Ground Zero Once Removed

I can't believe that this Right wing blog ginned up issue hasn't become an issue here yet and I REALLY hate to fuel the nonsense by bringing it up but it seems that the GOP has taken its stand and even the president has commented on the topic so I guess it's out there.

A few facts first: 1 it’s not a mosque, its a Muslim community center. 2 It's not on ground zero, it's a couple of blocks away. 3 It is just one of like 18 or 19 other tenants in the new building. 4 These are moderate Muslims that had nothing to do with 9/11.
5 There is no legislative solution to this issue one way or the other, it is a New York City building code issue. 6. No politicians in New York have issues with this building.

Now, having said that, what is the issue?

 

The most disturbing event in this entire debacle is Obama's involvement. In two paragraphs, you were able to show how much of a non issue this topic really should be. But our President decides to swing a the proverbial "pitch in the dirt". The federal government has nothing to do with it and commenting on the topic is a political no win situation. What in the hell was the Obama administration thinking when they took on this issue?

 

I didn't see the context in which Obama commented on this topic but I'm guessing that someone asked the question. Is that right? I guess that he can't not answer the question. I agree that he should have just stayed out of what is essentially a local issue for New Yorkers. Then Harry Reid had to put his foot squarely in his mouth and call it a bad idea. This whole non-issue began when some Right wing blogger ginned up the whole controversy and it took off when Fox got a hold of it. I suppose it is exactly like the Shirley Sherrod issue. Ginned up by the Right wing and then used to point out Obama's reaction while completely ignoring the fact that they ginned it up in the first place. Obama's reactions, right or wrong, to the 24-hour news cycle is one thing but having the people that created the controversy in the first place pointing fingers at the people that are forced to react to it seems like a bassackwards approach to these situations.

 

My guess is it would have been answered by the white house press secretary in the daily press briefing if this was just a response to a question. The clips I saw were Obama himself speaking which meant he wanted to weigh in on the debate. While dodging the question in the presse briefings may have drawn some criticism, it would have been far less damaging than answering the question, no matter what the response.

Now Moen, don't go all Tom on us and start cyring about the right wing bloggers. The republicans had to watch the daily death toll of the Iraq war every night on the news. No need to get a blogger since the entire television media (expect FOX) is controlled by liberals. Every administration in this day and age needs to be able to deal with constant and relentless scrutiny from the media and the opposing political party. Swinging at a pitch in the dirt is a rookie mistake and not one this administration should be making in their sophomore year IMO.

 

I try never to go all Tom, just a little bit Tom. LOL!

They traced this story back to its inception which wasn't that long ago and it was basically a manufactured controversy that no one would have ever thought twice about until this vicious anti-Muslim Right wing blogger created the issue and Fox eventually ran with it. The GOP leadership in the form of Gingrich, Boehner, and Cantor weighed in on it and finally Obama and Reid chimed in. Here is the path: http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/16/ground_zero_mosque_origins

This crazy Bizarro World ginned up news has just become a pattern on the Right. They don't want to talk about the real issues like the economy, jobs, immigration, or health care so they create these distractions and then do their level best to make the Democrats look bad for any reaction they have.

It’s like starting a building on fire and standing around waiting for the fire department to show up so that you can criticize the way they put the fire out. Even more aptly, it is like calling in a false fire alarm and waiting for the fire department to show up and criticizing them for showing up to a false fire alarm. The thing that really makes this one for Bizarro World is the fact that some people in the crowd stand around and nod approvingly at the people that are criticizing the fire department. Just how dumb are people anyway? Accusing Obama of not handling the pressure of the 24-hour news cycle isn't nearly as big of an issue as all the people in this country incapable of handling it without being the president. Geeeeeeesh!

 

Do your research
Moderate muslim , give me a break…… well maybe you have………left wing news and blogs are calling this Imam ‘Feisal Abdul Raue’ A moderate so why am I not surprised you would go in lock step.
Feisal Abdul Raue tells CBS news that the attacks on 911 are because of American’s policies and we were accessories to the crime.. What does that tell you about moderate muslims. When ask if Hamas is a terrorist organization, he won’t answer the question. If some main street Christian preacher said something that extreme I guarantee they wouldn’t be calling him a moderate.

The American people have been told over and over, we must be sensitive to Muslim senseabilities. Well its about damn time that muslims in the United States be sensitive to American values and give some respect to the 3000 murdered on 911.

 

Ahhhh jth, you walked right into this one. I'll let this story do my talking for me and this scary Muslim Imam that has another history.

'Ground Zero Mosque' Imam Helped FBI With Counterterrorism Efforts

In March 2003, federal officials were being criticized for disrespecting the rights of Arab-Americans in their efforts to crack down on domestic security threats in the post-9/11 environment. Hoping to calm the growing tempers, FBI officials in New York hosted a forum on ways to deal with Muslim and Arab-Americans without exacerbating social tensions. The bureau wanted to provide agents with "a clear picture," said Kevin Donovan, director of the FBI's New York office.

Brought in to speak that morning -- at the office building located just blocks from Ground Zero -- was one of the city's most respected Muslim voices: Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. The imam offered what was for him a familiar sermon to those in attendance. "Islamic extremism for the majority of Muslims is an oxymoron," he said. "It is a fundamental contradiction in terms."

It was, by contemporaneous news accounts, a successful lecture.

Flash forward six-and-a-half years, and Feisal Abdul Rauf occupies a far different place in the political consciousness. The imam behind a controversial proposal to build an Islamic cultural center near those same FBI offices has been called "a radical Muslim," a "militant Islamist" and, simply, the "enemy" by conservative critics. His Cordoba House project, meanwhile, has been framed as a conduit for Hamas to funnel money to domestic terrorist operations.

For those who actually know or have worked with the imam, the descriptions are frighteningly -- indeed, depressingly -- unhinged from reality. The Feisal Abdul Rauf they know, spent the past decade fighting against the very same cultural divisiveness and religious-based paranoia that currently surrounds him.

"Imam Feisal has participated at the Aspen Institute in Muslim-Christian-Jewish working groups looking at ways to promote greater religious tolerance," Walter Isaacson, head of The Aspen Institute told the Huffington Post. "He has consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism, and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam. Some of this work was done under the auspices of his own group, the Cordoba Initiative. I liked his book, and I participated in some of the meetings in 2004 or so. This is why I find it a shame that his good work is being undermined by this inflamed dispute. He is the type of leader we should be celebrating in America, not undermining."

A longtime Muslim presence in New York City, Feisal Abdul Rauf has been a participant in the geopolitical debate about Islamic-Western relations well before 9/11. In 1997, he founded the American Society for Muslim Advancement to promote a more positive integration of Muslims into American society. His efforts and profile rose dramatically after the attacks when, in need of a calm voice to explain why greater Islam was not a force bent on terrorism, he became a go-to quote for journalists on the beat.

 

Hey Moen,

I guess it is pretty easy to get someone to swing at a pitch in the dirt!

 

Whatever that means in this context????

 

It meant I knew this thread was a trap. The only way to respond without falling into the trap was to talk about how others have responded to the topic. Hence my response about Obama's handling of the issue.

 

That’s the best you can do….cut and paste from the left wing Huff & Puff compost. Go ahead and slap those 3000 families in the face…but when you visit NY you will have a place to go worship.

So we can conclude that you believe that…..1) American’s policies were accessories to the crime, and 2) Hamas is not a terrorist organization……….Take your time finding your answers….happy surfing.

 

It is more about not letting the terrorists win. Freedom of religion is protected by the Constitution. The instant we use the events of 9/11 to excuse dismissing the Constitution is the minute we have lost the war on terror. Prior to 9/11, no rational American would have been opposed to this muslim project. Now, a significant portion of our country wants to ignore one of the cornerstones of our country's foundation.

And you can quote the right wing propaganda all you want. The simple fact is that the Imam is correct in his statement about our policies being an accessory to the crime. The United States is directly responsible for Osama Bin Laden's rise to power within the middle east. The CIA directly funded and armed Bin Laden and the mujahideen in the Afghan rebellion against the Soviet Union. Then we ticked him off by placing our military personnel in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War. We make decisions without any thought as to the future repercussions of our actions. Foreign policy is like chess. You need to think many moves ahead in order to win. We consistently fail to show diplomatic foresight and often display the hubris of a lone superpower.

We considered Saddam Hussein one of our worst enemies under our previous administration. Yet we supported Saddam and Iraq in the Iraq-Iran war because Iraq promised to topple the Iranian government. Then we win the Gulf War but leave Saddam in power. And even worse, we were the major proponent of the oil for food programme. Guess that backfired huh?

As for Hammas, how is he supposed to keep open relations with both the arabic Islamic people of the middle east and the US if he is forced to publicly call one of the Islamic groups a terrorist group. Do you see the hubris rearing it's ugly head. Hell, if Hammas pledged to depose the current Iranian government, we would probably make a public declaration that they are freedom fighters and not terrorists.

The best thing about foreign policy is that it really shouldn't matter whether you are republican or democrat. Our politicians have the evil required to make sound foreign policy decisions as long as we shed the hubris that has plagued us since the fall of the Soviet Union.

 

Lets see, attack the source rather than "refudiate" (thanks Sarah!) the facts, appeal to emotion rather than debate the issue, and then take a cheap personal swipe at me. Finish it off by assuming my position and challenging me to defend it....Is that the BEST YOU CAN DO!

 

Your concerned about religious liberty and property rights? When's the last time you ever heard a liberal talk about property rights in the sense that anybody has any? This is pure politics. The people that want that mosque built want to stuff it down the throats of Americans. It just so happens there was a Greek Orthodox Church right across the street from Ground Zero. They have been refused permission to rebuild. Why are you liberals not screaming about their religious liberty and property rights?

Yeah they have the constitutional right to build it, but that’s not what this is about, its about the sensitivities of the people/families murdered by 19 muslims on 911.

Have you ever stopped to wonder why it is that every leftist, every socialist, every person in this country who has a problem with this country is for that mosque being built? Have you ever asked yourself why it is they are so hell-bent on the mosque being built?

Why stop at the Ground Zero? Put a mosque next to the Pentagon… put a mosque right next to the soon-to-be completed Flight 93 national memorial in Pennsylvania. ……how bout a Shinto temple right next to the Arizona Memorial out at Pearl Harbor, you gonna support that also? After all they have the constitutional right to do so don’t they?

 

No reason whatsoever, appeal to emotion, make up lies, and character-assassinate those who disagree with you. Is this all you have? You have made all of the Newt Gingrich arguments picked up by Fox news here. If I need to know what you think, I will begrudgingly turn on Fox News.

 

Well then I guess the entire Right wing saw the "trap" too because they also responded by talking about Obama. Again, the false fire alarm! That's the real issue.

 

A few other opinions on the mosque:

Harry Reid: “I think that it's very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else.”

Abdul Rahman al-Rashed. He is the director of al-Arabiya TV. He is the former editor of London's Arab daily. Abdul Rahman al-Rashed is a left-leaning director of Al-Arabiya TV, former editor of London's big Arab newspaper. "I cannot imagine that Muslims want a mosque on this particular site, because it will be turned into an arena for promoters of hatred, and a symbol of those who committed the crime." We don't want that. "At the same time, there are no practicing Muslims in the district who need a place of worship, because it is indeed a commercial district." He's saying no Muslims live there. "The last thing Muslims want today is to build just a religious center out of defiance to the others, or a symbolic mosque that people visit as a museum next to a cemetery. “

Not exactly right wing gingrich fox watchers, huh?

I guess that’s why public opinion is running about 70-30 against the mosque. Bipartisian I would say.

 

It has been a issue for quite some time guy's long before the President decided to speak up on the matter. We have had reports about it over here for months now and that was main stream news channels.
My own personal view is that it shoudnt be allowed to proceed no matter what it is, as the damage to it has allready been done.
It is too close to the site of a major terrorist incident that was carried out by Muslims (That alone raises issues of sensitivity towards the feelings of the familie involved) I have to ask why pick this spot? they must have known there would be a backlash! How long after it is compleated do you think it would be before some nut job decided to make it a target?
If you want a Muslim community/mosque center you have the entirety of the city of New York to pick from, why cause confrentation?

 

The Democrats have imploded! Pelosi is so drunk on her own power, she doesn't realize what a suicide mission she's on for herself and her party. And then Pelosi, right out of Joe Stalin's playbook, "Investigate the funding of the people who oppose the mosque." Let's investigate people using their First Amendment free speech rights. Let's investigate the 9/11 families. And they want to try to make you believe it's the Republicans who are in trouble over this? There's panic in the White House because Obama screwed up Friday night and said what he really thinks about this.

Now hear comes the comical part…….
Eugene Robinson in the Washington Post and Maureen Dowd are begging George W. Bush to get involved in the mosque issue to save Obama. They want Bush cause he's got credibility on this. They want Bush to bring out the megaphone again and come out in support of the mosque to bail Obama out. Lol.

 

That Greek church is allowed to rebuild on the exact same spot it was on. So your statement is untrue. And the Arizona Memorial is government property So there goes that anology. But I do think there shouldnt be a taco stand right next to the Alamo, if that helps.