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.
I agree with the Newt's soundbite on this topic. But it's just a cheap and easy shot at something that 95% of the public would agree with anyway.
Note to the Republican Party leadership: Please make Gingrich and Palin your nominees for 2012.
It isn't as though Newt has just now taken up this stance. He has been speaking about this issue for a long time now. I receive information and updates from him on a regular basis and so I know what issues he is always addressing. So, throwing this as a, solely, political maneuver, on his part, isn't going to work for me.
This is a political issue and he is a politician. It doesn't mean he's playing the political card with it though, but it's probably nice to think that for those that oppose him. It's always easier to brush off the crucial issues that way. At least he is speaking boldly about it. Something not many would dare to do.
A bit more background, not that it would matter to Newt:
"Among the worshippers is Sharif El-Gamal, a member of the congregation that has been praying in Lower Manhattan for five decades.
...
Park51's leaders, meanwhile, have also stated that a Sept. 11 memorial is part of their vision for the site. (Daisy Khan, Imam Feisal's wife, is, incidentally, an advisory member of the National September 11 Memorial and Museum.)"
It isn't as though Newt has just now taken up this stance. He has been speaking about this issue for a long time now. I receive information and updates from him on a regular basis and so I know what issues he is always addressing. So, throwing this as a, solely, political maneuver, on his part, isn't going to work for me.
This is a political issue and he is a politician. It doesn't mean he's playing the political card with it though, but it's probably nice to think that for those that oppose him. It's always easier to brush off the crucial issues that way. At least he is speaking boldly about it. Something not many would dare to do.
Just speaking for myself, I don't see this mosque kerfuffle as anything approaching a "crucial issue." It's a local NYC thing and it's more than likely not as it's being presented in the press.
I see it as an opportunity for Gingrich and others to blow it up all out of proportion and take a "bold and courageous stand against islamist terrorism."
Please...
As I mentioned earlier, I agree with his sentiments in this instance. I doubt you'd find very many outside the muslim faith who wouldn't.
It's a nonissue, meant solely to inflame passions.
Is it? So, there's nothing "sacred" about it? Not even to the families of several thousand people?
I don't know anyone who died there, but I respect the feelings of those who are offended at the thought of a Mosque at or near the site.
I know at least 100 people who died there. I was there that day myself and worked there for 19 years and loved the buildings themselves.
Perhaps some people do feel it is "sacred". I am not of any tradition that hallows the remains of the dead--that is just not the way my family is, so yes, some of this could be my own perspective.
I do respect the feelings of those who lost family members, but losing a family member does not mean that one gets to decide what does and does not get built in lower Manhattan. Let's think back a couple of years to one of the reasons (not the only one) for the five-year delay in getting construction going at the actual WTC site: Politicians and other stakeholders involved in the process were hesitant to publicly go against the wishes of the families during the design process, and there were family members who insisted that nothing ever be built at the WTC site ever again! While their emotional state is understandable, such demands cannot be made based upon their grief. Further, not all family members--and we are talking about thousands of people here--are all of one mind, either back then or now. There came a time as regards the actual WTC site that it had to be said "we are going forward with rebuilding". Now nine years later the feelings of some of the family members are to extend to areas outside the WTC site as well? How far do we take this? Few, if any, of the families live anywhere near the WTC site or this mosque. On the other hand, the 50,000 or so residents of the area where the mosque will be built overwhelmingly approve the project. It is THEIR neighborhood. IMO, their opinion should carry the most weight.
I doubt it. But I know how people on CD love a good conspiracy. That's why we're all here I guess. I am not a fan of the Muslim religion by any means. The Mosque is not in view of ground zero. This is not a big deal....it's business.
I read the article. The most telling quote for me was, "According to City Council member Margaret Chin, who represents the district, more than 95% of the complaint calls her office receives about the project come from outside the neighborhood, and the vast majority come from out of state."
That's what I figured was going on here. The right wing media has turned a local non-issue into a national crap storm.
I read the article. The most telling quote for me was, "According to City Council member Margaret Chin, who represents the district, more than 95% of the complaint calls her office receives about the project come from outside the neighborhood, and the vast majority come from out of state."
That's what I figured was going on here. The right wing media has turned a local non-issue into a national crap storm.
Exactly. As a matter of fact, the first article I read on this back in May was the New York Post article that contained the absolute falsehood that it was going to open on 9/11/11. I saw that and realized that they weren't even going to put up any PRETENSE of fact-checking on this one.
Exactly. As a matter of fact, the first article I read on this back in May was the New York Post article that contained the absolute falsehood that it was going to open on 9/11/11. I saw that and realized that they weren't even going to put up any PRETENSE of fact-checking on this one.
The moment anyone brings up the Post (a.k.a. Rupert Murdoch's baby), the first two words that should leap to mind are yellow journalism. There are only two things the Post is good for: raising a ruckus, and as toilet paper in an emergency.
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.
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.
