…and this is a 
What are they thinking? The protesters complaining about that violent, militant religion of Islam building a mosque/community center in New York are now towing about a pair of deactivated missiles at their rallies. I guess Christians are trying to send a message that they're friendly and non-threatening.
I've been doing it wrong for so many years. When I was protesting the Iraq war, maybe it would have been a more effective demonstration if we'd rented a tank and put a sign on it, "Honk if you hate war". When we protested that biological warfare work going on at the Dugway Proving Grounds, maybe we should have put talcum powder in envelopes and mailed them to the local newspapers. It's so much more reassuring to the other side when you couch your message of respectful coexistence in military gear.
The guy who donated the missiles to the protest has a poll. He's just clueless on so many levels.
Do you want the Mosque @ Ground Zero?
Sure, why not 66%
Hell no! 34%
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Donnie B.
|
September 6, 2010 7:35 PM
Only a few votes on that poll so far. Should be easy pickings for the horde.
Posted by: KennyG
|
September 6, 2010 7:43 PM
69 to 31 in favor of the mosque/community center.
Ah, psychological projection in acation. Always a spectacular-and hilarious-sight to behold.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
September 6, 2010 7:44 PM
Rockets are cool.
That might be the main reason, really. It's ridiculous with respect to their message (whatever that is), of course, but I know their missile would be the only thing that would draw me toward them.
So anyway, that's the message I'm taking from it: Rockets are cool.
Glen Davidson
Posted by: KennyG
|
September 6, 2010 7:45 PM
That should be "action", not "acation".
Posted by: anthrosciguy
|
September 6, 2010 7:48 PM
The guy is so clueless he not only has an internet poll, but one which can be voted on repeatedly by just doing a page refresh.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 6, 2010 7:49 PM
what a stupid poll. I don't want a mosque at Ground Zero, or anywhere else for that matter (or a church, or a buddhist temple or any other religious building); I do however know that they have a right to do so, and therefore accept that they're building one.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 8:14 PM
I guess one could argue that it is a subconscious (or maybe not) phallic expression. y'know "eff the mosque".
I do think the mosque is a bit disrespectful, seems more like something you'd do if you had conquered the infidels.
Posted by: Zeno
|
September 6, 2010 8:14 PM
At least the affirmative response in the poll isn't too bad. "Sure, why not?" is close to my reaction, since "Hell, yes!" would not reflect my feelings. I don't see a good reason to build any religion-affiliated structure anywhere. They're a blight on the land. But I have contempt for the un-American bigots who refuse to respect the rights of others and insist on screaming "they" are responsible for 9/11 and now "they" want to build a community center. "They"? Even Roman Catholicism isn't that monolithic (to the pope's grief).
Posted by: The Other Ian
|
September 6, 2010 8:17 PM
Yeah, Jadehawk, I'd like an "it's none of my business" option too. However, "sure, why not" isn't too bad as an expression of my indifference as to what other people do with their property. It's even a bit snarky. Come on, bigots, tell me why not. Your feelings are hurt? Is that the best you've got?
Posted by: Usagichan
|
September 6, 2010 8:17 PM
Do I sense some sort of phallic symbolism in the missiles? - overcompensation for something perhaps; deactivated too (I hear there are very successful treatments to help with that problem).
Peace through coercion - agree with us or get blown up. Yep, I can see the spirit of tolerance and democracy is alive and well!
Posted by: mxh
|
September 6, 2010 8:21 PM
poor New Yorkers... it's their city and they have to deal with a bunch of out of town nuts telling them what to build where.
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
September 6, 2010 8:23 PM
I don't see a poll anywhere on this page.
Posted by: Zeno
|
September 6, 2010 8:24 PM
The poll got axed (I think) just as I was trying to add a pithy comment to the twenty that were already there.
Posted by: Patrick
|
September 6, 2010 8:40 PM
i think it is kind of telling that if you go to the regulate them website, the two top things they talk about is not wanting the ground zero mosque and something that greatly affects the people of america... BMW dealerships inflating repair costs.
those are the two things wrong with your country those terror muslims and paying too much for an oil change on your M3 at the dealership
Posted by: James R. Palmer II
|
September 6, 2010 8:47 PM
Can't find poll.
Posted by: Mark
|
September 6, 2010 8:49 PM
The poll link seems to have been changed to an advertisement. I suspect the site owner is now getting some money every time someone goes to his site and clicks on the work "Poll".
Posted by: Grahame
|
September 6, 2010 8:51 PM
I'm guessing he took it down because it didn't say what he wanted it to say. The pussy.
Posted by: Aquaria
|
September 6, 2010 8:51 PM
I do think the mosque is a bit disrespectful, seems more like something you'd do if you had conquered the infidels.
It's no more disrespectful than a Catholic church near a playground.
Or you deluding yourself that even one intelligent thought has ever entered your empty head.
Posted by: Ternon
|
September 6, 2010 8:52 PM
I hope you voted "hell, no!"
Not wanting the symbol of idiotism, violence, ignorance and anti-reason to be built is not the same thing as not supporting the right for it being built.
To much liberal and right wing noise...
Posted by: Frank b
|
September 6, 2010 9:00 PM
Sandi #7 said
Muslim Americans are already living there wanting a community center to meet in and a prayer room to pray in. The site is two blocks from the periphery of ground zero, but it might as well be two miles. It is in its own typical Manhatten neighborhood, and has nothing to do with ground zero. You have not been paying attention if you haven't heeard this before. I am sorry if I sound harsh, but the concept of disrespect was made up by bigots.
Posted by: whitedragon25
|
September 6, 2010 9:02 PM
I couldn't resist, my inner geek took over:
The LOL Cats version
Posted by: Algernon, elle sans chapeau
|
September 6, 2010 9:02 PM
I was trying to talk myself into taking the devil's advocate position tonight, but instead all the missiles leave me thinking is...
America, fuck yeah!
Posted by: phoenixwoman
|
September 6, 2010 9:03 PM
Thanks for this, PZ. Hope this is a sign that you're doing better!
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler
|
September 6, 2010 9:05 PM
Missiles are so passé. (Taping a couple of flags to the tailfins is a nice touch, I gotta admit.)
If you really want to impress and warm the hearts of modern Muslims, nothing sends a message better than an armed drone.
Posted by: Daz
|
September 6, 2010 9:06 PM
The Poll's gone. I did find this interesting though ...
"We, Israelis have been fighting terrorism and Muslims well before Americans knew how to spell Terror. We have tolerance and respect for all religions..." (My italics)
Hmm, right.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 6, 2010 9:07 PM
That noise you heard was my irony meter going nuclear.
Posted by: phoenixwoman
|
September 6, 2010 9:09 PM
whitedragon25 @ 21: That. Is. Perfect.
Posted by: SquidBrandon
|
September 6, 2010 9:09 PM
I find myself wanting to ask these people what the exact minimum number of blocks from ground zero a new mosque would need to be in order to be considered "respectful" or "sensitive" to the plight of those directly affected by 9/11.
a. 5 blocks?
b. 10 blocks?
c. 17 blocks?
d. 204 blocks?
And similarly, what would be an acceptable minimum length of time to wait after 9/11 before constructing said mosque?
a. 10 years?
b. 20 years?
c. 30 years?
d. 1,638 years?
Posted by: Caddisfly
|
September 6, 2010 9:10 PM
The stupid is strong with them young Skywalker, beware the opportunity for the "farce" is boundless.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 9:16 PM
Its not that I am unaware of facts, but rather a matter of it just hasn't been long enough yet. Whether Muslim Americans like it or not, the memory and effects of 9/11 are still strong. Strong enough that the proximity of the mosque to Ground Zero is a slap in the face. I understand the NY Muslim American community needs a place to meet, but it is asking too much too soon. Having lived in a diverse city myself I do understand that neighborhoods can and do vary greatly block to block. I don't doubt NY is just the same. But part of being American is accepting that community means sometimes there are limits.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 9:19 PM
You know what?
I actually want the mosque there. I didn't before this bullshit. I want that thing built,a nd big, if only because I fucking hate the islamophobia of Merika, and want the bigotry destroyed.
Shit, I almost considered you at least principled, til you claimed the center was a site for violence. Because I consider swimming pools and exercise equivalent to bombs and rifles.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 9:21 PM
Sandi, you're not aware of the facts if you think these people are wahabbist muslims, which would actually make them the same people.
From where I'm sitting, you're just looking for an excuse to discriminate against brown people.
Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula
|
September 6, 2010 9:26 PM
sandiseattle wrote:
You're demonstrably unaware of many facts, including that you're a stupid, deluded, ignorant pissant whose presence here makes the conversation that much stupider.
Once again, why don't you go fuck a decaying porcupine?
Posted by: Daz
|
September 6, 2010 9:27 PM
@sandiseattle
The community centre prayer room (not mosque) is for the use of Muslims living in NY. Presumably most of them lived in NY at the time of the attack and deplored it just as much as you or I. Please explain why these people have any less right to worship in that area than any other religion.
If the attack had been made by a fundy christian organisation, would you now be advocating the banning of all christian sects from the area?
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 6, 2010 9:45 PM
I saw the protest in person yesterday. It was every bit as stupid as you think it was. I tried engaging them*. They were all over me when I told them I had treated 9/11 victims and lost friends in the attacks...until I told them that I supported the mosque. Suddenly "terrorist sympathizer" was the nicest term they could think of for me...They don't want to hear from New Yorkers, 9/11 victims, or downtown residents. They only want to hear agreement. They're quite willing to walk all over the rights and desires of actual people in defense of the supposed views of "New Yorkers" or "9/11 victims". It's like being the children in the "think of the children" meme.
My favorite stupid comment was one anti's statement that "the whole area" should be made into a memorial. As though New York and Tribeca are nothing but the place the attacks happened an have no living reality. I pointed out to her that that plan would mean tearing down multiple high-rent apartments and taking on realtors who were friends of the mayor. Not to mention making thousands of New Yorkers homeless. Response: blank stare.
*In their defense, my diplomacy skill is non-existent and charisma is my dump stat. PZ or Walton could have done better I'm sure.
Posted by: j-brisby
|
September 6, 2010 9:46 PM
PZ should clarify why Gregory Koger's form of protest is OK, but this isn't.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 6, 2010 9:49 PM
Incidentally, if I understand correctly, the group building the center is Sufi. Equating them with the 9/11 terrorists is a bit like equating the Church of England with the IRA because they're both Christian.
Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives
|
September 6, 2010 9:55 PM
Where's the choice for "It's not a mosque, and it's not at Ground Zero, dumbasses!" ?
Posted by: Utakata
|
September 6, 2010 10:02 PM
So does the Second Amendment give you impunity to carry around missles as well? O.O
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, Quel Dommage
|
September 6, 2010 10:05 PM
Because Koger can go to prison and the mosque protestors are whiners.
Posted by: boygenius
|
September 6, 2010 10:08 PM
j-brisby should clarify what the fuck s/he's on about.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 6, 2010 10:08 PM
This protest is OK it's just stupid, hypocritical and exposes the protesters as people wholly lacking any sense of irony.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 10:08 PM
Carlie @ 38: like that idea, it would certainly improve the poll.
Rutee @ 32: no I don't discriminate against brown people, in fact both of my significant others are brown.
SquidBrandon @28: like your questions but my answer has to be, I can't answer that.
Dianne @ 37: thanks for the additional information.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 6, 2010 10:13 PM
Strong enough that the proximity of the mosque to Ground Zero is a slap in the face.
To whom? Sarah Palin? Rush Limbaugh? The protesters are not, for the most part, Manhattanites, often not even New Yorkers. They certainly aren't Tribeca residents. The BCF has been closed for many years, the site is doing nothing for anyone but the cockroaches right now, and the area needs another community center. And the building of it will provide much needed jobs. What's the downside, apart from the risk of fanatics blowing it up?
Posted by: SteveM
|
September 6, 2010 10:16 PM
Which proves absolutely nothing. While your words about the community center do prove something.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/DhjBEuJ8pt63x6eBKuPx0Jv9_QE-#7c327
|
September 6, 2010 10:17 PM
When I click "Poll", it takes me here:
http://buy1get1free.com/
When are these cowards going to keep their polls up even when they don't like the results?
As for the missiles: Paging Dr. Freud.
Posted by: KATHYxx
|
September 6, 2010 10:21 PM
Um wow. I'd never though I'd see something so textbook played straight.
I bet you even let them use your bathroom, too.
Posted by: erpease
|
September 6, 2010 10:22 PM
Strictly speaking part of it can be considered a mosque in the sense of a place where Muslims meet for prayer and for a Friday sermon. The rest is a community center which will be open to others in the community not just Muslims (which puts it one up on many churches).
I am a bit dismayed that a planned mosque in my local community is attracting some bigotry though so far it seems to be limited to the local newspaper's online comment page (with push back). It is being built in a somewhat rundown section of town (also a flood zone) on the site of an old church and adjacent to a Jewish Community Center. The JCC is fully supportive by all I've heard.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/O.jullMj0I2VvJaxMMVeNKSfOPf73voLSxJAe9PdlOWwi8Y-#258ec
|
September 6, 2010 10:23 PM
come on Sandi lets be honest about it. it has nothing to do with respect except you are not showing any. It is about fear of who you see as the other. It is about collective guilt and punishment. You are letting yourself be manipulate by the demagogues who simply do not care for anyone including you.
get real it is New York city and from what I have heard and read about the neighborhood there are a lot of places that could be seen as less respectable then an Islamic equivalent of a YMCA.
Besides the fact that there were followers of "The Prophet" who also died in the buildings too and they did not come by plane. if was really a religious war I would agree but it is not it is about a small group wanting to bully everyone else into doing what it wants, so far they seem to be having some success.
uncle frogy
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 6, 2010 10:25 PM
Please explain how it's a slap in the face.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 10:26 PM
KATHYxx @ 47: you will find I am far from textbook. "Brown" is quite a wide subset of human.
As for the bathroom, I always leave the seat down. (and I'm the one that cleans it too. oo1o )
Posted by: First Approximation, L'esprit de l'escalier
|
September 6, 2010 10:29 PM
Posted by: ckitching
|
September 6, 2010 10:31 PM
I can only hope that he has mounted some truck balls to that trailer. It would only be fitting.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 6, 2010 10:34 PM
whew Feynmaniac, that was a crusher
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 10:34 PM
Posted by: Daz
|
September 6, 2010 10:35 PM
sandi
Brown white or purple, you're still tacitly accepting the tarring with one brush of a large section of the word's population on the acts of a few fundamentalists. Don't you think it's time you grew up?
Posted by: KATHYxx
|
September 6, 2010 10:35 PM
har har. I am yet unimpressed, especially by your attempt at backpedaling. There were so many more interesting posts than mine to reply to. Which is, well, typical.
Posted by: owenevans00
|
September 6, 2010 10:36 PM
@sandi - you fail at being American (as do too many US citizens and residents, sadly). This is by no means a "slap in the face". This is a section of the New York community wishing to take part in the famous "melting pot" of which the US is justly proud.
If you protest the mosque, the terrorists have won.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 10:38 PM
Wow, me and Feynmaniac both came up with the same idea. I just had to learn how to embed images to do it.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 10:41 PM
went here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_Zero_Mosque
good basic information.
KATHYxx: LOL in no way am I "backpedaling."
I return to my original comment= its an eff you on the part of the protesters.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
September 6, 2010 10:51 PM
This whole manufactured controversy has pissed me off no end. First, we've got the idiots like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich and *spit* Pamela Geller. The fact that they're involved alone is almost reason enough to support the damned thing.
But, beyond that, this is Americans trying to build a community center. Yeah, they're Muslims. They're also folks that any number of us have worked with and, dare I say it, socialized with. The American approach should be: what the fuck, it's their right to do so. Muslims died in that spot as much as Christians and atheists and Jews. Americans died there, as did Britons and Dominicans.
The whole trumped up controversy was driven by a hideous person (Geller) and worked up by worse people (Palin and Gingrich) for personal and political gain. It really is much ado about nothing. And I'm pissed off at these motherfuckers for turning attention away from a bad economy...then again, it's not like Gingrich and Palin, with their adoration for making the rich richer and fucking over everyone else have anything of value to offer on that front.
This nation is fucked in every way possible.
Posted by: Daz
|
September 6, 2010 10:51 PM
sandi, I quote from the wiki page you linked.
"Columnist Errol Louis pointed out that a mosque, Masjid Manhattan, has been located "a stone's throw" away from the World Trade Center site since the 1970s, and that a strip club, New York Dolls, is currently in the same area. "The nightly boozing and lap dances do not seem to have disturbed the sensibilities of those now earnestly defending the sacred ground near the World Trade Center site." "
Personally, I'd think that your average curtain-twitching christian prod-nose would be more offended by the strip club than the 'slightly different but at least god-worshipping' Muslims. But that wouldn't grab the headlines the same, now would it?
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 10:53 PM
Sandi, you fucking little moron. Make that argument again like you did at #30 and I will fucking blame christians like you for the murder of George Tiller.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM
|
September 6, 2010 10:53 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't sandiseattle one of those Christian Nationalist, or what decent and intelligent people would call horrible Americans?
Posted by: First Approximation, L'esprit de l'escalier
|
September 6, 2010 10:55 PM
Rutee,
Great minds ;).
Posted by: Shala
|
September 6, 2010 11:01 PM
in fact both of my significant others are brown.
I bet you let them use the bathroom too
...
On your face.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:01 PM
MAJeff, I do not know nor do I care. Sandi has shown himself to be a whimpering woo-meister and all around idiot as it stands. It is just that he has not shown himself to be as unhinged as D*ndy nor d*r*nd*r.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 11:05 PM
Janine, lets settle one thing first: the subhuman asswipe fundie filth that murdered Tiller was NOT a Christian. "christian" means, among other things, "Christ-like", Tillers murderer was nothing of the sort.
MAJeff, I will correct you because you are wrong. I don't even know what a "Christian Nationalist" is. Did like what you said at 61: some one is using media to hype this up.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 11:09 PM
...Do you understand the purpose of the analogy that was made? Like, at fucking all? Are you an idiot?
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:11 PM
Sandi, allow me to used your same fucking moronic argument.
The subhuman asswipe fundie filth that murdered thousands were NOT Muslim. "Islam" means, among other things, "peace", the terrorist murderer was nothing of the sort.
And, oh yeah, fuck you and your moronic No True Scotsman&trade argument.
Posted by: GAllan
|
September 6, 2010 11:11 PM
Recently the Iranians announced a drone missile and Ahmedinejad said, approximately, that the missile, while a harbinger of death for the enemies of humanity had a main message of peace and goodwill. I suppose the Christian protesters in NY have something in common with him and his "logic".
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 11:13 PM
Rutee_ No, explain it to me.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:13 PM
And who made you the decider of what is and isn't Xian? I'll go by the labels folks put on themselves. If the called themselves Xians, they are. Your idjit and irrelevant "no true Scotsman" defense shows your lack of moral character, and lack of true intelligence. Both of which is why people constantly get on your case. You are just stoopid, but can't acknowledge that truth.Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
September 6, 2010 11:14 PM
By sandiseattle's own logic, sandiseattle isn't human, since Homo sapiens means 'wise' or 'knowing' man.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:14 PM
Dumbass, I already made the needed point. But I am sure the Rutee knew this without my help.
Posted by: Shala
|
September 6, 2010 11:14 PM
the subhuman asswipe fundie filth that murdered Tiller was NOT a Christian.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/28/scott-roeder-abortion-doctor-killer
Yes he was.
"christian" means, among other things, "Christ-like", Tillers murderer was nothing of the sort.
What the fuck does "Christ-like" mean? Who says you get to ignore all the shit in the old testament just to pay attention to Christ in the new one?
I don't even know what a "Christian Nationalist" is.
You may find out if you fuck a decaying porcupine while eating a cupcake.
Posted by: Michelle L.
|
September 6, 2010 11:17 PM
OLDWTC.com summed it up best for me.
I also voted 'hell no' on the poll
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 6, 2010 11:18 PM
@72:
Tiller claimed he was a Christian. Like Islam and nearly every other religion on the face of the fucking planet, there is no emperor of Christianity who can actually speak for everyone in discarding someone from Islam. It isn't a single, discrete group that more or less agrees on everything.
This is important to remember. You agree with tiller about as much as Imam Rauf and the Park 51 muslims agree with Al Qaeda. Hence the analogy. THe only possible difference is that Tiller MIGHT not claim you're not a christian, whereas Al Qaeda, a wahhabist sect of ISlam, completely and categorically denies the right of Sufism to pretty much exist at all, and especially to criticize them.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 6, 2010 11:19 PM
so let me get this straight: all muslims are the same as the 9/11 terrorists, but Roeder was No True Christian?do you even know what hypocrisy is?
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 6, 2010 11:21 PM
{SIGH}
First Rule of Holes
Night, gotta 6am call.
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
September 6, 2010 11:22 PM
Do they know you can't tell them apart?
Posted by: Shala
|
September 6, 2010 11:23 PM
{SIGH}
gosh
we're like
so intolerant and don't understand what you really mean
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:23 PM
The problem is not that you are digging holes. The problem is the huge fucking hole in your head.
Also, nice way to duck your hypocrisy.
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 6, 2010 11:27 PM
I think building a mosque near where their co-religionists murdered so many people lacks tact. However, I would vehemently oppose any government action that would limit their right to build it. Peaceful protests, like the one above, are also ok but admittedly silly, especially when so many of the people involved vocally defend freedom while attempting to deny it to others.
On a related note, I see a lot of people on here decrying anyone who prejudges people based upon their religion...the old "tarring with the same brush" argument. While members of any voluntary group, islam for example, will vary widely in their opinions and actions, the fact remains that they CHOOSE to be a member of that group. I make judgments about people based upon their decisions and actions all the time. Joining or remaining in a religion makes me think one is deluded and a muddy thinker. I also assume that they subscribe to the basic beliefs of that religion. In islam's case, this means accepting women and homosexuals as lesser beings among other repugnant beleifs. So, to that extent, I am prejudiced against muslims. I am similarly prejudiced against christians.
This type of prejudice, based upon decisions people have made, is completely different than prejudice based upon race, gender or sexuality or other things that do not indicate people's beliefs and over which they have no control.
So, yeah, I'm a bigot.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 6, 2010 11:35 PM
On a related note, I see a lot of people on here decrying anyone who prejudges people based upon their religion
Because atheists are known to prefer one religion over an other.
Posted by: Psych-Oh
|
September 6, 2010 11:37 PM
Hmmmmmm... I thought that possession of a bomb of any kind was considered a felony in NYC?
Posted by: Kevpod
|
September 6, 2010 11:37 PM
Aw jeez, PZ. Nobody likes you and your work more than me.
But apostrophes for quotation marks? A comma outside of the quotes?
Meaning no disrespect, people are expected to have this kind of thing down by the time they reach high school.
Don't you care at all?
Posted by: McCthulhu is taking ∞ to eat all the pi
|
September 6, 2010 11:40 PM
Teh Mosk shood be bilt in teh wash room uf an alreddy existeng Mosk Dat way tey can anser teh call to prayer and call uf naychur at teh same time. Its teh only snsibul thing to do.
Posted by: monad
|
September 6, 2010 11:42 PM
They're not co-religionists. Wahhabi and Sufi are as different as the Westboro Church and Unitarians. The people building the mosque are probably much closer to the Muslim victims of the attacks, if anyone remembers them.Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 6, 2010 11:43 PM
"co-religionists"?so when the IRA blew up chunks of London, was it inconsiderate of their "co-religionists" from the CoA to continue having and building churches in the vicinity of the attack?
seriously, pretending as if Islam were a monolith is pretty fucking idiotic. Not all Christians (or even, not all Catholics) are terrorists, and neither are all Muslims.
Posted by: McCthulhu is taking ∞ to eat all the pi
|
September 6, 2010 11:44 PM
Kevpod: The ultimate fate of pedants: derided detractor out of town on derail.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 6, 2010 11:46 PM
CoE
Posted by: geralcorasjo
|
September 7, 2010 12:55 AM
@Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom #55.
Epic win.
Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
September 7, 2010 1:01 AM
"I think building a mosque near where their co-religionists murdered so many people lacks tact."
So we can agree that there should be no churches built within a few miles of the site of the Alfred Murrah Building in OK City?
God this issue brings out the toxic stupid in people. Please tell me it's just a vocal minority, please.
Posted by: raven
|
September 7, 2010 1:07 AM
I could care less if the mosque was really a victory monument. They could have a statue of Allah holding up the severed head of an office worker while standing on a shattered computer.
If that is what Islam in general and US Islam in particular is about, we need to know it and sooner rather than later. I wouldn't expect things to get easier for the small minority of 3 million US Moslems though. Their choice, their problem.
FWIW, the US Moslem community is very diverse, coming from dozens of countries. But many are refugees from Moslem-Moslem violence or failed Moslem states. Somalias, Afghans, Iraqis, and Iranians among them. Others are well off, educated Moslems who find the US a lot freerer and more liveable than their own states
Posted by: F
|
September 7, 2010 1:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WO_XOOxn7c
Is Islamophobia sweeping the US?
or
Burkini Blanket Bingo?
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 1:29 AM
@#90 - "so when the IRA blew up chunks of London, was it inconsiderate of their "co-religionists" from the CoA to continue having and building churches in the vicinity of the attack?"
Yes
@#94 -"So we can agree that there should be no churches built within a few miles of the site of the Alfred Murrah Building in OK City?"
Yes
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 1:42 AM
@#89 - "They're not co-religionists. Wahhabi and Sufi are as different as the Westboro Church and Unitarians."
If you claim to belong to a group then you have to expect to associated with the beliefs of that group.
If someone tells me they're a member of the KKK but belong to a sect that doesn't support lynching blacks, I'll still have a problem with them just because they are part of the KKK.
"I'm a member of crazy group X but my subgroup of X only believes the non-crazy stuff" doesn't hold water with me. Just don't join crazy group X.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 1:45 AM
@#90 - "so when the IRA blew up chunks of London, was it inconsiderate of their "co-religionists" from the CoA to continue having and building churches in the vicinity of the attack?"
Yes
@#94 -"So we can agree that there should be no churches built within a few miles of the site of the Alfred Murrah Building in OK City?"
Yesalrighty then, I guess that means you're consistently stupid... I guess that's at least something...
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 1:48 AM
once more, this time without the blockquote fail:
alrighty then, I guess that means you're consistently stupid... I guess that's at least something...Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
September 7, 2010 2:02 AM
Wow. I'm guessing that there's not a single square mile of Europe that a church of any kind can be built on.
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 2:05 AM
@ Rey Fox
I'm not advocating laws or violent action to prevent churches or mosques being built near sites of the particular religion's atrocities...I thought I was very clear about that in my original post. I'm just saying I don't think people ought to do things like that.
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 2:08 AM
@Jadehawk,
Quoting me then simply making the assertion that I am stupid is not exactly a winning argument.
Please explain to me why you think it is tactful or considerate for members of a group to build their clubhouses near the sites of their group's atrocities.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 2:14 AM
I'm having a very hard time parsing this. where did you get the idea that Rey Fox was claiming you advocated legal or violent actions? And are you seriously incapable of telling the difference between Sufis and Wahhabis, or between Catholics and Anglicans, or between Westboro Baptists and Unitarians?Wow, I think we found that Real True New Atheist the accommodationists are always complaining about.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 2:18 AM
you mean other than the blatantly obvious fact that they aren't part of the same group, and in one instance were actually on opposing sides of the conflict?Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula
|
September 7, 2010 2:45 AM
MarkNS wrote:
That implies you're capable of presenting an argument to suggest that you aren't stupid - and we're yet to see that.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 7, 2010 3:00 AM
I cannot tell the difference between MarkNS and sandiseattle.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 7, 2010 3:03 AM
So Mark NS believes no human should belong to any group, because otherwise by doing so they automatically and voluntarily own every single mistake and atrocity committed in the name of that group, regardless of your feelings on them.
Mark NS, I am going to assume, because you care about this 'monument', that you are Merikan.
How would you feel if, based on this logic, you had to deal with the constant screaming of JApanese people, incredibly angry at you, personally, for dropping nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? If more or less immediately after getting out the door, a coalition of 20 to 30 people from pretty much all over South America stopped you in the hall and, screaming at you with spittle, demanded you explain why you remained a USian after you ruined their countries with free trade agreements. And god forbid you had to answer for the idiot fundamentalists that this country spawns, because Aussies and Brits are mighty, and rightfully, pissed at your country of origin for letting loose the dogs of stupidity.
I can keep this up more or less all day for any major formerly imperialist power. That is why your position is fucking stupid, you just didn't have the good sense to take the 10 minutes you needed to think your position through. Unless a group is small and well policed internally (And in so doing also manages to nip rival movements in the bud), people will dissent from other, even major, planks in the platform of their group.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 3:49 AM
Ha, you gotta hand it to him. That's pretty clever of the motherfucker. I probably just gave him some money.Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 3:54 AM
Sorry, not American.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
September 7, 2010 3:57 AM
*facepalm*
If you are or are not american was not Rutee's point. Try reading wait she said and this time, comprehend it.
Posted by: MarkNS
|
September 7, 2010 3:59 AM
And yes, I think it would be inconsiderate for any sub-group of Americans (who self-identify their group as an American sub-group) to build an clubhouse next to the surviving dome which serves as a monument to victims of Horoshima.
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 4:11 AM
Mark... you do realize that the US has bases all over Japan, right? Not to mention fucktons of american businesses...
and also, just out of curiosity... how do you feel about the Japanese Cultural Center of Hawaii?
Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula
|
September 7, 2010 4:18 AM
MarkNS, I sincerely doubt there's a person on earth whose nation/religion/ethnic group hasn't engaged in some atrocity throughout history. Using your logic, no-one should be allowed to build anything anywhere outside their own country.
Are you capable of grasping just how stupid that sounds?
Posted by: Jadehawk, cascadeuse féministe
|
September 7, 2010 4:35 AM
not inside their country either, since there's national subgroups committing atrocities against other subgroups. IOW, there should be no establishments by white Americans, or about white American culture, anywhere in America, since their subgroup committed atrocities against Natives and other minorities all over the damn country. So, no museums of colonial history, no Jamestown, no Scandinavian cultural centers, etc ad nauseamPosted by: Samantha Vimes
|
September 7, 2010 4:58 AM
Hmm. Non-Native Americans drove them off their lands, collaborating in genocidal policies.
Ergo, no one but pure-blooded American "Indians" should be allowed to build any edifices at all in the US. It would be so insensitive.
Yeah, not gonna fly, although it makes more sense than claiming the community center shouldn't be built.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 5:01 AM
You know what, now I not only support this "mosque", but I want them to build more mosques. I don't give a fuck about Islam, but you know, just out of spite for these christian hypocrites.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 5:07 AM
Oh, and since I just did (and always do) this:
Unless you're in amurrica, most others do it. And it makes sense too, cause the comma is not part of the quote.Posted by: John Phillips, FCD
|
September 7, 2010 5:18 AM
Andyo, our Kevpod is a bit OCD about the 'American' way of dealing with things inside and outside quotes. I might be being a bit unfair, but he does it so regularly that it is about the only thing I can ever remember seeing him post about.
Posted by: Gordon
|
September 7, 2010 5:26 AM
I dont know how to vote. I dont want a mosque, or a church, or a temple, built *anywhere*... but that's not what they are asking.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 5:32 AM
And I think we can be pretty sure that PZ is putting the punctuation marks outside of the quote (when appropriate) on purpose.
Since in Spanish we do it that way too, I had to look it up when I came across it cause it didn't make sense to me to put them inside unless they're part of the quote. IIRC it had something to do with a now obsolete print limitation.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 5:34 AM
Gordon, you can't vote anymore, anyway. Don't click on the POLL link, it will take you to an ad page.
Posted by: John Phillips, FCD
|
September 7, 2010 5:45 AM
It's also how I have always done it on this side of the pond too, even though English is not my mother tongue. Like you, it just appears more logical to me to consider where such things should go with respect to context.
Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold
|
September 7, 2010 5:54 AM
I am quite sure you mean a lot of disrespect.
I would also suggest you go away and learn that the American form of English grammar is not the only form around, and that many people (including PZ) consider the British English rules on punctuation with respect to quotes is superior.
Now really, I would have thought you would have known that. Do you not care that you are not only ignorant about English grammar, but also about the fact America is not the only place that speaks English ?
Posted by: Jimmy handbags
|
September 7, 2010 6:23 AM
I will stil write about science here, but more about the conduct of science. My plan for the other blog is to write about specific advances in physiology.
And I did not invert my links, Irene. They are placed where I wanted them.
cting98@gmail.com
Posted by: Birger Johansson
|
September 7, 2010 6:39 AM
They should -in addition to the community centre- build a big f*cking mosque run by the *most liberal* of the many islamic groups -Alevi?, Achmadiya?- and put a BIG sign on top saying "FUCK YOU WAHABBITE ASSHOLES AND YOUR MEDIEVAL FUCKING BELIEFS!!!!BY THE WAY, HERE IS A PICTURE OF MUHAMMED COZ IMAGES AIN´T DISRESPECTFUL"!!!!
(does arabic have more colorful invectives? American English seem a bit limited, once you wear out the F*cking F'uckers thing)
Posted by: Birger Johansson
|
September 7, 2010 6:44 AM
PS -The Alevi are Shiíte and would not have problems with a respectful image of Muhammed. It might actually be a great foil, in case Al-Quaeda slips past again: Instead of hitting a building they would aim at the Liberty statue -sized Muhammed (optional: which is holding the index finger in the general direction of Afghanistan).
Posted by: Cosmic Snark
|
September 7, 2010 7:10 AM
Ah, the fundie's biggest friend... the No True Scotsman fallacy. Gotta love it. Any time an Xtian does something reprehensible, the predictable godbotter response is "Oh, that person wasn't really a Christian..."
And yet, these same people will snort derisively and say "typical Muslims..." when they think of the 9/11 hijackers.
Posted by: DLC
|
September 7, 2010 7:50 AM
They remind me of the last remnants of Humanity in the Planet of the Apes, worshiping a nuclear weapon.
I do not approve of any religion at any time.
But I understand and support the rights of others to do so. The people who wrote the Bill of Rights knew what they were doing when they demanded a secular government that placed no one religion over any of the others. It's saved us no end of wars.
Posted by: Katharine
|
September 7, 2010 7:54 AM
Oh dear, I don't think sandiseattle is very familiar with this site. Or basic informal logical fallacies, which are an important thing to know if you want to actually make a good argument anywhere.
This is not your typical dumbass blog. The commenters here actually demand substance.
And a thick skin. If you are offended and wilting just 'cause you didn't like someone's tone, you need to grow a pair of your sex's corresponding gonads and thicken that epithelium.
I do not think sandiseattle has heard of this 'No True Scotsman' argument. In fact, part of me thinks she goes 'la la la' and she denies some wackyass murdering or bombing or kidnapping person is a christian (if they are) because it upsets her delicate worldview.
Or she's a fucking gibbering idiot, which all too many people are these days.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 7, 2010 8:37 AM
I'm just saying I don't think people ought to do things like that.
Ok, you want to stop it? Legally and peacefully? It's very, very simple: Just go to the owners of the building and offer to buy it from them. You may have to bid high thanks to all your co-believers and their making a stink about it, but eventually you'll find a price they'll take. Then do whatever you feel like with the site. Make a standing exhibit of anti-Mohammed cartoons or a church or whatever floats your boat. But unless you're willing to buy the thing or otherwise compensate the people involved for their time and trouble, STFU. It's none of your business anyway. The project has been approved by the zoning board, the Downtown development board, and the city. Furthermore, it's just sensible. Why not have a community center instead of an abandoned building on a typical mixed residential/business street in NYC between a bar and a grocery store? I don't see the problem or even why it's notable.
Posted by: Daz
|
September 7, 2010 8:40 AM
Katharine
"Or she's..."
I'm pretty sure your last two paragraphs aren't mutually exclusive...
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/65L6hp58sJR27IqJ9Gqb4.TnnNo-#cf793
|
September 7, 2010 8:58 AM
Philosophically speaking, it's interesting to parse the distinctions between Jadehawk @ 6 (with whom I agree) and MarkNS (who's being a troll). I'm not sure I can articulate why I feel that way, though.
Posted by: a.human.ape
|
September 7, 2010 9:32 AM
If Muslims who think they are moderate (as if being a fucking idiot is moderate) had any decency at all, they would throw out their terrorist organization.
But they don't throw it out. Instead they show their contempt for non-Muslims by sticking a mosque next to their most famous atrocity. New York City is a huge place, so why two blocks away from ground zero? There can be only one possible explanation, they're fucking assholes.
Should America suck up to assholes? I don't think so.
Please listen to Pat Condell.
-- Human Ape
Posted by: swedishskinjer
|
September 7, 2010 9:35 AM
I was watching the news this morning, and I saw a story in which it was said that one of the donors to the mosque also donated to an organization that was convicted of funneling some of its money to Hamas. If someone also saw this story, could you fill out the details? Considering Imam Rauf's hesitancy to label Hamas a terrorist organization, I'm concerned that he's not nearly as moderate as he claims to be.
Posted by: Andyo
|
September 7, 2010 9:42 AM
a.human.ape, you're being the fucking idiot. At least read some of the thread before saying dumb shit like that.
And being an asshole is not illegal. You should be defending their right to be assholes.
Posted by: Calli Arcale
|
September 7, 2010 10:02 AM
Oh wow. Missiles to protest violence. Y'know, part of me is glad we have people like this. They give us endless entertainment. Then, of course, I realize the harm they do, and that rather kills the buzz.
Of course, they're not really protesting violence. They're protesting Islam, and toting around missiles to say "if you get all uppity, this is what's coming your way". In their minds, the only moderate Muslim is one who is seen and not heard, or preferably not even that.
These people tend to be Biblical literalists; thus, one should direct them to the writings of the apostle Paul, who was fine with cities having temples for other faiths in them -- as long as Christians didn't go worship in them in order to improve their financial prospects. (Context: in the Roman period, a lot of important networking went on at temples, and paying the right temple dues could make a big difference to your business prospects.)
So to any Christians who might be reading this, and who don't like the idea of a Muslim community center in a defunct Burlington Coat Factory a quarter mile away from Ground Zero (hint: this is Manhattan; you can't always be picky about real estate): if it bothers you, just don't go there.
Posted by: Ing: PhD Trollologist
|
September 7, 2010 10:04 AM
@134
Condell is a PRIME example of where DBaD is right. he's exactly who Plait is talking about.
Posted by: Jules, Bride of Death
|
September 7, 2010 10:48 AM
Katharine
sandiseattle is a regular idiot around here. He's had his ass handed to him so many times it could make your head spin. I'm almost positive he's been alerted to the No True Scotsman fallacy before, and numerous times. He just isn't too bright.
a.human.ape
Being a fucking asshole ≠ terrorist
Also, wanting to have a place to gather ≠ being a fucking asshole
Read the rest of the thread.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/65L6hp58sJR27IqJ9Gqb4.TnnNo-#cf793
|
September 7, 2010 11:02 AM
How, exactly?
Plenty of Muslims have spoken out against terrorism.
(As though a given person shouldn't be assumed to be against mass slaughter anyway, yeesh. When someone says "I believe in the Bible!", I always assume they live with cognitive dissonance and/or a good escape clause, rather than that they genuinely believe slavery and genocide are cool.)
What concrete thing are American Muslims supposed to do in order to "throw out" terrorist groups?
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 7, 2010 11:27 AM
I don't hear you applying this logic to white Christians, and they probably have more deaths to worry about, on the hands of their 'co-religionists', in this fucking century, what with the slaughter of witches in AFrica the evangelicals are going whoo! about. Because that's where it's needed? Or it was cheap, because nobody gives a shit about the property 2 blocks away from ground zero.Or it was a nice, central location.
Or it was a suitable building with the most minimal changes needed.
Or it's an attempt to flip an acknowledged eyesore.
Or...
Just because you and Pat Condell are racist assholes with no imagination, doesn't make you correct.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 7, 2010 11:41 AM
You're an idiot.
Are you British? How about Australian? French? German? Austrian? Danish? Russian? South African?
It doesn't fucking matter what country you're from; According to your logic, there are a thousand things I can pin on you to make you feel guilty, and that you personally have to answer for, regardless of your position on the matter. It's a fucking stupid argument, and you should feel bad for making it.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/65L6hp58sJR27IqJ9Gqb4.TnnNo-#cf793
|
September 7, 2010 11:49 AM
Um, guys? MarkNS has already clarified that he comes from the Centauri star system, which is noted by astro-historians for being a conflict-free utopia ever since the Big Bang. So he's not being inconsistent or trollish.
Sheesh, Earthlings and their presumptions.
Posted by: Robin Lionheart
|
September 7, 2010 12:03 PM
Semiotics gone wrong. "I've got a bullet with your name on it" (or missile) doesn't send the message that your target is violent and dangerous.
Posted by: Vicki, Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief
|
September 7, 2010 12:11 PM
Yes, there are limits: There are limits on what you can tell your neighbors what to do or not to do.
That's aside from the small fact that a Muslim, or anyone else, in Manhattan probably has a better idea of what's needed here than a self-proclaimed non-Muslim in Seattle. I say "self-proclaimed" because zie is insisting that a person claiming to be Christian cannot be trusted: how can I know that Sandi isn't really a Muslim agent provocateur trying to increase anti-American or anti-Christian sentiment among other Muslims?
But I am wondering something: Sandi, you claim to be Christian. How does your congregation feel about (a) your having two partners and (b) your desire to prevent other people from building community centers? I can think of Christians who would accept either, but few who would agree with both.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/LGUgwGk4zvGfthp0ncqkRIyj5T_U4yw3ydM-#c3478
|
September 7, 2010 12:16 PM
@ #135
I wonder if you're thinking of Al-Waleed bin Talaal, who is the largest shareholder of the company that owns Fox News. Here's a collection of stories about that.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
September 7, 2010 12:17 PM
And if Christians who think they are moderate (as if being a fucking idiot is moderate) had any decency at all, they would throw out the KKK, and people who shoot abortion doctors, and the Teabaggers, and those that are like Timothy McVeigh, and so on.
--------------------
There's a large variety within the Muslim population, just like there is a large variety within the Christian population. Those that are terrorist are not fucking representative of the rest. They are an extreme group -- hence the term that's often used to describe them, "extremist."
Just as I don't hold all Christians responsible for the terrorism of those that shoot doctors who perform abortions, so I don't hold innocent Muslims responsible for Islamic terrorists.
That'd be fucking idiotic.
And then there's the little problem that the 9/11 attacks were motivated by politics more than religion. It might be convenient that they use their religion as a weapon (not that we'd ever do that, right?), but the attacks themselves were politically motivated.
But it doesn't matter. Since I fucking love America (and I really do), I try to uphold its foundational principles, including that of fucking freedom. If you hate freedom so much, why don't you move to Russia?
Posted by: Iris
|
September 7, 2010 12:30 PM
a.human.ape:
Precisely. This is a great argument for building Park51: so that the intolerant, un-American assholes protesting it don't become more empowered and emboldened.
Posted by: Frank b
|
September 7, 2010 12:45 PM
Swedishskinjer #135 said
So you would think that someone donating to the Israeli Likud Party is ok but not Hama? What criteria are you considering? Hama is criticized for not recognizing Israel. Well, Likud not only refuses to recognize Palestine, but has vowed never to allow a Palestinian State to form. Hama has been criticized for indiscriminate attacks across the border. Likud, as part of the Israeli government, have sanctioned very discriminate attacks across the border for decades, with civilians being the main target. Death toll statistics makes Likud five times the terrorist group that Hama is. For the most part,"terrorist" is merely a derogatory term.
Posted by: sandiseattle
|
September 7, 2010 12:47 PM
Vicki @ 144:
The term 'significant other' doesn't always mean lover.
And I have no desire to prevent someone from builing a community center. See above, I've come to the conclusion this is a non-issue hyped by some media manipulating soapboxers. In fact I say now, build it, and let it be in the news when it opens. Till then, shut up about it. (I know that won't happen but one can hope.)
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
September 7, 2010 12:50 PM
Holy shit
Flashes of reason!
PRAISE THE COSMIC MUFFIN!
Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
September 7, 2010 1:00 PM
"It's none of your business anyway."
Oh, but it's everybody's business. Those durned East Coast liberals are always trying to tell us what to do, so it's only fair play that us No Coast rednecks get together and disrupt their local affairs. It's what they get for trying funny business in the general vicinity of our adopted Mecca of chest-beating Murcanism.
"Or it was cheap, because nobody gives a shit about the property 2 blocks away from ground zero.
Or it was a nice, central location.
Or it was a suitable building with the most minimal changes needed.
Or it's an attempt to flip an acknowledged eyesore.
Or..."
Or they already have a facility in that area that they've outgrown.
Or there's already a mosque in that area so the mouth-breathers have already lost.
Posted by: Markle
|
September 7, 2010 1:14 PM
@Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
Irony meter screaming!If you actually knew what you were talking about and had researched the actual statements by the builders, you would know that they chose the Burlington Coat Factory building specifically because it was damaged in the attack. Not merely because it was available, but for its symbolic importance. This is a matter of record, as is the statement that price was no object in securing the site. They're not likely to sell.
Nope, sorry. As above.Nope, again. It's a teardown. The landing gear assembly when it went through the roof and the top three floors took out many beams that supported those floors. It's not economically feasible to fix. That's why it has been unoccupied since Sept. 11, 2001.
Sorry again. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they are racist assholes. Even when you can employ bullshit fallacies to shoehorn in that argument. Condell, if that's the link to the video I think it is, is right. He has the facts right. If you disagree with his analysis, attack that. But his facts are correct.Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 7, 2010 1:28 PM
You're an idiot if you think that I was saying you're supposed to do that to white christians. I'm saying the fact you don't destroys your logic, you dunderhead, not telling you to do it to white extremist Christians. White extremist Christians, as an aggregate, have been no less destructive or murderous then Wahhabist muslims, we just choose to recognize Christians as a diverse group. We should be doing it to muslims too. I'm sure the fact that the real estate is cheaper didn't help their decisions at all, or that it's located where it's needed. Nope, they went clear across town, and paid triple, just to mock Merika. Yes, and the symbolic importance they attach to it is that it will show that muslims were hurt too, and that they're pushing back against extremists as well. How stupid can you be? I'm sure price was no object in securing damaged real estate nobody wants to fix, in a part of town nobody wants to build in, yes. You suck at research. I just felt the need to make that exquisitely clear. You're right, that's not what makes either of you racist assholes.The fact that you're only doing this to brown people, despite white people and stereotypically white religions being better targets based solely on your logic (And it's not my logic, because I wouldn't do this to either of them) is what makes you a racist asshole.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 7, 2010 1:43 PM
If you actually knew what you were talking about and had researched the actual statements by the builders, you would know that they chose the Burlington Coat Factory building specifically because it was damaged in the attack.
Citation, please. And also answer to the question, so what? Why not take an empty building, abandoned before the attacks (if the statement of a long time neighborhood resident is correct, anyway), and turn it into a community center that can be used by the whole neighborhood?
Posted by: Markle
|
September 7, 2010 1:45 PM
@Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
What makes you assume I'm not brown? My views on this?Posted by: Dianne
|
September 7, 2010 1:52 PM
That's why it has been unoccupied since Sept. 11, 2001.
Actually, it was already unoccupied on Sept 11, 2001. It's been unoccupied since because no one has had the money or inclination to rebuild there. I'd like to see the area rebuilt. I want a vital, live downtown, not a dead memorial to events of a decade ago. I want occupied buildings and people on the streets. I'm not sure if the organizers made the right move putting a community center next to a bar and a block from a strip club, but that's not my problem.
Unless you're prepared to buy the property and do something constructive with it, please stop ruining it for those of us who live in Tribeca. Yeah, I know much of America hates us in NY for our freedom, but please try to keep it a little less obvious.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 7, 2010 1:58 PM
Incidentally, I've heard a rumor that someone's building a "Ground Zero church" in respone to the "Ground Zero mosque". I doubt it'll be a useful project-it sounds like he means literally a church and not a community center with worship space-but besides that, I see no problem with this response and wish more of the crazies would adopt it. Better to live in a neighborhood with 1000 churches than one where the fundies spew hate and carry missles around. Plus the tour agencies could put together a "holy sites of ground zero" tour...See the mosque. See the church. See the synagogue. See the Buddhist temple. See the atheists standing out front snearing. Buy the T-shirt...Yep, that'd work.
Posted by: Markle
|
September 7, 2010 2:00 PM
WTF? LLOL (Literally laughing out loud)!Posted by: Rey Fox, Bird Caller Guy
|
September 7, 2010 2:28 PM
"I want a vital, live downtown, not a dead memorial to events of a decade ago."
Hey, that way it could match all the dead crumbling downtowns of America that are a product of the pro-business conservatives that back the teabaggers.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
September 7, 2010 2:52 PM
In my experience, hypersensitivity to discrimination against white people (Which I've never seen established as actually happening) means the person's white.It helps that you actually give a shit about what a known white racist has to say (Condell's views were well established as racist loooong before this whole thing), but that's the big one.
Posted by: Dianne
|
September 7, 2010 4:29 PM
Hey, that way it could match all the dead crumbling downtowns of America that are a product of the pro-business conservatives that back the teabaggers.
One of which is not downtown Manhattan. Yet. If the teabaggers have their way with enough real estate projects though...
Posted by: llewelly
|
September 7, 2010 6:29 PM
Pshaw. Amateurs. Real Peacekeeper missiles could deliver up to 10 re-entry vehicles, each carrying a warhead of up to 300 kilotons.
Posted by: piranhaintheguppytank#9ee73
|
September 7, 2010 9:58 PM
Now there's a great way to honor the memory of the victims of 9/11.
Bringing a WMD to Ground Zero.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/O.jullMj0I2VvJaxMMVeNKSfOPf73voLSxJAe9PdlOWwi8Y-#258ec
|
September 8, 2010 3:09 AM
while I was reading this thread earlier today. It is a subject that pushes my buttons when I see paranoid would be brown shirts being whipped up by cruel power hungry people I kind of get upset. I got a phone call with an old friend who strongly disagrees with me on the right of the community center being built just like our friends above. our talk went badly and we were cutoff, he hung up?
but it did come out what his fear was about.
"My concern is that I don't want to see what is happening in Europe, happen here that's all."
was his answer
he only knows what is going on in Europe by what sees on TV. It is not Frontline he is watching and he does not spend a lot of time on it. I think he is not unlike most of the public they think Europe and Islam are full of violent terrorists and if we let them they will do the same thing here.
I know that view is highly distorted but for what it is worth people want simple story with clear good and bad and everything to come out fine.
it is a pity reality is so messy and complicated
Benjamin Franklin said
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
uncle frogy
Posted by: Scorpy1
|
September 8, 2010 9:38 AM
That display isn't patriotic at all: they didn't even try to put flags on the back of their car.
Posted by: Katharine
|
September 8, 2010 9:59 AM
Someone should show up at one of those things with a sign drawing parallels between wahhabism and fundamentalist christianity.
And maybe put up a photo of a fat white guy carrying a bible making googly eyes at some fat Middle Eastern guy carrying a Koran, who is making googly eyes back.
Posted by: Katharine
|
September 8, 2010 10:13 AM
Look at it this way, folks: these old disgruntled idiots will eventually die (not to malign old non-disgruntled non-idiots) and a more liberal next generation will take the helm.
The Baby Boomers grew up in the 50s, when, at least from what I've heard, men were testosterone-overdosed-or-underdosed men who were insecure about their masculinity, women were oppressed, and everyone was afraid of anything to the left of Eugene McCarthy.
Subsequent generations, however, were born later, in saner ages. Time, civilization, and knowledge, if sufficiently sane and intelligent people are at the helm, march inexorably forward, and not a one of us by ourselves can do anything about it. When I'm old and on the cusp of death, I think I will be one of those who will have the poise to say 'I have made the contribution to the world I wanted to make; it's your turn, boys and girls'.
At least we're all mortal.
Posted by: kryptonite
|
September 8, 2010 10:17 AM
Interested in how the site for the Islamic community center was chosen? check out this article: http://nymag.com/news/features/67635/
“Listen,” said El-Gamal, “do you have any clue how the Manhattan real-estate market works, what is involved? People seem to think that we picked that building to make some kind of point. But that is simply insane. This is New York; no matter who you are, you just don’t choose a building, move in, and take over. Do you know how many places I looked at? I looked at Chambers Street. I looked at Vesey Street, Broadway, Greenwich Street, Warren Street, Murray Street. Maybe half a dozen more, I can’t even remember now. It was only after all that that Park Place came up. Even then, it was the most grueling negotiation of my life. So many times I told myself, Wow, this just isn’t worth it. One minute the deal was on, eight months later it was off. The whole thing almost drove me nuts.”
Posted by: Katharine
|
September 8, 2010 10:45 AM
Er, I meant to say we can only drive it further forward, not hold it back.
Also, that should have been Joseph McCarthy.
Posted by: lenoxuss
|
September 8, 2010 3:49 PM
#169 kryptonite: Wait, one of the buyers is the amiable jack-of-all-faiths Father El-Gamal? Than what could all the fuss be about? ;)