Obama supports the Constitutional Right of Mosque being built near WTC

Page 23 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Women go to Mosuqes as far as I know.

Correct - though in all cases I've seen to date they are segregated from men inside the mosque and can sit for prayer behind them, never in front.

It's not as sexist as it sounds but it's still kind of amusing.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,022
8,298
136
are they really planning on opening this on 9/11/11 or is that just stupidity overheard on my boss's radio? (well, it's the height of stupidity if true, i mean, srsly, can't they get someone to do PR for them?)

From what I understand, that's just another lie in the story to rile people up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordoba_House#Planned_facilities
A number of commentators said that the builders planned various construction milestones, such as groundbreaking and the start of construction, to coincide with anniversaries of the September 11 attacks.[56][57] Khan was reported as saying in July 2010, however, that such assertions were "absolutely false" and that the construction timeline had not been determined.[58]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cordoba_House#cite_note-mediamatters-57
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Yes.

This is a lose-lose and he had no real reason to enter the fray. Reminds me of the Cambridge prof thingy. Another case of involvment in a local issue; it's not a fed gov or even state-level issue.

This looks to be largely emotionally driven, and cuts across party lines in NYC. So, it's a lose-lose situation.

And, yes, his political advisors are doing him a dis-service.



The way to "win" is to not get involved, particularly because it was unnecessary. The matter is resolved, they have to permission to proceed with the mosque etc.

I suspect there are some Dems up for reelection who privately wish he had just stayed out of it.

As I have said before, the Dems are particulalry poor at picking which battles to fight when. And let's not charge them with something they haven't done ("condemn him for silently supporting bigotry")

Fern

The voice of courage for protecting the minority, defending American values, in the face of the mob.

When the mob is screaming about how they oppose an innocent group building a perfectly fine center because they wrongly group them with Al Queda, rather than the President using his Bully Pulpit, as Presidents are supposed to and have done for a long time such as JFK's taking on the unpopular moral issue of segregation that some Democrats wish he'd just stay out of, here's the brave Fern advising him: stay silent on the discrimination, pander to the mob letting them own the debate unchallenged.

The old saying about 'good men who do nothing' when confronted with something wrong clearly has little meaning for Fern. The 'good politics' is 'be quiet to the mob'.

For shame, Fern. This is not your best day.

Maybe Democrats are particularly GOOD at picking which battles, but their criterion isn't only ones that benefit them politically, as you are advocating.

While we're at it, perhaps you can name in history the times the right wing has stuck its political neck out to opposed a mob against a minority's rights.

They're happy to paint the majority or powerful as 'victims' and pretend to 'defend' them, when actually supporting their wrongs, but when have they done that?

You might be tempted to go all the way back to the first Republican president, Lincoln - and run into the fact he did not have much of a plan to fight for the slaves before the war; that he freed them only in the south while he was at war with them which happened to help the war effort; that his dream had long been to end slavery by 1900 and deport all the blacks to Africa, and that is he could preserve the union by preserving slavery, he would do so.

How noble of you to address the issue of rights and unjust discrimination by saying that the thing to do is to stay silent for political gain.

That's just the sort of president the nation needs, one who ignores the right and wrong to appease the mob's prejudice.

The fact that his silence in this case wouldn't have caused the center to be built has nothing to do with the fact that it would have left the prejudice dominating the debate.

If you saw the AT forums fill up one day with people attacking a minority wrongly, would your reaction be, better not say anything, it's bad politics?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
under what circumstance are women allowed into a mosque?

Don't worry, they got it covered...

Islamic law
requires men and women to be separated in the prayer hall; ideally, the women must occupy the rows behind the men. Muhammad preferred women to pray at home rather than at a mosque, and according to the hadith Muhammad said: "The best mosques for women are the inner parts of their houses", although Muhammad told Muslims not to forbid women from entering mosques. The second caliph Umar at one time prohibited women from attending mosques especially at night because he feared they may be teased by males, so he required them to pray at home.[42] Sometimes a special part of the mosque was railed off for women; for example, the governor of Mecca in 870 had ropes tied between the columns to make a separate place for women.[8]



Many mosques today will put the women behind a barrier or partition or in another room against most Islamic beliefs.

Sure glad no ones rights are violated.
 

Sclamoz

Guest
Sep 9, 2009
975
0
0

The fact that the people against the mosque can't come up with a legitimate argument against the mosque besides emotional BS and they continue to make shit up just confirms that this is a nothing but a manufactured outrage/fear monger story for the right wing base.
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
Likely speaking ignorantly here, but don't they have insurance to rebuild? Or does insurance not cover an act of Allah?

Silverstein got his money, I don't see why the Church wouldn't of.

As the Twin Towers' insurance money recipient, Silverstein claimed that he had the sole right to decide what would be built. He announced that he had already picked Skidmore, Owings & Merrill as his master planner for the site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_site

“just a stone’s throw away from 9/11’s sacred ground”- Sarah Palin

lol
Perhaps baseball would of been a better choice of career for her
 

brencat

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2007
2,170
3
76
What was it that created 9/11 Islam/Muslims or American policy towards the Middle East and its propping up of the house of saud and funding terror in both iran and iraq simultaneously while they were at war
Ah yes, the old "we brought it on ourselves" bullshit response. Kind of like accusing a rape victim of "asking for it" because she wore a short skirt and 4" heels. You really are short-bus stupid aren't you?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
The fact that the people against the mosque can't come up with a legitimate argument against the mosque besides emotional BS and they continue to make shit up just confirms that this is a nothing but a manufactured outrage/fear monger story for the right wing base.

Yea, it ridiculous that all those people that are sad, and pissed because some radical Muslims murdered 3000+ people in the name of Islam don't want a mosque near ground zero, they must be crazy.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
-snip-
The old saying about 'good men who do nothing' when confronted with something wrong clearly has little meaning for Fern. The 'good politics' is 'be quiet to the mob'.

Melodramatic BS.

As I pointed out above the issue has been resolved in the mosques' favor. No need to come their defense etc.


an innocent group building a perfectly fine center

You're making an assumption.

IMO, their motives can be fairly questioned. You're 'reaching out and building bridges' by pissing off these people? They're going ahead with it in spite of this? Whether the outrage is justified or not, if that were in fact their objective they should have paused to reconsider. Yet they haven't.

How noble of you to address the issue of rights and unjust discrimination by saying that the thing to do is to stay silent for political gain.

That's just the sort of president the nation needs, one who ignores the right and wrong to appease the mob's prejudice.

The fact that his silence in this case wouldn't have caused the center to be built has nothing to do with the fact that it would have left the prejudice dominating the debate.

He's picking and choosing which 'cause' to address, and IMO quite likely for his own political purpose. Stupid choice.

And, no, the other side is not dominating the debate. FFS, there are people all over MSM already taking up that 'cause'. And obviously that side (pro mosque) dominates in NYC because approval was granted by vote.

Fern
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
I wasn't aware we were talking about other religions, but why don't you enlighten us?

Nono, I've just been through 23 pages, reading how you and your kin like to argue, that's why I phrased my post as a question.
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Nono, I've just been through 23 pages, reading how you and your kin like to argue, that's why I phrased my post as a question.

Me, and my "kin"? lol.

How about ...I don't care, and it's not the subject. You brought it up, if you want to talk about it, than talk about it.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
How can anyone vote for a party that engages in this kind of fear mongering, instead of demonstrating that they've learned how to govern since the last time they had the complete power to do so 2000-2006 and blew it?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
WTF are you going on about? Victory Mosque??:rolleyes:

For the record, I think they should build that Mosque elsewhere but they have the right to build it there. I also don't know anything about some Greek Orthodox Church being taken over by Eminent Domain and finally I think Islam is even more ridiculous the Christianity.

Of course what I think about what religion people choose to worship doesn't matter as they have the right to worship as they choose. Same goes for you.
Islam always builds mosques to celebrate great victories over the infidel. The very name of the foundation building the mosque is the Cordoba Foundation or Cordoba Initiative, based on the grand Cordoba Mosque (since I think torn down or turned into something else after the Muslims were driven back out of Spain and Portugal) in Cordoba which was built from the stones of a Gothic Cathedral knocked down for that purpose after the Muslim Moors conquered the Catholic Iberian Peninsula. The article quoted before on the Greek Orthodox Church that was crushed under the collapsing towers is not being allowed to rebuild. Its land is being taken under eminent domain by the government, which is why the Port Authority was offering them other land and money as compensation, to go elsewhere and rebuild. Seems a Christian church, even a beautiful Greek Orthodox Church, just isn't suitable to be near Ground Zero. They could not come to an agreement though, so now the Port Authority is going to just seize the land and compensate them as it wishes.

under what circumstance are women allowed into a mosque?
A woman may enter a mosque at any time, provided of course that a man drags her in by her hair. ;)

Remember class, under Christianity women are second class citizens whereas under Islam they are treasured property.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
The voice of courage for protecting the minority, defending American values, in the face of the mob.

When the mob is screaming about how they oppose an innocent group building a perfectly fine center because they wrongly group them with Al Queda, rather than the President using his Bully Pulpit, as Presidents are supposed to and have done for a long time such as JFK's taking on the unpopular moral issue of segregation that some Democrats wish he'd just stay out of, here's the brave Fern advising him: stay silent on the discrimination, pander to the mob letting them own the debate unchallenged.

The old saying about 'good men who do nothing' when confronted with something wrong clearly has little meaning for Fern. The 'good politics' is 'be quiet to the mob'.

For shame, Fern. This is not your best day.

Maybe Democrats are particularly GOOD at picking which battles, but their criterion isn't only ones that benefit them politically, as you are advocating.

While we're at it, perhaps you can name in history the times the right wing has stuck its political neck out to opposed a mob against a minority's rights.

They're happy to paint the majority or powerful as 'victims' and pretend to 'defend' them, when actually supporting their wrongs, but when have they done that?

You might be tempted to go all the way back to the first Republican president, Lincoln - and run into the fact he did not have much of a plan to fight for the slaves before the war; that he freed them only in the south while he was at war with them which happened to help the war effort; that his dream had long been to end slavery by 1900 and deport all the blacks to Africa, and that is he could preserve the union by preserving slavery, he would do so.

How noble of you to address the issue of rights and unjust discrimination by saying that the thing to do is to stay silent for political gain.

That's just the sort of president the nation needs, one who ignores the right and wrong to appease the mob's prejudice.

The fact that his silence in this case wouldn't have caused the center to be built has nothing to do with the fact that it would have left the prejudice dominating the debate.

If you saw the AT forums fill up one day with people attacking a minority wrongly, would your reaction be, better not say anything, it's bad politics?

Wow! You actually went all the way back to Lincoln to attack Republicans and defend Democrats on minority rights! You, sir, are a real piece of work. Even Obama doesn't have that kind of moxie. Congratulations on being the most blindly party loyalist poster on the Internet, that certainly wasn't an easy title to attain.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
How can anyone vote for a party that engages in this kind of fear mongering, instead of demonstrating that they've learned how to govern since the last time they had the complete power to do so 2000-2006 and blew it?

So, you come from the mindset that every Republican is in fact George W. Bush?

Why do we even bother listing names on ballots? Just put a D & an R on the ballot and that should suffice. We could eliminate the primaries, because they don't matter then either.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,357
8,445
126
Anyways, even if you disagree with Obama on this issue, I don't see how voting for a party that has demonstrated complete inability to govern when it had full power from 2000-2006 is going to make things better for America overall.

the senate was controlled by democrats from the middle of 2001 through the new congress seated in 2003
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
So, you come from the mindset that every Republican is in fact George W. Bush?

Why do we even bother listing names on ballots? Just put a D & an R on the ballot and that should suffice. We could eliminate the primaries, because they don't matter then either.

I just know we cannot trust Republicans with majority in Congress or with the Presidency. That has been demonstrated. Whether there are individual Republicans with a brain, possibly, but they aren't willing to fight for their party's soul, and vote party line anyway.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I just know we cannot trust Republicans with majority in Congress or with the Presidency. That has been demonstrated. Whether there are individual Republicans with a brain, possibly, but they aren't willing to fight for their party's soul, and vote party line anyway.

Let's all mediate on how much astoundingly better things have been since the Democrats first took over in January 2007 . . .

Just so you know - your cute little BP = GOP symbol fools no one. BP gave Obama right at a million dollars in campaign cash, consistently gave much more to Democrats than to the Pubbies, and in return got the rights to drill in deep water - rights that American companies somehow couldn't quite seem to land. When you then associate BP with the GOP you merely establish yourself as someone unable or unwilling to evaluate life realistically and honestly.
 
Last edited:

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,164
1,637
126
Don't you loony leftist take every chance you can to bash Christians? Yet go out of your way to defend the sensibilities of Muslims, weird.

Muslims pretty much believe crazy shit. But, I don't see how we can allow churches from one religion, but then block churches of another religion. It's either all or none, there can't be a middle ground. If for an instant we as a nation favor one religion over another, we become a theocracy. And if you wanna see "loony" ... look at every theocracy that has ever existed over the time-line of mankind.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Do conservatives want the government to use eminent domain to seize the Mosque property from its rightful owners?
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Also, why would the president of a country founded on religious freedom for ALL take a different position here? It's almost shocking how easily some people can dismiss the rights of those they don't agree with.

Agreed. While the selection of the location could have been handled a little more tactfully by the muslim group...they have the right to build the center there and restricting them in any way would be horrible for our freedoms.