Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-14-2010, 08:00 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,549,770 times
Reputation: 24590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by baront70 View Post
Here let you some thing to ponder. First why does Muslims own ground zero? Were they just raising the towers for the Insurance??? Also why in the hell didn't United States build back the twin towers as it was before??????
this is the kind of brilliant stuff people hear outside of america and they think is unbiased news unlike the evil foxnews and cnn that we watch here in america. they get nothing but the truth outside of america especiall in islamic countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-14-2010, 09:31 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,356,228 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvs View Post
Google Maps put it at about 19 minutes, fwiw.


And NJ and NYC are filled with middle-eastern and aisian-indian folks. This thread is not about the population, it's about the location chosen for the mosque.


Again, there's a HUGE difference between needing a building that was hit by the debris of the attack, and having it 14 miles away.


I realize this is now the case. Was it the case before this bonehead decided to build one near GZ? I'm not sure, but I think this incident has caused this outcry.
nope, it's been the case since 9/11, for the same reason many people are fighting this mosque. it has nothing to do with location and everything to do with ignorance towards islam.

are there some that oppose this simply because of location? sure. but there is opposition all over the country to mosque's since 9/11. so i would say, just like the terrorists used Islam as a justification for their opposition to US policy, the opposers are using location as a justification for their opposition to Islam.

terrorists attacked ground zero. so unless terrorists are building something near it, then there's no basis to oppose this building unless you have a problem with Islam.

i've said that numerous times in this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 09:35 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,356,228 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
everything im saying is true. just look it up. i believe if you search the word "caliphate" it should give you a little info about the goal to unite the world under islamic law. the jihad thing is something muslims and the ignorant try to say is an internal struggle not a holy war against non-muslims. they are trying to be tricky. jihad is both internal and exteral, it is the muslims duty to spread the religion and to stop the spread of other religions. in some muslims countries, the penalty for a muslim to convert to christianity is death. sounds like extremist? its islamic law. its amazing how they spoke of murdering people for burning a book and people called the priest the crazy one. as if killing people for some guy burning paper makes any sense. ill tell you something, it makes sense to muslims. right? you know im right. all the sudden your friendly muslim neighbor thinks killing someone for burning paper makes more sense than the guy burning the paper. they arent gonna tell you that they would be happy if the guy gets killed right? but i guarantee they will be happy.

its all out there, just do your research.
you are taking an extremist interpretation of the book and applying it to all muslims. you are wrong. sorry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 09:36 AM
 
Location: West Orange, NJ
12,546 posts, read 21,356,228 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLuckoftheDraw View Post
As if "truly following a religion" is a cut and dried issue for ANY religion.
he's completely taking the teachings out of context, and using the extremist views of the text and applying it as "what islam teaches". it's not even worth responding directly to any further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 09:56 AM
pvs
 
1,845 posts, read 3,359,292 times
Reputation: 1538
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
nope, it's been the case since 9/11, for the same reason many people are fighting this mosque. it has nothing to do with location and everything to do with ignorance towards islam.

are there some that oppose this simply because of location? sure. but there is opposition all over the country to mosque's since 9/11. so i would say, just like the terrorists used Islam as a justification for their opposition to US policy, the opposers are using location as a justification for their opposition to Islam.

terrorists attacked ground zero. so unless terrorists are building something near it, then there's no basis to oppose this building unless you have a problem with Islam.

i've said that numerous times in this thread.
OK, I understand your distinction. The only issue I see is that all polls say that more than 50% of people cannot see this distinction ... YET.

I believe the wounds are still too fresh, the memories not forgotten. the LINK between the two has been ingrained on westerners by the past 20 years of attacks, all supposedly IN THE NAME OF ISLAM, for ALLAH.

I'm not up on my history ... how many years did it take, after Pearl Harbor, before the concentration camps were closed? Maybe for the average human being, it takes more than 9 years to "heal"?

Since there has been such a popular uproar over the location of this mosque, I feel those emotions should be taken into consideration by the individuals who proposed it. Especially in the light of the fact that they claim this facility will work to bridge a gap between the west and Islam. How are they going to bridge the gap if they insist on widening it by forcing the issue on this location? It is this stubborn insistance by them that is making a lot of us wary of their real agenda, here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 09:58 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,549,770 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp View Post
you are taking an extremist interpretation of the book and applying it to all muslims. you are wrong. sorry.
im taking the actual interpretation. its not like its up for debate (but its funny to see people like you debate it). its in the islamic religious texts. its so obvious that there are entire countries based on it, following it, practicing sharia law that its amazing to see how people turned their heads to it in the name of political correctness. theres no bill of rights in the islamic world. theres sharia law.

here they have quoted some stuff from the hadiths and from the koran:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jihad
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 10:55 AM
pvs
 
1,845 posts, read 3,359,292 times
Reputation: 1538
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
here they have quoted some stuff from the hadiths and from the koran:

Jihad - Wikiquote
Some interesting reading here, Captain (and a LOT of it) ... especially if you click on the links to the passages.

bradykp, have you taken a look? Again, look at the articles linked to the summary passages. I would be very interested in what your "take" is regarding these texts. Are these, in your opinion, the extremist views? If so, do you have links to the ones that are not extremist?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 10:56 AM
 
Location: NJT 14C
429 posts, read 929,844 times
Reputation: 144
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
im taking the actual interpretation.
lol, if only you knew how silly that phrase is.
Quote:
its not like its up for debate
You just acknowledged that interpretation of religious texts is hardly a cut and dried issue for any religion, but now you're arguing that it is for the Islamic religion. Hermeneutics should be another thread, in another forum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 11:26 AM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,549,770 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLuckoftheDraw View Post
lol, if only you knew how silly that phrase is. You just acknowledged that interpretation of religious texts is hardly a cut and dried issue for any religion, but now you're arguing that it is for the Islamic religion. Hermeneutics should be another thread, in another forum.
its not as hard to see with regards to islam because the views in their religious documents are consistent with what people would consider "extremist" views and those are the dominant views being followed among muslims throughout the world today.

you have resorted to playing silly games because you can not defend the islamic literature because it is clearly "extremist". you can not defend islam as it is practiced today because the "extremists" control the religion all over the world.

what you and many others are trying to do is "Americanize" islam for the purposes of political correctness. you are assigning certain understandings of islam that arent consistent with the religion and ignoring the blatant truth that islam is an aggressive religion that isnt tolerant of other peoples beliefs. there is no bill of rights in islam, there is no freedom of speech, no freedom to practice ones religion, no trial by jury, no search warrant needed, no tolerance for other beliefs, no building places of worship for other religions, no democracy, etc. etc. etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,237 posts, read 84,175,053 times
Reputation: 114547
Quote:
Originally Posted by baront70 View Post
Here let you some thing to ponder. First why does Muslims own ground zero? Were they just raising the towers for the Insurance??? Also why in the hell didn't United States build back the twin towers as it was before??????
ROFL. What makes you think Muslims own Ground Zero/the World Trade Center site? The property is owned by and is being rebuilt by The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, a public transporation agency (their PATH system comes in underground--that's why the WTC was there in the first place.

Don't understand the "raising the towers for Insurance" question.

The design of the Twin Towers does not meet modern building codes, especially for fire/life safety as modified after 9/11. Also, we are all-too-aware of the vulnerabilties of that type of tube construction now.

What's being built are four office towers and the 911 National Memorial, and of course, the PATH station/transportation hub (a temp PATH station was completed in 2003--the permanent station is under construction and its roof is the memorial area at street level.)

Here's a link:

World Trade Center - Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top