Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Mosque
So, about that Mosque that is being considered for construction by ground zero. What is its return on investment? Because to me it represents misguided Liberal thinking and waste, and has a very small return compared to other possibilities.
return on investment is a place for muslims to worship... remember, freedom of religion? it's in your constitution.
and they're not just building a mosque, but it's an open community center which happens to include a mosque for the muslim community.
Somebody had an interesting point...who says anybody in Dubai has $100 million for such a project, these days?
Chicken,
Basically it has a very little return on its investment, is what you are saying. It is more costly than it is worth, and other alternatives would yield much higher returns.
![[TI] Primo](https://imperialconflict.com/forum/img/avatars/711.jpg)
my question is, how the hell can a mosque afford to pay for this location...
The US State Department has funded the Imam who plans to build the mosque to travel to the middle east to collect donations. And Obama has angered the public by vaguely supporting it.
it's one of those things where the people in question have every right to to what they plan on doing, even though it's somewhat bad taste to use their right the way they are doing it
it's two blocks away from ground zero anyway
I do agree that religion in general is a pretty big waste of resources
btw east, you look better as before. Did something with your hair didn't you?
I got a pet 
i saw let them build it and then blow it up
ahhhh the irony
You're letting them build a Mosque near ground zero? Lol. Try getting Saudi permission to build a church in Riyadh. Stupid Americans, lol.
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/ideas/archive/2008/12/09/a-lesson-in-tolerance-russians-want-a-church-in-riyadh-for-a-mosque-in-moscow.aspx
The effect of not letting them build it should not be underestimated as well. Its a stupid thing really but there simply isn't a good option.
The whole controversy only shows one thing: Americans associate Islam with Al-Qaeda terrorism. That is a pity.
>>The whole controversy only shows one thing: Americans associate Islam with Al-Qaeda terrorism. That is a pity.<<
So the fact that the Imam running this show published a book with the WTCless NYC skyline (
Get a different imam then, problem solved.
The motivations behind placing it there are still disgusting. They're cherishing the taking of human life.
Have you no thoughts on how bad of a choice this is for Muslims all over the world? It makes moderates look bad for radicals to glorify murder. This is a religion common among barbarians who rape and mutilate their women at rates unheard of in the west. Moderate Muslims certainly don't need the bad PR. Don't you have any input on how actions like this by radicals hurt the cause of moderates who aren't barbarians?
Chris_Balsz: If we blew it up we'd just be making ourselves as uncivilized and barbaric as those who share the culture of this Imam and those who see 9/11 as a victory.
COOOOOBRRAAAAAAAA
btw buzz that the backers are gonna pull out. Inshallah!
"The motivations behind placing it there are still disgusting. They're cherishing the taking of human life."
Define "they". As far as I read, the mosque would be for american muslims, I'd assume they're not really pro-Al Qaeda. If that premise is true, the location doesn't matter at all. It would only matter for those who hold Islam, rather than Al Qaeda, responsible for the 9/11 tragedy.
>>Define "they". As far as I read, the mosque would be for american muslims, I'd assume they're not really pro-Al Qaeda.<<
They: The people who want to build a victory mosque for the 9/11 attacks. Which is everyone who wants to build a mosque at this location. Nobody wants to build a mosque in that location because it's ideal for a population to worship at. It's not. The population isn't there and there are many, many more Mosques in better locations for NYC's Muslim populations to worship at. That this Imam who's co-whatever planning it and the co-founder of Hamas's support the planned mosque are evidence that radical Muslims (that is, the ones who like murder) think it's a great idea. And moderate Muslims don't seek to build a victory mosque at the WTC site because they don't see the barbaric murderous act as a victory.
You're equating anyone against a victory mosque for the 9/11 attacks with bigots who have a problem with Islam. I have explained that I find it embarrassing that Americans don't want to rezone (or whatever method they please) the area to prohibit a victory mosque at the site of the 9/11 attacks. I have no problem with nonradical Islam. I just don't want to entertain our barbaric murderous enemies with a victory mosque. I have no problem with nonradical Islam building all the mosques it wants all over the place. Nonradical Islam doesn't want to build a victory mosque at the site of the 9/11 murders.
If you have a problem with bigotry, perhaps you would do better to attack the many Muslim nations which are openly bigoted. While bigotry there is atrocious, disgusting, and open, the only bigotry you protest here is imagined and projected because some people object to allowing a victory mosque to be built at the WTC site.
Edit: Regarding "As far as I read, the mosque would be for american muslims, I'd assume they're not really pro-Al Qaeda." more specifically, this states that you haven't read anything about the Imam who wants to build this mosque, including what I mentioned here. Obviously the intentions of the mosque's would-be creators more than point to who it would be for. If you haven't read of his support for Sharia or any of the most basic information about him or the others who desire to build this mosque, why are you assuming they're not pro-Al Qaeda? I take it that "for american muslims" means for nonradicals? Even not considering the location, I'd still question this presumption because nonradical American Muslims don't support Sharia. In fact, they're adamantly against it.
The fact that I didn't read it as much has just one simple cause: our papers don't think the world's interest doesn't focus on America's regional political trifles. Although the politics forum has largely degraded to the point where it nearly always covers american topics, you should know that people from other countries don't spend as much time on the matter as Americans do.
As I said before, if the imam is promoting radical ideas, get rid of him. But on the other side, he's entitled to the same degree of freedom of speech as those "God hates fags"-idiots and other (Christian) fanatics.
For the rest, why would a mosque near ground zero even be a victory mosque? From a religious point of view it can not even be a victory mosque, as Islam's "competitors" would be Christian or Jewish buildings. If it would replace or be installed next to a dissapeared religious monument, it can rightly be a victory mosque. Otherwise you're confusing religion and politic acts. After all, there's next to no Islam involved in the 9/11 terrorist acts itself. The only Islam involved is in the rhetoric of Al Qaeda and, indeed, the rhetoric of religious fanatics, but those are irrelevant to the installation of a mosque itself..
People should be free to choose to do whatever they like. However sometimes people choose to do pretty silly things. Proposing to build a mosque near the 9/11 site is one of them.
The reaction to the proposal was quite predictable and the controversy is bad PR for islam because in many people's eyes it does link islam to al-qaeda terrorism.
If someone wants to fund it then there should be nothing stopping the construction of a mosque near the 9/11 site, and there should not be any controversy. However because the controversy was predictable and is bad PR it was a mistake to propose the construction.
*sigh*
>.From a religious point of view it can not even be a victory mosque, as Islam's "competitors" would be Christian or Jewish buildings. If it would replace or be installed next to a dissapeared religious monument, it can rightly be a victory mosque. Otherwise you're confusing religion and politic acts. After all, there's next to no Islam involved in the 9/11 terrorist acts itself. The only Islam involved is in the rhetoric of Al Qaeda and, indeed, the rhetoric of religious fanatics, but those are irrelevant to the installation of a mosque itself..<
But that is the SOLE MOTIVE behind the attacks, the idea that the Muslim God wanted such violence to occur. Further it is not a view of Islam roundly condemned by the mosque builders, who think America needs to examine itself to prevent such things.
Such views merit our national hostility, which of course we have a right to express.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Mosque
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.