Ground Zero: Mosque; or No Mosque

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
No, I do not. I believe there has been a massive cover up in the government's failure to do it's job and that the attack could have been averted but I do believe (until proven otherwise) that they were brought down by terrorists in planes.




Or I could just keep referring to it as the Islamic community center or cultural center.
I didn't ask myself, I Googled it. The answer seems to be "a bunch".


It didn't become a "hot button issue" until outsiders made it so.
And controversy, real or artificial, is not a reason to not do something lawful and moral.



It's not a "mosque", just because 90% of the media is too lazy to get it right doesn't mean you have to play dumb too.
It's being built in the heart of Manhattan, that's a pretty good location for such an attraction. Cultural centers aren't just for one group, they're for anyone who wants to visit.



Questions like this expose your lack of wanting to understand the entire issue. I recommend strongly you expand the number of sources you get your information from.

Here's a direct quote from FactCheck.Org
Is the center scheduled to open on Sept. 11, 2011?

Organizers say no. As best we can determine, the idea that the cultural center and mosque would open that day is unfounded speculation. Project organizers say that no official date has been set for the opening of the proposed center. Imam Rauf told Newsday back in May that it could take anywhere from 18 months to three years to raise the money to complete the project, and added that the center wouldn’t open on the anniversary of Sept. 11. Project organizers took to the social networking site Twitter as recently as Aug. 20 to knock down the claim, saying: "Reports that we will open on 9/11 or begin construction on 9/11 are false and inflammatory. Our timeline to build is 18 - 38 months."

The idea that the center and mosque would open on Sept. 11, 2011 — the 10-year anniversary of the terrorist attacks in 2001 — has been bandied about on blogs and discussion boards. The American Freedom Defense Initiative sponsored advertisements that may have also contributed to that thought. The initiative’s ads appeared on New York City buses and asked, "Why There?," with an image of a plane flying into a burning World Trade Center, next to a rendering of the proposed building with the words "September 11, 2011, WTC Mega Mosque."






Why not? Some actual 9/11 victims' families are against it and some are for it while others are indifferent. As many as 300 people killed that day were Muslims, including first responders, is there sacrifice worth less?

1. At least we agree on that. I was starting to think you was in the "truth" movement. The only thing I would differ from you is that it was a cover up about the lax of alertness before 9-11. As I recalled, Bush recounts many times about the "pre-9-11" mentality, and how it was wrong. Even includes himself in that thinking as well. A government cover up will never state that it was wrong. Unless I'm not understanding what you are stating, please clarify what you meant.

2. Dude quit spinning for your argument. The center WILL have a mosque inside of it. They keep changing what it suppose to be to make it less divisive. You should know this....

3. Upgrade, really, if the mosque was never mentioned the muslims who died on that day *non-terrorist* would be remembered the same way any other group would be. Having a Mosque open on 9-11 doesn't highlight that fact. This been stated many times in the past about muslims dying in the WTC.

I'm going to raise a question, and I'm completely serious about this. Is it funny how a lot of this stuff is being revved up more since our dear President has be elected?
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
1. At least we agree on that. I was starting to think you was in the "truth" movement. The only thing I would differ from you is that it was a cover up about the lax of alertness before 9-11. As I recalled, Bush recounts many times about the "pre-9-11" mentality, and how it was wrong. Even includes himself in that thinking as well. A government cover up will never state that it was wrong. Unless I'm not understanding what you are stating, please clarify what you meant.

No, it's much more than a lack of "alertness". That was him putting some off on Bill Clinton.
When you have dudes on a list of known terrorists or having ties with known terrorists groups and you have them under surveillance learning how to fly planes but not learning how to land. Add in intel of an imminent attack and now all these guys seem to be going on trips across the country simultaneously, those are red flags like a motherfucker. But no one did anything to stop them and none of that can be dropped on the footstep of Clinton or Janet Reno or anyone else.

2. Dude quit spinning for your argument. The center WILL have a mosque inside of it. They keep changing what it suppose to be to make it less divisive. You should know this....

No spin necessary. It will have a mosque in it, just as the World Trade Center had two in them, but it's purpose and title is a cultural center. Calling somethingn what it is isn't spin, it's honest.

3. Upgrade, really, if the mosque was never mentioned the muslims who died on that day *non-terrorist* would be remembered the same way any other group would be. Having a Mosque open on 9-11 doesn't highlight that fact. This been stated many times in the past about muslims dying in the WTC.

Who's opening a mosque on Sept. 11? Who's doing that? And if it's just about being close to the former WTC site, what's the problem in Tennessee and California and the other places were some people are protesting proposed mosques? This event in NY is part of a larger theme.

I'm going to raise a question, and I'm completely serious about this. Is it funny how a lot of this stuff is being revved up more since our dear President has be elected?

What do you mean? The Right has been trying to project him as an "Other" for nearly 3 yrs now and go to extraordinary lengths to jam him up with relatively small issues like this.
It's revved up because there used to be people in positions of authority on the Right who stood against this foolishness but they're silent now that they aren't in power.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
No, it's much more than a lack of "alertness". That was him putting some off on Bill Clinton.
When you have dudes on a list of known terrorists or having ties with known terrorists groups and you have them under surveillance learning how to fly planes but not learning how to land. Add in intel of an imminent attack and now all these guys seem to be going on trips across the country simultaneously, those are red flags like a motherfucker. But no one did anything to stop them and none of that can be dropped on the footstep of Clinton or Janet Reno or anyone else.



No spin necessary. It will have a mosque in it, just as the World Trade Center had two in them, but it's purpose and title is a cultural center. Calling somethingn what it is isn't spin, it's honest.



Who's opening a mosque on Sept. 11? Who's doing that? And if it's just about being close to the former WTC site, what's the problem in Tennessee and California and the other places were some people are protesting proposed mosques? This event in NY is part of a larger theme.



What do you mean? The Right has been trying to project him as an "Other" for nearly 3 yrs now and go to extraordinary lengths to jam him up with relatively small issues like this.
It's revved up because there used to be people in positions of authority on the Right who stood against this foolishness but they're silent now that they aren't in power.

1. So, Clinton can't hold any responsibility? If so, would that mean that Obama cannot blame Bush for anything that's going on now? You can't have it both ways.

2. The mosque in the world trade center holds no argument on this issue. Last time I checked, every religion was accounted for in the WTC. Plus, that was BEFORE 9-11. BTW, who to say that a mosque wouldn't be in the NEW world trade center?

I'll be back later to finish my rebuttal.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
2. The mosque in the world trade center holds no argument on this issue. Last time I checked, every religion was accounted for in the WTC. Plus, that was BEFORE 9-11. BTW, who to say that a mosque wouldn't be in the NEW world trade center?
Seriously, (not at all meaning to be sarcastic or demeaning) who gives a fuck ? ? ?

Why are you so consumed about which religious groups locate where, thousands of miles from you ???

If some group is operating within the law and there is no factual basis for believing that they are breaking or about to break the law, why the supersensitive sniff test ???

What when someone doesn't like your otherwise legal smell ???

QueEx
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
1. So, Clinton can't hold any responsibility? If so, would that mean that Obama cannot blame Bush for anything that's going on now? You can't have it both ways.

Bush couldn't be held responsible for an attack on American soil 8+months into the Obama term. But he directly defanged many of the regulatory agencies who's jobs it is to prevent some of the very crisis we've faced in the last two years including the SEC and MMS.
Didn't say Clinton couldn't hod any responsibility. But the onus is on the Bush Administration who decided to concentrate on finding ways to topple Hussein and not counterterrorism.

2. The mosque in the world trade center holds no argument on this issue. Last time I checked, every religion was accounted for in the WTC. Plus, that was BEFORE 9-11. BTW, who to say that a mosque wouldn't be in the NEW world trade center?

I'll be back later to finish my rebuttal.

Now you can't have it both ways. If this is all about the victims, then many of the victims were Muslims. A formal mosque and an informal one were destroyed that day so it should be okay for a group of Muslims, who have no known ties to radical Islamists, to build a cultural center nearby (not on the site) with a mosque within.
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
Seriously, (not at all meaning to be sarcastic or demeaning) who gives a fuck ? ? ?

Why are you so consumed about which religious groups locate where, thousands of miles from you ???

If some group is operating within the law and there is no factual basis for believing that they are breaking or about to break the law, why the supersensitive sniff test ???

What when someone doesn't like your otherwise legal smell ???

QueEx

That's actually a very good and direct question.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Seriously, (not at all meaning to be sarcastic or demeaning) who gives a fuck ? ? ?

Why are you so consumed about which religious groups locate where, thousands of miles from you ???

If some group is operating within the law and there is no factual basis for believing that they are breaking or about to break the law, why the supersensitive sniff test ???

What when someone doesn't like your otherwise legal smell ???

QueEx

Que, time and time again, I said they can build the damn mosque. Legally they can do it. That question has been answered, by me, for at least five times on this thread alone. Maybe you can't comprehend why I don't like it.

BTW, if it wasn't for the people in question, and the site. I wouldn't give two shits about this damn issue. In fact, a Mosque was just opened not to long ago in my neighborhood. I just found out today, and it really don't fucking matter to me. However, this issue struck a nerve because of the history of that area, and the group in question. Just like they have the right to build it, I have a right to NOT like the idea, just like you have the right to keep asking already answered questions, just like Obama can look above this situation, but care about what a two shit Pastor in Florida burning Qu'rans.

Right, for arguments sake, you will not be able to comprehend what I just said, and you will post another question that I have already answered.... Of course, with the support of the left on this board...
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Bush couldn't be held responsible for an attack on American soil 8+months into the Obama term. But he directly defanged many of the regulatory agencies who's jobs it is to prevent some of the very crisis we've faced in the last two years including the SEC and MMS.
Didn't say Clinton couldn't hod any responsibility. But the onus is on the Bush Administration who decided to concentrate on finding ways to topple Hussein and not counterterrorism.



Now you can't have it both ways. If this is all about the victims, then many of the victims were Muslims. A formal mosque and an informal one were destroyed that day so it should be okay for a group of Muslims, who have no known ties to radical Islamists, to build a cultural center nearby (not on the site) with a mosque within.

1. With all that being said, we had no attacks after 9-11 under Bush. Sooooo....

2. Maybe it would be better if the victims, and this group get together with the planners of the next WTC. That would actually be better than actually building a exclusive cultural center that would look like a victory flag.

Oh yea, that would make it reasonable right?
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
1. With all that being said, we had no attacks after 9-11 under Bush. Sooooo....



richardreid_374x4503.jpg

The lord prays for the ignorant!:smh:
 

Alaskanredman

Star
Registered
Que, time and time again, I said they can build the damn mosque. Legally they can do it. That question has been answered, by me, for at least five times on this thread alone. Maybe you can't comprehend why I don't like it.

BTW, if it wasn't for the people in question, and the site. I wouldn't give two shits about this damn issue. In fact, a Mosque was just opened not to long ago in my neighborhood. I just found out today, and it really don't fucking matter to me. However, this issue struck a nerve because of the history of that area, and the group in question. Just like they have the right to build it, I have a right to NOT like the idea, just like you have the right to keep asking already answered questions, just like Obama can look above this situation, but care about what a two shit Pastor in Florida burning Qu'rans.

Right, for arguments sake, you will not be able to comprehend what I just said, and you will post another question that I have already answered.... Of course, with the support of the left on this board...

I think the problem is that you blur the lines between Muslims and Terrorists. There is nothing that points to a connection between the Muslims who are building this center to the Terrorists who flew planes into the WTC building, and there is nothing that even shows that they support those actions. The Muslims building this center have no obligation to be concerned with people's unreasonable blame because they aren't doing anything wrong or offensive and they don't represent anything wrong or offensive.

I hear wild stuff coming from the Right comparing this thing to the KKK setting up shop in a black neighborhood when in reality its more like a southern white guy with no ties to the KKK or any clear cut racism, moving in.

What the pastor was going to do is wrong, offensive and dangerous, but he most likely got scared off from the thought of a reaction from the same people he wanted to disrespect. Yet, people are jumping on the bandwagon and crossing that line not to protest anything per se but to show support for pure bigotry. These people are burning Qu'rans and they are not being arrested or stopped... so the Right can be proud that the Muslims who had nothing to do with 9-11 can now feel the hatred that they don't deserve and the Constitution is intact.
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
Que, time and time again, I said they can build the damn mosque. Legally they can do it. That question has been answered, by me, for at least five times on this thread alone. Maybe you can't comprehend why I don't like it.

That wasn't the question. The question was "Why do you care?" or more accurately "Why are you so supersensitive about something that even you say is legal and above board?"

BTW, if it wasn't for the people in question, and the site. I wouldn't give two shits about this damn issue. In fact, a Mosque was just opened not to long ago in my neighborhood. I just found out today, and it really don't fucking matter to me. However, this issue struck a nerve because of the history of that area, and the group in question. Just like they have the right to build it, I have a right to NOT like the idea, just like you have the right to keep asking already answered questions, just like Obama can look above this situation, but care about what a two shit Pastor in Florida burning Qu'rans.

What about the people in question? What about them has you perturbed?
Obama has spoken on both issues.


1. With all that being said, we had no attacks after 9-11 under Bush. Sooooo....

Not true.
The anthrax mailings happened after 9/11.
There was the guy who ran over people with his Jeep at the University of NC
And another fool that was running over people with his suv in San Fransisco
And even if it was true, so what? Did there need to be a rash of destroyed highrises?


2. Maybe it would be better if the victims, and this group get together with the planners of the next WTC. That would actually be better than actually building a exclusive cultural center that would look like a victory flag.

Oh yea, that would make it reasonable right?

Why would they need to get together with victims of the attack or planners of the next WTC? They have no relation to either party. They didn't fly any planes into the WTC and they don't own the WTC site.


It's not anymore exclusive than Jewish, Christian, or even Black/African American cultural centers that dot the US.

Look like a victory flag for who? Moderate Muslims building a cultural center in NY would be a victory for the US.
What would be a victory for extremists would be pressuring Imam Rauf into not building it. That would be further proof that America is all talk.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Looking to 2011 and the Future
<font size="5"><center>

This Year In Islamophobia </font size></center>



no-mosque-cropped-proto-custom_2.jpg

Protesters In New York oppose the Park51 Islamic
center.


Rachel Slajda
December 29, 2010


Nine years after Sept. 11, 2001, America saw perhaps its worst outbreak of Islamophobia since the attacks. Experts wagered it came from the aimless fear and the anger people feel in times of economic crisis, exploited by certain politicians looking to give their party an advantage in the midterms and turned toward American Muslims.

Such an outbreak was possible in the days and months after Sept. 11's attacks. It never really materialized, experts say, in part because President George W. Bush stood up and told the nervous country that Islam is a religion of peace, and that American was not at war with Muslims.

He made no such appeal this year, and President Obama's pleas fell on deaf ears or, more accurately, ears that believe Obama himself is secretly, and sinisterly, Muslim.

<font size="3"><center>Without further ado, then, is This Year in Islamophobia:</font size> </center>

<font size="4">The 'Ground Zero Mosque'</font size>


When an imam -- a known moderate imam who'd been sent by the U.S. government around the world on goodwill missions to Muslim nations -- and a group of developers decided to turn the old Burlington Coat Factory building in downtown Manhattan into a community center and mosque, almost no one noticed. No one noticed for months, in fact, until all of a sudden, this summer, it exploded.

People like Pamela Gellar and Robert Spencer, who for years had been screaming about the dangers of Islam from the fringe, were suddenly front and center. Their assertions -- that American Muslims are inherently dangerous, that the majority of imams are radical, that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a terrorist sympathizer -- were suddenly being repeated by the mainstream, by Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin and the like.

People said vicious things, calling the community center a shrine to terrorists and salt in an American wound.

The furor came to a head on Sept. 11, the ninth anniversary of the attacks, when protesters from both sides converged on the site, just a few blocks from Ground Zero itself and the memorial services being held. They screamed and chanted, and at least one man tore pages out of the Koran and scattered them throughout the street.

Then, as suddenly as it came, the furor died down to a few embers at the extremes. But the community center is still years and millions of dollars away from being a reality, and we can all expect more outrage to come.​


<font size="4">The Koran Burner</font size>


When cultish Florida church leader Terry Jones announced that he would burn a pile of Korans in his front yard on Sept. 11, the media dug in and didn't let go. It became the biggest story of the week, with dozens of reporters and news crews camped out in front of Jones' church, while reporting that footage and even stories about such a bonfire could set off violent riots in the Muslim world and give recruiting fodder to terrorists.

So worried was the Obama administration that Defense Secretary Robert Gates called Jones personally to ask him not to burn any Korans. He eventually agreed to call off the event after a local imam told him that Rauf, the New York imam, had promised to move his community center, even though he hadn't. Jones never did go through with it.

The spectacle angered the "God hates fags" funeral protesters at the Westboro Baptist Church, who'd been burning Korans for years.

It also prompted copycats, like the man in Texas who tried to burn one of the holy books but was thwarted by a skateboarder, who described the incident thusly:

I snuck up behind him and took his Koran, he said something about burning the Koran, I said, "Dude you have no Koran," and ran off.​


<font size="4">Sharia in Middle Tennessee</font size>


The opposition to a mosque near Murfreesboro, Tenn., started out scary -- first with vandalism and then with an arson that claimed some of the mosque's construction equipment. But it quickly turned to farce, as opponents to the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro -- which has been in town for 30 years and is now trying to expand -- filed a lawsuit to try and stop it.

The lawyers for the opponents, partially funded by a Christian Zionist group, argued in county court that the mosque's permit for religious use should never have been approved because Islam, they claimed, isn't a religion. When the Justice Department filed a brief noting that the U.S. has recognized Islam since Thomas Jefferson's time, the lawyers claimed that the federal government couldn't be trusted because it had once condoned slavery.

The judge ruled that the mosque's construction could continue.​

<font size="4">The Future</font size>

Violence has, fortunately, not spread past isolated incidents like the young man who slashed a Muslim cab driver in New York City.

But the story of Islamophobia in America is not over. Tensions between the Muslim community and federal law enforcement are growing, as the FBI continues to conduct undercover terror stings that some critics say amounts to entrapment. The new chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) has claimed that Muslim leaders are insufficiently cooperative with terror investigations and therefore is holding hearings on the "radicalization" of Muslim Americans. Other congressmen have promised to try to keep the hearings from targeting Muslims.​

And so what happens next year, and the year after that -- whether cooler heads continue to prevail in the end -- remains to be seen.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/the_year_in_islamophobia.php?ref=fpa
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
I respectfully disagree. The location of this one is a smokescreen and it's another case of opportunists using 9/11 for political gain.

Is Murfreesboro, Tenn to close? They're protesting a mosque there. Temecula, Calif.? Protests. Sheboygan, Wis.? Same.





Herman Cain Says U.S. Communities
'Have the Right' to Ban Mosques​



cain_herman_070411.jpg

Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain speaks
during a Tea Party rally in Philadelphia July 4



logo-foxnews.png

July 17, 2011


Presidential candidate <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">Herman Cain on Sunday defended his opposition to a new mosque in Tennessee</span>, expressing concern about Shariah law and declaring Americans "have the right" to ban mosques in their communities.

Cain, who stirred controversy this year by saying he would be uncomfortable appointing a Muslim to his Cabinet if elected, first expressed concern Thursday about the controversial mosque in Murfreesboro, Tenn. That mosque has been the subject of demonstrations and legal challenges in the wake of the controversy over the so-called "Ground Zero mosque" in New York City.

Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Cain said he came out against the Tennessee mosque after talking to members of that community. He said the site is "hallowed ground" to Murfreesboro residents and that they're concerned about "the intentions of trying to get Shariah law" -- the code governing conduct in Islamic societies.

"It's not just a mosque for religious purposes. This is what the people are objecting to," he said.

Asked whether any community should be able to prohibit a mosque, Cain said they should.

"They have the right to do that. That's not discriminating ... against that particular religion. That is an aspect of them building that mosque that doesn't get talked about," he said.

Cain again argued that residents were objecting to "the fact that Islam is both a religion and a set of laws, Shariah law. That's the difference between any one of our other traditional religions."

But while Cain said he expects the case to come before the Supreme Court, a local judge has allowed the project to go forward.

Cain is taking heat for his comments about Muslims. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which accused him of using "bigoted" language with his Cabinet comments, said Sunday that he should "apologize" for his latest remarks.

CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper, describing Cain's stance on the Tennessee mosque as a possible "sign of desperation," said other Republican candidates and leaders should also distance themselves from that kind of rhetoric.

"It's incumbent on reasonable people within the Republican Party to come out strongly and repudiate these kinds of un-American unconstitutional views," he said. "It's just so bizarre."

Cain, the former CEO of Godfather's Pizza, is struggling to build on earlier momentum and break into the top tier of candidates in the 2012 Republican primary race. He expressed confidence Sunday that he could have a strong showing in an upcoming Iowa straw poll.

FoxNews.com's Judson Berger contributed to this report.







http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/17/cain-says-communities-have-right-to-ban-mosques/

`
 

Upgrade Dave

Rising Star
Registered
I'm trying to figure out, is Herman Cain just pandering; or, is he just ignorant ???




[/size]

I vote for pandering with a big dose of attention whoring. With Michelle Bachmann stealing his thunder, he needs to get crazier to maintain his dwindling momentum.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator

Ground zero Islamic center opens doors​


nyc_islamic_center_AP110921068117_620x350.JPG

Photographer Danny Goldfield poses among his photographs celebrating New York children from
over 160 different countries, Sept. 21, 2011, at the Park51 cultural center gallery space in Manhattan. (AP)



CBS News
September 22, 2011



(AP) NEW YORK - The developer of an Islamic cultural center that opened Wednesday evening near the site of the terrorist attacks that leveled the World Trade Center says the biggest error on the project was not involving the families of 9/11 victims from the start.

People crowded into the center, where a small orchestra played traditional Middle Eastern instruments and a photo exhibit of New York children of different ethnicities lined the walls. The enthusiasm at the opening belied its troubled beginnings.

"We made incredible mistakes," Sharif El-Gamal told The Associated Press in an earlier interview at his Manhattan office.

The building at 51 Park Place, two blocks from the World Trade Center site, includes a Muslim prayer space that has been open for two years. El-Gamal said the overall center is modeled after the Jewish Community Center on Manhattan's Upper West Side, where he lives.

"I wanted my daughter to learn how to swim, so I took her to the JCC," said the Brooklyn-born Muslim. "And when I walked in, I said, `Wow. This is great."'

The project has drawn criticism from opponents who say they don't want a mosque near the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

The center is open to all faiths and will include a 9/11 memorial, El-Gamal said. He called opposition to the center — which prompted one of the most virulent national discussions about Islam and freedom of speech and religion since Sept. 11 — part of a "campaign against Muslims."

Last year, street clashes in view of the trade center site pitted supporters against opponents of the center.

When the center was first envisioned several years ago, activist Daisy Khan and her husband, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, played a major, vocal role. But they soon left the project because of differences with the developer.

El-Gamal, 38, confirmed Wednesday that they parted ways because "we had a different vision." He declined to elaborate.

The couple said they had discussed plans for Park51, as the center is known, with relatives of 9/11 victims, first responders and others, including the possibility that it could become a multifaith center focusing on religious conflict. But El-Gamal wishes victims' families had been involved earlier — before the center became a point of contention.

"The biggest mistake we made was not to include 9/11 families," El-Gamal said, noting that the center's advisory board now includes at least one 9/11 family member.

At first, "we didn't understand that we had a responsibility to discuss our private project with family members that lost loved ones," he said, and they did not "really connect" with community leaders and activists.

But today, "we're very committed to having them involved in our project. ... We're really listening," he said.


Pointing to the <SPAN style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffff00">inclusivity</span> of a center that critics feared would be polarizing, El-Gamal noted that the featured photographer in the "NYChildren" exhibit is Danny Goldfield, who is Jewish.

The Brooklyn photographer was inspired to create the exhibit by the story of Rana Sodhi, a Sikh who emigrated from India and settled in Arizona. His brother Balbir was killed in a retaliatory hate crime four days after Sept. 11.

Sodhi made the trip to New York for the opening and wore a tie decorated with heart-shaped American flags. He still runs the gas station where his brother was killed.

"My heart is so warm when I hear Danny is doing this exhibition in Park51," Sodhi said.

Goldfield said he has photographed children with roots in 169 countries since 2004. He hopes to find subjects representing 24 other countries to complete the project. Some of the photographs had been exhibited elsewhere, but the opening marked the first time all were shown together.

He said there was a synergy between the themes and spirit of his project and those of the center, particularly with regard to community participation and openness.

"They want to build a center for everyone that's represented on the walls here," he said.

Recalling the controversy over the center, he said he didn't want to pass judgment on its opponents. But he said he'd like them to see the show "more than anyone."

Afsana Khundkar, a native of Afghanistan whose 12-year-old son, Waseem, was one of the children photographed for the exhibit, said her family was honored to participate in the project.

"It's promoting good things in the world," she said. "The most important thing is to involve the children in the good things."

The space had been cleared out and the walls painted a stark white for the exhibit. The renovations were funded with $70,000 raised on the website Kickstarter. The modest first-floor space is intended to function as a temporary center until groundbreaking on an entirely new building.

El-Gamal told the AP that fundraising is under way to complete a 15-story building that will also include an auditorium, educational programs, a pool, a restaurant and culinary school, child care services, a sports facility, a wellness center and artist studios.

The mosque is especially needed in lower Manhattan, he said, because thousands of Muslims either work or live in the neighborhood, "and in our religion, we must pray five times a day."

At the opening, an ebullient El-Gamal told reporters the project had been framed by others throughout the debate over its existence.

"Today, for the first time, everyone gets a little bit of a glimpse into the future of what Park51 is going to offer New York," he said.





http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/22/national/main20109949.shtml
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Ground Zero mosque opens with little fanfare

source: Examiner

The controversial Islamic center planned for lower Manhattan that was the focus of superheated and sometimes misleading debate opened not with a bang but with a whimper on Wednesday. The protesters who had fought so adamantly to see the project scotched were nowhere in sight. Neither were their fist-waving liberal opponents, goading them with accusations of religious intolerance.

Ultimately, the courts rejected efforts to block construction of the center, which they said was protected by the Constitution. The courts got this one right. No one I know and respect ever denied the Cordoba Institute’s right to build a mosque on any site of its choosing. The issue was never one of rights but, rather, of what is right, in the moral sense. It is hard to conceive in a city with an area of 305 square miles that Feisal Abdul Rauf, the contentious imam behind the project, could not find an alternate spot that was not in the now-spectral shadow of the twin towers.​

It is equally hard to imagine that liberals, who claim to own the patent on tolerance and compassion, had so little of either for the families of 9/11 victims, who were among the project’s most vociferous opponents. What possible harm could have come from indulging their request that Cordoba find a different plot of real estate for its religious center? Oh, that’s right—I keep forgetting: Mention of the fact that the terrorist plot to kill 3,000 Americans was carried out in the name of Islam is not permitted according to the liberal handbook.

The Park51 center, as it will henceforth officially be known, opened with a photo exhibit of children’s art. How innocent! And the project’s usually bellicose developer and chief financier, Sharif El-Gamal, was all sweetness and light as he tut-tutted:​
We made incredible mistakes. The biggest mistake we made was not to include 9/11 families. We didn’t understand that we had a responsibility to discuss our private project with family members that lost loved ones.​
If only he had had a V-8!

One small blessing that Rauf and El-Gamal can be thankful for is that no harm is likely to come to their center now that it is built. America is still by and large a peaceful and law-abiding nation. The two men wouldn’t enjoy the same peace of mind had they built the structure in Rauf’s native Kuwait or its neighboring countries.


 

humble

Rising Star
Registered
Re: Ground Zero mosque opens with little fanfare

Occupy Wall Street has taken all the fanfare now!!! Power to the people!
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
. . . . . .

0-kim5.jpg

Hey!!! time to wake up:



Controversial billboard finally up near Times Square​


1u0WoJ.AuSt.91.jpg

An attention-grabbing billboard is on display near Times Square in Manhattan after traffic-stopping runs in Los Angeles and Chicago.​



McClatchy Washington Bureau
By James Rosen
February 10, 2014


A billboard that had been blocked for months from going up at Times Square is finally on view in the heart of New York City.

The giant ad for an anti-snoring throat spray shows a U.S. soldier and a Muslim woman in an embrace. His left arm is around her shoulder, while her left hand rests on his chest with a wedding band on the ring finger.

The soldier wears a camouflage uniform and a black beret. She is wearing a black niqab headdress that reveals only her eyes.

The billboard is on Broadway near West 51st Street a few blocks north of Times Square.

"As a snoring-solution company, we're in the business of keeping people together," said Melody Devemark, vice president of communications for Green Pharmaceuticals in Camarillo, Calif. "So we found the most polarized couple and thought, 'If we can keep them together, we can keep anybody together.'"

Clear Channel, the largest radio station company in the United States, had refused to let the ad be displayed on one of its billboards at Times Square.

The image went up last week on a billboard owned by United Advertising Corp., a Denver-based firm with a sales office in New York City.

The model in the ad is Paul Evans, a U.S. Army National Guard sergeant and aspiring actor.

"I am in the military to fight for this very right to express oneself in this country," Evans said. "I did this for the people who choose to be together despite the political, religious and racial prejudices that surround them."

The billboard was earlier on display in downtown Chicago and on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood.

The ad sparked a fierce online response, with hundreds of tweets, blogs and comments on the company's Web site that ranged from laudatory to highly critical.



Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/02/10/217616/controversial-billboard-finally.html#storylink=cpy


 
Top