West (the US in particular), and are more than willing to match political belief with religious teachings. It's not the other way around (ie, inspired by religious indoctrination), as you are suggesting.

I couldnt personally stomach a Mosque being erected right over the ashes of thousands of dead Americans simply because it raises the image of their Prophet Mohammed standing at ground zero with a foot placed on the neck of the fallen dead.

Those are Muslims, residing in the US, earning a living here, sending some of that money overseas and this is their reaction to all those people dying?

It is widely known that Muslims killed at the WTC were seen as martyrs for the cause

and to me it was left at that

On the other hand Patterson NJ was on the news shortly after the towers fell, with the whole Muslim community cheering and dancing in the streets

The Muslim world didnt seem to be too taken aback by it.

Cite your news source, please; I have been not been able to find any verification of this.