Building a Mosque near Ground Zero.

[Oscar Wilde]

From here.

A leading opponent of a proposed mosque and community center near Ground Zero is asking a question that looms as large as the towers that stood nearby less than nine years ago: "Why there?"

Pamela Geller, a conservative blogger who leads a group called Stop the Islamicization of America, posed the question on CNN's "American Morning" Wednesday.

"We feel that it is a cemetery and sacred ground and the dead should be honored," Geller said. "To build a 13-story mega mosque on the cemetery, on the site of the largest attack in American history, I think, is incredibly insensitive."

Those for and against the proposed mosque butted heads during a passionate three-hour hearing of New York's Landmarks Preservation Commission Tuesday night.

Officially, the hearing was a forum for testimony on whether the building at 45-47 Park Place, near Ground Zero, is worth preserving. The structure dates back to the late 1850s. Preservation Commission spokeswoman Elisabeth de Bourbon said the building housed the headquarters of the Merck pharmaceutical company in the 1920s and in more recent years served as a discount clothing store. She said she was not sure what the current owner -- the Muslim outreach group the Cordoba Initiative -- has been doing with the building, but people attending Tuesday night's meeting said it was being used for prayer services.

The commission is expected to vote in August on whether to grant the structure landmark status, even though the Community Board of lower Manhattan said earlier this month the building wasn't architecturally significant enough to merit the designation.

Supporters of the preservation are opposed to a project by the Cordoba Initiative and the American Society for Muslim Advancement to build a mosque and community center near the site where the twin towers of the World Trade Center were destroyed by Islamist hijackers on September 11, 2001.

The contentious nature of the hearing was expected, because if the commission rules the structure now at the site doesn't deserve the landmark status, the groups behind the project won't need any additional city permission to demolish the old building and move ahead with the mosque construction.

Voices opposing the mosque dominated the hearing.

"It would be a terrible mistake to destroy a 154-year-old building in order to build a monument to terrorism," one woman said.

Some at the hearing, including Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, expressed suspicion about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who heads the Cordoba Initiative. Feisal was out of the country and did not attend the hearing.

Lazio called for an investigation into its funding.

"We're asking for a delay in the process to get some answers," Lazio said.

The heckling and intense nature of the hearing got to be too much for some participants.

"I'm ashamed to be an American today," said Rakif Gathwari, a Muslim-American, who reminded the crowd that people from many countries and religions died on September 11.

"I want to prove to this hall that I am a citizen," Gathwari said, holding up her passport.

Some Muslim community leaders say the mosque could provide an opportunity for improving interfaith relations.

"We're saying Muslims have a legitimate role to play in the social fabric of this country," said Ibrahim Ramey, the director of the Human and Civil Rights Division of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, on CNN's "American Morning" Wednesday.

"We are part of the interfaith mosaic of the United States. But more than that, I think this particular group of people in the Cordoba Institute can do a huge amount of good not only for Muslims in New York but also for interfaith relations throughout the country," Ramey added.

The Cordoba Initiative says it aims to improve relations between Muslims and the West.

"The Cordoba Initiative hopes to build a $100 million, 13-story community center with Islamic, interfaith and secular programming, similar to the 92nd Street Y," its website says, referring to the cultural institution on the upper east side of Manhattan. The project calls for a mosque, a performing arts center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces.

I think that "It would be a terrible mistake to destroy a 154-year-old building in order to build a monument to terrorism," sums up the opposition pretty well.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Yeah I have been hearing about this for some time on the right wing blogs. It has been trumpeted as "Proof" that Obama is a secret Muslim agent working to over-through america, and this mosque is a "Payoff"

Really it is just more evidence that the right ring truly have no understanding of how to reach out to other people, nor desire for it. Building a mosque near ground zero if anything is a smack to Terrorists because it shows America is willing to forgive, it also shows (one would think) a message that not all Muslims are Terrorists.

[Ryushikaze]

So, it's a community center that fulfills the role of a Mosque, as opposed to a distinctly different architectural style from every other building in the area?
That just makes the complaints all the stupider. I can appreciate the 'But a Mosque would look terrible here' in the same way I'd feel about a Church, Temple, Shinto Shrine, etc. but this is a 13 story building. Unless they crennelate and ostentate the hell out of the roof, it'll just be another interesting but ultimately faceless building in a sea of such.

This is entirely motivated by fear of Muslims. Not that anyone needed me pointing that out to them.

[General Zod]

I think the only real objection here is whether or not the mosque would be more of an architectural eyesore than the building it's replacing. Because it's not like New York has plenty of horrid modern buildings or anything . . .

[Crossroads Inc.]

Thats a good point I hadn't thought about. No one is ever going to know there is a Mosque there once its built, of course, perhaps that makes it all the more sinister!!!

Also more to the point, what ever happened to "Freedom of Religion" ? Why are these bad people trying to prosecute a group just trying to follow their faith? How unchristian like!

I think the only real objection here is whether or not the mosque would be more of an architectural eyesore than the building it's replacing. Because it's not like New York has plenty of horrid modern buildings or anything . . .

Well said! Does anyone have a link of what the proposed building will look like? God help us if its another Concrete Box™

[Oscar Wilde]

Freedom of Religion is "Freedom to practice Christianity/Catholicism/Maybe Judaism," not actual freedom of religion.

In practice anyway, the theory is "Freedom to practice any religion."

[General Zod]

Thats a good point I hadn't thought about. No one is ever going to know there is a Mosque there once its built, of course, perhaps that makes it all the more sinister!!!

Depends on whether or not they include minarets or not, in which case it will be somewhat obvious.

Well said! Does anyone have a link of what the proposed building will look like? God help us if its another Concrete Box™

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/201 ... ahead.html

[Coyote]

Remember, Crossroads, that's "Freedom of Christian Religion. And some Jews, if they stay quiet and don't ask for more than a token Menorah during Christmas".

The right wing in this country doesn't want to forgive, or be open, or "show up" the terrorists by being better human beings. Being understanding and open minded and tolerant are sissy things for those effete Europeans, y'hear?

[Crossroads Inc.]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/201 ... ahead.html

[img]<snip>[/img]

*HURK* *HURK!!* *Mprpfff!!!!*
runs away and vomits

This is an outrage! How dare they build this at ground Zero! I am firmly opposed to building such a thing that would dishonor New York!!

[Guardsman Bass]

That's pretty distinct-looking from the surrounding buildings, but maybe in a good way. It looks like the type of thing that would end up on sight-seeing tours of New York City after a while.

[Temujin]

Thats a good point I hadn't thought about. No one is ever going to know there is a Mosque there once its built, of course, perhaps that makes it all the more sinister!!!

Of course, this way they can lure in the local youth who have no future and indoctrinate them to become suicide bombers for Allah.

The right wing in this country doesn't want to forgive, or be open, or "show up" the terrorists by being better human beings. Being understanding and open minded and tolerant are sissy things for those effete Europeans, y'hear?

I personally have come to realize that they are truly incapable of honestly forgiving period. Oh they can mouth the words, but they certainly don't mean them. Doing so is a sign of weakness, which seriously speaks volumes to just how fucking insecure this lot is.

[Coyote]

The only time the concept of "forgiveness" applies to Conservatives is when one of their right-wing political leaders gets caught cheating on his wife in a sex scandal. Then they tell everyone that Jesus forgives them, and it is time to move on.

[Darth Yan]

Diane West, Robert "I don't need to study Islam in college and I was caught on a facebook group advocating genocide against the Turks" Spencer and Pam "My hubby's a murdering crook and i'm an all around genodical bitch" geller, are all condemning it, and they even said the fact it didn't rain on their protest was AN ACT OF GOD. If someone castrated these assholes and impaled them zulu style i would die a happy man

[Themightytom]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/201 ... ahead.html

[img]<snip>[/img]

*HURK* *HURK!!* *Mprpfff!!!!*
runs away and vomits

This is an outrage! How dare they build this at ground Zero! I am firmly opposed to building such a thing that would dishonor New York!!

On the plus side, nobody will ever fly a plane into it the thing is so blindingly obnoxious they'd plow into the ground first.

The objections to the building are pure bias against Muslims because the terrorists were Muslims. never mind that Muslims working in the world trade centers died too, and serve in our armed forces and died in Afghanistan opposing the Taliban, a mosque is clearly disrespectful to those who were killed in 911 because it was the fault of Muslims everywhere that a bunch of terrorists chose to oppose western society efficiently (Not so much effectively) rather than getting massacred as an under equipped poorly organized and trained army on the wrong continent.

[Kanastrous]

The picture makes it a little tough to be sure, but the exterior patterning sure looks like what I would call an 'Islamic' pattern (evocative of the patterns of tilework, sculptural ornamentation etc one sees in a lot of High Islamic Period architecture that's so much greater than this chunk of crap it's not even funny).

For that reason alone I dislike it, just as I'd dislike a building festooned with crosses, stars-of-david, aums or wheels-of-life, or other in-your-face we gotta rub your nose in our faith ornamentation.

Well, plus it's kind of ugly.

Somehow I can see the objection to erecting a religious structure at the site of a massacre committed by dedicated members of that religion, even knowing that most members of said religion didn't themselves back the massacre. I don't agree with the building's opponents past that point, but I will accompany them that far.

Historically, the practice of destroying a big important building and erecting a mosque on the site held obvious big-time symbolic value to Muslims. It's inevitable that to some proportion of Muslims this would have pretty much exactly the same symbolism. Whether or not we should care is a valid question, but feeding the symbolic ambitions of the worst among them doesn't sound particularly desirable, to me. I can see the Al-Qaeda/etc press release now: Great Mosque built in the heart of the infidels' financial capital, practically on the ruins of their towers! We are on a fucking ROLL!

[Themightytom]

Historically, the practice of destroying a big important building and erecting a mosque on the site held obvious big-time symbolic value to Muslims. It's inevitable that to some proportion of Muslims this would have pretty much exactly the same symbolism. Whether or not we should care is a valid question, but feeding the symbolic ambitions of the worst among them doesn't sound particularly desirable, to me. I can see the Al-Qaeda/etc press release now: Great Mosque built in the heart of the infidels' financial capital, practically on the ruins of their towers! We are on a fucking ROLL!

That's actually a really good argument, didn't they do that in the crusades with Solomon's temple?
Edit: the Muslims, not Al Qaeda of course

[Kanastrous]

*shrug* it's more an observation than an argument, really, but yes this is a typical Muslim practice. This is how, for example, The Church of Holy Wisdom (Hagia Sophia) became Mehmed's mosque, in Istanbul (nee Constantinople). It's a method of obviating your opponent's history and by extension claim to the territory you have conquered. Also - I forget the place-names and particulars - a recurrent source of Muslim-Hindu conflict, where Muslims have torn down Indian Hindu temples and built mosques over the ruins - then made out that only a mosque ever stood there and that land once Muslim must never be non-Muslim, again...

[Thanas]

*shrug* it's more an observation than an argument, really, but yes this was a typical Muslim practice.

It was also a pretty typical Christian or Jewish practice.

This is how, for example, The Church of Holy Wisdom (Hagia Sophia) became Mehmed's mosque, in Istanbul (nee Constantinople). It's a method of obviating your opponent's history and by extension claim to the territory you have conquered.

Though they did not really destroy it. And the method is not really muslim, but was first used by the Jews and Christians.

[Kanastrous]

It would be interesting to determine which faith has made the most use of the practice, most recently. I figure it would be either Muslims or Christians.

Sure, it's true that Hagia Sophia wasn't physically destroyed, but it was architecturally modified and as much evidence as possible of its Christian character deliberately minimized, covered up or destroyed. The important thing is that is was effectively replaced. Or, if you prefer, converted.

[Ryan Thunder]

*shrug* it's more an observation than an argument, really, but yes this was a typical Muslim practice.

It was also a pretty typical Christian or Jewish practice.

I'm really not sure what the significance of that is, in context. Are you suggesting we should ignore that because medieval Christians did the same thing? Isn't that some kind of tu quoque fallacy?

[Ritterin Sophia]

So, it's a community center that fulfills the role of a Mosque, as opposed to a distinctly different architectural style from every other building in the area?
That just makes the complaints all the stupider. I can appreciate the 'But a Mosque would look terrible here' in the same way I'd feel about a Church, Temple, Shinto Shrine, etc. but this is a 13 story building. Unless they crennelate and ostentate the hell out of the roof, it'll just be another interesting but ultimately faceless building in a sea of such.

This is entirely motivated by fear of Muslims. Not that anyone needed me pointing that out to them.

Worse, it's a community center with a number of different establishments that are a part of it that includes a mosque.

[Gil Hamilton]

Sure, it's true that Hagia Sophia wasn't physically destroyed, but it was architecturally modified and as much evidence as possible of its Christian character deliberately minimized, covered up or destroyed. The important thing is that is was effectively replaced. Or, if you prefer, converted.

When the city was captured, the Turks were so impressed by it that they had absolutely no doubt that it HAD to be a holy building itself, so they never tried to pull it down. You can't blame them, it's one of the more impressive buildings that came out of antiquity. Not only that, it was so impressive that the Ottomon Turks modelled many of their other mosques on it, which is pretty deliciously ironic when you think about it. That means that from then on, mosques had classic Byzantine christian character.

The Turks did that alot. They turned the Parthenon into a mosque for a while too, until they were foolish enough to use it as an ammo depot when Venice attacked Athens with artillery. That was end of THAT piece of antiquity. However, keep in mind that the Turks weren't the first people to do that. By the time the Turks got their hands on the Parthenon, Christians striped it of all the good pagan works and turned it into a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary, as opposed to the the Goddess Athena.

You could say that the Muslim conquests did absolutely nothing to Christian sites that Christians didn't already to classic pagan religion, surprisingly often on the same sites as each other. Tearing down other peoples temples and sticking your own on top of them as a symbolic gesture well predates Islam.

[Akhlut]

*shrug* it's more an observation than an argument, really, but yes this was a typical Muslim practice.

It was also a pretty typical Christian or Jewish practice.

I'm really not sure what the significance of that is, in context. Are you suggesting we should ignore that because medieval Christians did the same thing? Isn't that some kind of tu quoque fallacy?

I think it was more of an observation than a defense, especially given his other statement from that same response of his.

Plus, it's not like al Qaeda is demanding that a Wahabi madrassah be built directly upon Ground Zero. It's a Muslim-outreach group trying to build a community center near the larger WTC complex.

[Kanastrous]

You could say that the Muslim conquests did absolutely nothing to Christian sites that Christians didn't already to classic pagan religion, surprisingly often on the same sites as each other. Tearing down other peoples temples and sticking your own on top of them as a symbolic gesture well predates Islam.

I think this is true. However, it's also irrelevant to the question as to whether or not this is a form of symbolism which we want to promote, with the players, conditions and location we're talking about in this century, today.

Plus, it's not like al Qaeda is demanding that a Wahabi madrassah be built directly upon Ground Zero. It's a Muslim-outreach group trying to build a community center near the larger WTC complex.

Also apparently true. But I don't think that will affect the propaganda-value of a mosque going up there (even as part of a larger complex which is very obviously Islamic in terms of its visual design). Really, is it *so* necessary for the mosque to go right on that spot, considering that it can serve precisely the same purpose for precisely the same people, precisely as well, being situated a few blocks in most any other direction?

[Thanas]

*shrug* it's more an observation than an argument, really, but yes this was a typical Muslim practice.

It was also a pretty typical Christian or Jewish practice.

I'm really not sure what the significance of that is, in context. Are you suggesting we should ignore that because medieval Christians did the same thing? Isn't that some kind of tu quoque fallacy?

No, it is not. The context is that people were going "typical muslim practice" when in fact the first religion to do this on a grand scale was the christian one. Also, we had americans going the "convert the middle east" route just a few years ago.