• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Muslim Mosque at Ground Zero, NYC......what's the real deal?

Why are you guys so upset about this..Like it matters what we want, they will take it to court and they will tell us to STFU and pay your DAM TAXES..:dunno: Now go to bed so you can get up in the AM to go to work..

Sorry but i feel better
 
Amid the debate over the Islamic center slated to be built two blocks from Ground Zero, few have stopped to consider the project’s name. Though it is now to be called Park51—a reference to its address, 45-51 Park Place—its initial name was Cordoba House, and the nonprofit behind it remains the Cordoba Initiative. It’s a reference to the city of Córdoba. But what does southern Spain have to do with southern Manhattan?
Click to expand...
http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/42700/why-cordoba/
Cliff notes on the rest of the article: Cordoba, Spain is where the Muslims had one of their first great victories. They conquered Cordoba and built a mosque there as a testament. Interesting tidbit there.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local...tense_hearing_on_park51_near_ground_zero.html
Also, interesting info on the effort to stop the mosque. Trying to get the Burlington building marked as a landmark so it can't be torn down.
 
karstic said:
You ever been to Peru?

Know how many Christian churches and cathedrals are built on the ruins of Inca temples and places of worship?
Click to expand...
Are we still going around naming new ones after any of them? Especially new ones being built in the vicinity of what would be considered a great victory to the extremists?
 
As I’ve stated before, those who are trying to make the Cordoba Initiative GZ mosque issue about religious freedom are either ignorant or supportive of the deception.

In 1965, funding from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Libya helped Rauf's father secure two-thirds of the block at 96th Street and 3rd Avenue. Rauf withheld the information about the Islamic donors until 1984. In fact, all 46 Islamic nations have financed the 96th Street mosque. Perhaps this explains Rauf's current refusal to explain who is funding the Ground Zero mosque.

Furthermore, according to the Washington Times, "using U.S. taxpayer dollars, our State Department is helping to rebuild mosques" in Tanzania, Iraq, and Egypt. For example, the U.S. government helped save the Amr Eben El Aas Mosque in Cairo. The "mosque's namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt." How does one justify American taxpayer money going to Muslim oil states, who since 1973 have earned thirteen trillion dollars as a result of sitting atop reserves of oil? In addition, Daisy Khan, Rauf's wife, "apparently never filed a required informational return or regular annual report: "shocking for a charity with over $1 million in grants just last year.'"

Equally troubling is that American monetary support of mosques raises serious First Amendment questions about the separation of church and state. Why is taxpayer money being used to preserve and promote Islam, even abroad? It is patently clear that one cannot "separate religion from a mosque; [thus] any such project will necessarily support Islam."

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/will_the_real_imam_feisal_abdu.html
 
I don't really have an issue with the idea of mosques being funded by Islamic countries and donors...kinda makes sense, just like Baptists generally pay for Baptist churches, Mormons for Mormon churches, Jews for Jewish synagogues...However, I do have a problem with the gov't funding the rebuilding of mosques.
 
It probably is not a direct donation to the religion, it may be Foreign Aide processed through the Department of State. In those 3rd world countries where the lines between religion and government are quite blurred these mosques are community centers.
 
Boatwrench said:
It probably is not a direct donation to the religion, it may be Foreign Aide processed through the Department of State. In those 3rd world countries where the lines between religion and government are quite blurred these mosques are community centers.
Click to expand...

Your point of government/Islam/mosque convergence is correct. However (always has to be one), if our government can't spend money here to rehabilitate churches, then it shouldn't be spending money to do that in other countries, regardless of their religious/political structure.

Besides, it is way past time we stopped spending money around the globe, it is way past time we stopped trying to be the World's Police Force. No, we don't have to return to the pre-FDR isolationism, but it is time to let the rest of the world stand on their own legs.
 
joe_peters said:
Besides, it is way past time we stopped spending money around the globe, it is way past time we stopped trying to be the World's Police Force. No, we don't have to return to the pre-FDR isolationism, but it is time to let the rest of the world stand on their own legs.
Click to expand...


ah joe i want to just ramble on and on and back up what you are saying cuz its exactly what goes thro my head as well....
 
Darky said:
If this is truly in the interest of religious tolerance, let's turn it into a multi-cultural religious center. It's planned to be 13 stories or something like that. Put a mosque on one floor, a synagogue on another, a church, a Buddhist temple, and so on. :D Let's see how tolerant everyone can really be.
Click to expand...
I love this idea. Sadly I don't think many of the people who would be involved really do.

XJEEPER said:
I care.

Since you brought up the topic of bigger issues, let's skip down that path for a while........

The original Great Mosque of Cordoba was built in the 10th century in Cordoba, Spain, the capital of the Muslim caliphate of al Andalus, ruling over the conquered Spaniards.

The Cordoba Mosque was the third largest mosque complex in the world at the time, built on the site of a former Christian church to commemorate the Muslim conquest of Spain.
This perpetuated a cultural Muslim practice of building mosques on the sites of historic conquests.

So, the mosque at GZ could be considered a monument to the action of Jihad that resulted in the slaughter of innocent 2,976 people.

Imam Rauf also believes that Americans brought the attacks of 9/11 upon themselves........

"I wouldn't say that the United States deserved what happened, but United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened, because we have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA."

The US taxpayers are funding Imam Rauf's current trip to the Middle East.

There is plenty of info about the Imam online, including his associations with Hammas, funding recieved by George Soros, call for Sharia Law, etc.
Click to expand...
The connections to Sharia law and the choice of names really does disturb me. It really shows intent.

IslanderOffRoad said:
I rather enjoy this image. It makes me laugh

TacgJ.jpg
Click to expand...
hahahahahahahahahaha
 
What is Sharia Law, you ask and why should I care? (Not my words, and paraphrased)

• Any critic of Muhammad, the Koran, and even Sharia, may be ordered to death, whether Muslim or non-Muslim.

• Drinking alcoholic beverages and gambling are not permitted. Punishment should be whipping.

• Islamic unmarried men may not indulge in sexual relations; the guilty are to be whipped. Adulterers are to be stoned to death.

• Husbands have full say over their wives and may hit them for any mistrust they perceive.

• Homosexuals must be executed.

• Islamic thieves, no matter their sex, must have a hand cut off.

• Islamic highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated.

• An injured plaintiff may seek the exact same injury as revenge, like an eye for an eye or a hand for a hand.

• Abandonment of one’s Islamic religion is punishable by death.

• Islam commands offensive, aggressive and unjust jihad.

“About 18 months ago, some very prominent personalities in the United Kingdom-church leaders and legal officers-argued that it was inevitable that some aspects of Sharia would be recognized in terms of public law, and then actually also commended such recognition,” he said. “In Ontario, Canada, there was the proposal that some aspects of Sharia should be recognized there, but it did not proceed, because of the adamant opposition of Muslim women who said they had not come to Canada to be subjected again to Sharia.”

Governments’ consideration to allow the implementation of Sharia to settle disputes between Muslims who live in the West has heightened fears among some Muslim women who believe they would lose the rights and freedom they now have in Western countries.

http://www.aim.org/briefing/shariah-v-human-rights/


Sharia in New Jersey: Muslim husband rapes wife, judge sees no sexual assault because Islam forbids wives to refuse sex

Judge Joseph Charles-Opinion in S.D. v. M.J.R. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.), a domestic restraining order case:
The record reflects that plaintiff, S.D., and defendant, M.J.R., are citizens of Morocco and adherents to the Muslim faith. They were wed in Morocco in an arranged marriage on July 31, 2008, when plaintiff was seventeen years old. [FN1] The parties did not know each other prior to the marriage.

On August 29, 2008, they came to New Jersey as the result of defendant's employment in this country as an accountant....
[Long discussion of the wife's allegations of abuse, which included several instances of nonconsensual sex as well as other abuse, omitted for space reasons. -EV]

Upon their return to the apartment, defendant forced plaintiff to have sex with him while she cried. Plaintiff testified that defendant always told her
this is according to our religion.
You are my wife, I c[an] do anything to you. The woman, she should submit and do anything I ask her to do.
After having sex, defendant took plaintiff to a travel agency to buy a ticket for her return to Morocco.

However the ticket was not purchased, and the couple returned to the apartment. Once there, defendant threatened divorce, but nonetheless again engaged in nonconsensual sex while plaintiff cried. Later that day, defendant and his mother took plaintiff to the home of the Imam and, in the presence of the Imam, his wife, and defendant's mother, defendant verbally divorced plaintiff....[...]

While recognizing that defendant had engaged in sexual relations with plaintiff against her expressed wishes in November 2008 and on the night of January 15 to 16, 2009, the judge did not find sexual assault or criminal sexual conduct to have been proven. He stated:

This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.

After acknowledging that this was a case in which religious custom clashed with the law, and that under the law, plaintiff had a right to refuse defendant's advances, the judge found that defendant did not act with a criminal intent when he repeatedly insisted upon intercourse, despite plaintiff's contrary wishes.

Having found acts of domestic violence consisting of assault and harassment to have occurred, the judge turned to the issue of whether a final restraining order should be entered.

He found such an order unnecessary, vacated the temporary restraints previously entered in the matter and dismissed plaintiff's domestic violence action.............an appellate judge overturned this ruling.

Imam Rauf is a proponent to Sharia Law and has compared it to our Declaration of Independance........hmmmm, not really seeing the parallels.

:patriot:
 
92DripCherokee said:
We all know the specifics on site 2 in lower manhattan, called "park 51", aka the ground zero mosque of desecration.

Did you know the flight 93 "memorial" called "Crescent of Embrace" is triumphal mosque site 1?

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...second-mosque-being-built-on-a-911-site-.html
Click to expand...

I wonder why Americans are building this memorial?

Remember the firefighter from Queens who told Osama bin Laden to come to Queens and kiss his backside right after 9/11 and then a month later a plane falls out of the sky into his neighborhood? He had cajonoes, laid it right out there for the whole world to see.

When did the workforce in construction trades lose their guts to stand up and say..."NO! We won't perform that work!" That's right, that was the old days before the systematic destruction of Craft Guilds and Labor Unions for the benefit of the elite with the help of the government. The average worker can't be bothered with standing up for what is in the common good for everyone, it's all about me, just me. The avergae worker now can't afford to turn down any work, even those that slap the face of American values.

Urban Legend in Alpine County California talks about an old woman in her 90's that lived up by the summit of Hwy 88. She was opposed to CALTRANs widening the road that would bring more flat landers up to her mountain retreat. The CALTRANs guys had a hard time as their equipment constantly would go into failure and not start. When the woman passed away and they were cleaning out her cabin boxes and boxes of distributor rotors wer found stash on her property.

She had the intestinal fortitude.

You reap what you sow.
 
Really? Did I read your post wrong?

Have you looked at the plans, the interviews with the architect, or gone to the NPS site? It's going to be a beautiful place to go, to remember.

What is wrong with people?

As far as Sharia Law goes in the US, it is a non-issue as a whole. As usual, it is the judges we have to watch. They seem not to know their place anymore, but rather fancy themselves as lawmakers.
 
Zuki-Ron said:
Really? Did I read your post wrong?

Have you looked at the plans, the interviews with the architect, or gone to the NPS site? It's going to be a beautiful place to go, to remember.

What is wrong with people?

As far as Sharia Law goes in the US, it is a non-issue as a whole. As usual, it is the judges we have to watch. They seem not to know their place anymore, but rather fancy themselves as lawmakers.
Click to expand...

Sarcasm right? I did go to the NPS website to verify what was posted.
 
Zuki-Ron said:
As far as Sharia Law goes in the US, it is a non-issue as a whole. As usual, it is the judges we have to watch. They seem not to know their place anymore, but rather fancy themselves as lawmakers.
Click to expand...


It is NOT a non-issue, this dismissive attitude is what will allow it to creep in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoSubL8jU8A

Agreed on the judges comment.....now look at the complexities of Sharia Law, operating in parallel with the US Constitution....and because of the First Amendment, Sharia Law (religious law) will trump the human Rights and Freedoms protected under the US Constitution.
 
It is not a "dismissive attitude" as you would imply.

I just don't think it has a chance in hell of getting past the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with so many people closely watching for actions that violate either.

The 1st amendment comes into play in full force. The US can not adopt Sharia Law without also establishing a State Religion.

There is also the ERA. Sharia is so full of Male only bias, that there is no way that the laws will pass the Amendments proofs. There is also the issue of Gays: > Sharia La=Kill Em; >Common Law = Not an option ~ Equal Rights to all Citizens no matter their Race, Creed, Color, Sex, or Sexual Orientation.

There is also the clauses about "Cruel and Unusual Punishment". Stoning is right out, as are cutting off limbs.

I suspect that there will be certain laws that are floated by this lawmaker or that. But mind you, they have to pass Constitutional Muster before they become law. If not, the system is self correcting, and someone will sue to put it back on course.

Lawmakers and Justices need to understand what can be considered a "Custom", and what is unjust. Just because someone moves here from somewhere else, they can not continue to practice their customs willy nilly. Those that fly in the face of our laws, will be, and have been dealt with accordingly. Someone may for example, commit a Honor Killing, but that person will also go to jail for it.

You guys seem to think that Islam is a new thing in the US. Fact is, it has been with us for a long time. They only thing that has changed is that the new wave of Muslims people are afraid of are not from around here.
 
I couldn't agree with you more, Ron.

Except I'm not the Socialist President who is snuggling up to the Islamic leaders in the US who've been quietly putting the pieces in place on US soil, under the shelter of the 1st Amendment.

Let's learn from Europe:

Feb 2008

Conservative leader David Cameron has rejected any expansion of Sharia law in the UK, saying it would undermine society and alienate other communities.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7264740.stm



Sept 2008

Sharia courts have been operating in Britain to rule on disputes between Muslims for more than a year, it has emerged.

"Five sharia courts have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester and Nuneaton, Warwickshire.

The government has quietly sanctioned that their rulings are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court. Previously, the rulings were not binding and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.


Lawyers have issued grave warnings about the dangers of a dual legal system and the disclosure drew criticism from Opposition leaders."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2957428/Sharia-law-courts-operating-in-Britain.html


Muslim gangs imposing sharia law in British prisons
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...s-imposing-sharia-law-in-British-prisons.html


Here's how the Saudi's roll.......

Aug 19, 2010

A Saudi judge has asked several hospitals whether they would punitively damage a man's spinal cord after he was convicted of attacking another man with a cleaver and paralysing him, local newspapers reported today.

Sharia law in Saudi Arabia allows defendants to ask for a similar punishment to harms inflicted on them. Cutting off the hands of thieves, for example, is common.

Under the law, the victim can receive blood money to settle the case.
Human rights group say trials in Saudi Arabia fall far below international standards. They usually take place behind closed doors and without adequate legal representation.

Those who are sentenced to death are often not informed of the progress of legal proceedings against them, or of the date of execution until the morning on which they are taken out and beheaded.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/19/saudi-arabia-judge-paralyse-convict
 
XJEEPER said:
WOW! Don’t see how I could add anything more to this. Well done.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/p...sible-to-be-astonished-but-not-surprised.html
Click to expand...

X2

"Without the shield of religion to hide behind, Islam would be banned in the civilized world as a political ideology of hate. And we have no obligation to make allowances for it, anymore than we do for Nazism."

They're not stupid. They use the Constitution to cover their expansion, they use the Constitution to protect them from prying eyes and ears, and they'll use the Constitution as toilet paper when they see fit to apply their 'Law'. As Bare Naked Islam says, "It isn't Islamophobia when they really are trying to kill you."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top