Mosque at Ground Zero - A few simple facts

[ImaGuyGeek]

The Mosque at Ground Zero (Cordoba House) is being funded by unnamed parties. The Imam refuses to build it 6 blocks away from Ground Zero where free land has been offered in order to build somewhere else.

A little history...

“Cordoba,” in Islamic symbolic terms, means Islamic rule in the West. It does not mean “coexistence,” unless coexistence is interpreted as referring to Islamic rule.

[Darbex]

Thats what peaks my interest why are they turning down free land only a few blocks away? Do they have a purpose in putting it in the exact spot they are fighting for?

[ImaGuyGeek]

As Maurader says, "Words mean stuff"

I recommend to anyone to research the meaning and history of "Cordoba" in Islam before you choose to support or oppose the building of a huge, opulent $100 million Mosque at Ground Zero.

If you like, I am happy to provide some links but I don't want people to feel like they are being led. On this issue I would like people to really understand on their own what this means.

[stevenallenbarnard]

What ever happened to "Actions speak louder than words?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100818/pl_yblog_upshot/imam-at-center-of-ground-zero-controversy-helped-bush-administration

[Darbex]

You are right actions do speak louder than words. And if they are truly tolerant and respectful then they should kindly move their location a few blocks away and realize they are causing a public storm and making many people relive what happened near that spot. What exactly about this spot is so important to this group?

[ImaGuyGeek]

What ever happened to "Actions speak louder than words?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...administration

And you clearly do not understand the meaning of "Cordoba" in the Islam context nor do you understand the "Actions" of building a mosque like this, in this spot, with this name and what it is meant to symbolize to the rest of the Muslim world.

I say this not with malice but with sadness. The lefts agenda has clearly succeeded on you.

[stevenallenbarnard]

All of the Muslims who I asked what that meant said that was nonsense. And a quick google search only turns upthe exact same quote you gave posted above. The precedent something like this could set could have unimaginable consequences for any group later on. The simple fact is that this is private property and there is no law that says a church can't be built there.

[ImaGuyGeek]

All of the Muslims who I asked what that meant said that was nonsense. And a quick google search only turns upthe exact same quote you gave posted above. The precedent something like this could set could have unimaginable consequences for any group later on. The simple fact is that this is private property and there is no law that says a church can't be built there.

Sigh!

The Far Left talking points of the legality is in no way the debate being had. Is it legal, so far yes. That will play out more if/when it is determined where the 100 million dollars is coming from.

The question is (aside from who is funding this mosque) Why in this location and What is the meaning of this mosque to the rest of the Islamic world. i.e. Is it the "Right" thing to do.

As for the history of Cordoba. I think you need to understand that history better and how Islam invaded and conquered the city of Cordoba in their move to conquer the West, then built an opulent mosque in the heart of the city as a symbol of Muslim rule.

Muslims attacked then erected Mosques. Sound familiar?

Building a Mosque of this magnitude, in this location, with this name IMHO is no different in symbolism to Muslims worldwide as the raising of the US flag on Iwo Jima is/was to Americans with regard to WWII and the Japanese enemy we were fighting.



So, I ask...

What is your reaction to Muslims attacking the US on US soil killing thousands of innocent civilians then raising their flag on that site and displaying that for the rest of the world to see?

Me, It pisses me off.

[wesleydnunder]

Sigh!

The Far Left talking points of the legality is in no way the debate being had. Is it legal, so far yes. That will play out more if/when it is determined where the 100 million dollars is coming from.

The question is (aside from who is funding this mosque) Why in this location and What is the meaning of this mosque to the rest of the Islamic world. i.e. Is it the "Right" thing to do.

As for the history of Cordoba. I think you need to understand that history better and how Islam invaded and conquered the city of Cordoba in their move to conquer the West, then built an opulent mosque in the heart of the city as a symbol of Muslim rule.

Muslims attacked then erected Mosques. Sound familiar?

Building a Mosque of this magnitude, in this location, with this name IMHO is no different in symbolism to Muslims worldwide as the raising of the US flag on Iwo Jima is/was to Americans with regard to WWII and the Japanese enemy we were fighting.



So, I ask...

What is your reaction to Muslims attacking the US on US soil killing thousands of innocent civilians then raising their flag on that site and displaying that for the rest of the world to see?

Me, It pisses me off.

Yup, pretty much pisses me off too, but so do skinheads, KKK, La Raza and lots of other groups that get to parade down main street because they have freedoms afforded them by the constitution. It chaps my a$$ to see a streetload of illegals parading down the street waving Mexican flags. Unfortunately, I don't get to do anything about it...legally. I agree with you about this threat Charles, I really do. I think this mosque is part of the invasion. But until we start trimmin' some of the fat off the Constitution the Islamic immigrants who are in this country legally have the right to have their church pretty much where they want it, just like Christian churches, LDS chuches, Synegogues and Kingdom Halls.

Like I said earlier, let 'em build it. When they do, the ****e's on and maybe this will finally come to a head in this country.

Mark

[Gene D]

Allowing this mosque to be built in that location would be the equivalent of allowing Santa Anna to erect a monument at the Alamo.

[stevenallenbarnard]

Allowing this mosque to be built in that location would be the equivalent of allowing Santa Anna to erect a monument at the Alamo.

No, it's like erecting a monument to Santa Anna on private property a few blocks away.

[Gene D]

No, it's like erecting a monument to Santa Anna on private property a few blocks away.

[stevenallenbarnard]

How am I incorrect?

[fshfrk]

[QUOTE=stevenallenbarnard;488308]How am I incorrect?[/QUOTE

Don't waste your time with people like this. November will tell!!!!! We will get to go back to work in 2012!

[stevenallenbarnard]

Fact:
The mosque is being built on private property, and the builders are well within the law to build it there.

Opinion:
The building of the Mosque is insensitive to the victims of the 9/11 attacks.

The law is clear cut on this one, it doesn't matter what anyone's opinion is. People have tried to say that it is being funded by terrorism and want to bring up the fact that the financial backers have yet to be named. But it's not uncommon for philanthropists to donate their money anonymously. If it starts here, then where does it end? Will the victims of the Catholoc Church sex abuse scandal be able to halt the building of new Catholic churches in their communities because it's an insult to the pain they suffered in the past? Maybe I'm looking too far ahead, but like I said before, the precedent that this sets could possibly affect each and every single one of us in the future.

It's also odd to me that the same people who were hollering for an end to whiny Political correctness and hyper-sinsitivity durning the draw Mouhamad Day are the same people today talking about how the Muslims aren't being sensitive to their feelings. Maybe that's why they aren't interested in Moving their Mosque to spare our feelings because we weren't willing to NOT draw mocking charactercatures of their Prophet to spare theirs.