What Do You Think?

[uvvsklfp]

I have to say I am somewhat surprised by your answer to my question about allowing Islamic and other groups with opposing view point to post ads because of your belief in freedom of speech.

What is your stance on the building of the Park51 Islamic community center?

If you are against the building of the center how can you be supportive of freedom of speech & religion yet opposed a religious group building a multicultural community center?

[troach]

uvvsklfp thanks for your comment and question.

For those that may be new to the board or this discussion.
The question & answer uvvsklfp was referring to is located at:
http://bbs.troach.net/viewtopic.php?t=1919

- - - - -

There is a very old and very true saying that just because one has the right or has the ability do something does not mean that the person should do it.

I have to wonder if anyone really thinks that if (for example) any of the following

American Nazi Party,
Aryan Nations,
Hammerskin Nation,
Ku Klux Klan,
Skinhead Action,
Or even
Westboro Baptist Church

Purchased the same site and submitted plans to build exactly the same type of structure.

A building that would include, but not limited to, a library, a gym, a swimming pool, a basketball court, a 500-seat auditorium, a restaurant, child care facilities, a culinary school, prayer / meditation space and let us even throw in a 9/11 memorial. Is there anyone that thinks there would not be just as many if not more protests against those groups wanting to put up a building on the same site? More importantly is there anyone that thinks the New York City Council would even seriously entertain/consider a proposal by any of those groups much less unanimously approve it?

If any of those groups had purchased the site before the current owners did they would have exactly the same rights to build any kind of building that they want. Assuming they are using their own money and not government grants or other government funding. (Where the funds for the project are coming from would be an issue regardless of group.)

None of the groups I mentioned had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks (though I suppose if one looks hard enough one can find a conspiracy theory or two saying otherwise.) Yet I am sure that a lot of people would be very offended, just as I would be, at the thought of one of those despicable groups building anything in the city much less near a location that is considered hallowed to so many.

And yes (if that hypothetical example had occurred) I would be speaking out against those groups building anything at that location, just as I speak out against the deplorable things that they really are doing.

HOWEVER, the passive moderate Islamic leadership that are/were in charge of building this center did something that none of the other groups I mentioned would do and that is cross a very dangerous line. (Or at least I do not think they would be so matter of fact and nonchalant about crossing the line especially not multiple times on national TV. Somehow I doubt any of those groups would be able to get the national TV airtime for personal interviews that Muslims get).

As for my stance 9/9/2010 was the date that I moved from the attitude of “It is in bad taste for that mosque to be built at that location but it is their right to do so” to an attitude of “If we have to it is time to peacefully stand with as many people as possible on every floor on every millimeter of that building to prevent ANY work from being done for anything any Islamic group wants to build.”

What could possibly have changed my mind and my way of thinking about this and other Islamic sites in the USA “home of the brave and land of the free”?

What caused me to change my mind and pick a side to “help dig the trenches” would be the statements of the “moderate passive non radical” Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf (who has since been moved off center stage as spokesman for the Park51 project but the fact he was there for so long indicates that the group as a whole supports the ideology he presented and as I understand he is still active with the project just not in as visible of a position).

The question was posed to Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf about why not simply move the location of the Mosque? (At the time there were other locations offered which would have appeased the anti-mosque protesters no one would be happy about the mosque being built but it would have been a solution everyone could live with. There have also been at least two offers to buy the property giving a sizeable profit to the Park51 group. From what I understand both offers were well over 100% of what the Park51 group has in the property. No matter how one calculates the expenses of the property accumulated by the Park51 group)

However his responses have been like this:

- - - - -

We need to consider how this will be viewed in the Muslim world. The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack. The danger of the radicals in the Muslim world to our national security, to the national security of our troops. . . . .I am only thinking of the safety of America’s national Security for the sake of our national security we should leave it where it is.

"If we move from that location, the story will be the radicals have taken over the discourse. The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack. If we don't do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world. It could become something very dangerous indeed."

But if you don't do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world," he later said, predicting that the reaction could be more furious than the eruption of violence following the 2005 publication of Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

- - - - -

See references:

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/09/new.york.islamic.center.imam/index.html?hpt=T1

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/rauf-moving-mosque-would-cause-attacks

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1009/08/lkl.01.html


And right there us where the group has crossed the line.

Saying that if we do not stop protesting or manage to get the mosque moved to a more neutral/less offensive location that there will be trouble around the world from people with such a low IQ that they probably couldn’t find New York on a map. The Islamic Neanderthals are going attack anyone (even people and groups that have absolutely nothing to do with the situation) some Imam says to attack because Muslims did not get their way or someone has said something truthful but negative about Islam. That, my friend, is not freedom of speech. That, my friend, is a threat, or perhaps a promise, of random hate violence and an attempt at intimidation.

To be honest I am confused at why This moderate non-radical Imam Rauf was not visited by lots of government officials explaining to him the dimensions of a jail cell. For I am fairly certain that if I or most anyone else said or implied that there would be “dangerous” threats to national security and lives of people in the States and around the world would be at risk if we did not get our way that anyone else making those statements would have visits from all kinds of people with interesting 3 letter initials associated with their names. Like FBI, NSA, CIA, etc. to give anyone making such statements a nice first hand visit to, not just a description of, a jail/holding cell.

The problem is that threats are very different than freedom of speech or freedom of expression or any other freedom.

If someone says I am an ignorant imbecile I do not get the right to beat up or kill the person that made the insulting statements about me. I also do not get the right, if I were to follow the Islamic example, to go down the street and beat up some people that have some loose association with the person that insulted me (a loose association like they once read a book that was published by a company located in the same country as the person that insulted me).

Under the same token IF I were to say that I believe Islam from the actions and statements by various members of the Islamic main stream leadership proves to me that Islam IS a dangerous and violent cult that is determined to control every region of the planet; Or IF I continued by saying that I believe Islam should not be allowed one nanometer of space for another mosque in any democratic country. Or IF I continued by adding a comment or two about the delusional prophet and included something about a pig or two.

You would have every right to call me an uneducated buffoon with the IQ of an insect. Or you might try to explain to me how I am mistaken about my viewpoint and show me how my perceptions of Islam are incorrect.

But what you DO NOT have the right to do is threaten to kill me or anyone I know. And you or other members of Islam DEFINITELY DO NOT have the right to go out pillage, rape, and KILL people that have absolutely no idea what has happened, who did what or anything else about the situation some Islamic leader finds insulting to Islam.

That is what I am against. A violent and dangerous hate and intimidation cult group that only believes in one-way bridge building (all concessions have to given to them).

While granted I have very strong feelings about the Islamic Ground Zero Victory Mosque I am also willing to admit I could be wrong about the group wanting to create a true community center that will bring all religions together. But for me to change my mind it is going to take some serious concessions by the Park51 group.

It is not uncommon for Muslims to demand free prayer/meditation and other concessions be made by private companies as well as public buildings to accommodate their “special needs”.

So what would it take to get me to change my mind and not continue to speak out against the Ground Zero Islamic Indoctrination Cultural Victory Mosque aka Park51?

In this case there would have to be a binding building design that allocates several floors of space reserved for people that practice other faiths for instance Baha’i, Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, Sikhism, Wicca as well as other faiths. The space should also be large enough for each group to hold their religious services as well as be located in appropriate locations. (For instance the Wiccans will need access to the rooftop. As I am sure you are aware many of the Wiccan services are held at night and need to have a direct view of the sky.) There should also be enough space provided for each to have reading, prayer/meditation rooms. Each group should also be able to hand out information and talk about their various faiths to anyone that wants to learn more about that faith. There should also be a binding clause that the areas designated for other religions cannot be revoked or taken away. Only the religious group itself can choose to vacate the premises or give their space to another religion or religious group of their choosing. The new group would of course inherit the same rights and protections of the space as the previous religious group.

Granted that is an over simplification of what it would take to get me to change my mind about the Ground Zero Mosque. If there were any realistic chance of The Park51 group even considering such an idea a lot of obvious issues would need to be ironed out. But if the Muslims of that project truly want to show that the building is meant as a community and bridge building center for all faiths. This would be a good start to get me to change my mind about the project.

If the Park51 group would actually do this and if I could find enough Christian groups to help sponsor the Christian area, with books, publications, etc. I would even be willing to work the Christian section of that community center.

But somehow I do not think that Islamic leadership would ever go for such a thing.

However, be my guest to prove me wrong and get the Park51 group to actually do what I suggested above. Having that happen would go a very long way to getting me to believe there is some hope for Islam to actually become the peaceful tolerant religion it claims to be.