If they are American Citizens, then yes they can have Muslim land. It is their right as citizens of the USA.ThatDudeWithTheFood said:The muslim land argument is retarded since America is America not muslim land puhlease
shyam513 said:I'd Say Yes.
Nowadays, I believe too many people believe Al-Qaeda and Islam are the same thing. I know many muslims who detest the very idea of being linked with 9/11. Building A Islamic Cultural centre on the site of Ground Zero may help the people see that there is more to Islam than what terrorists do.
Isn't that giving in to the "Over patriotic" Douche bags? Don't give them their way, that's the worst thing to do.mightymuffy said:shyam513 said:I'd Say Yes.
Nowadays, I believe too many people believe Al-Qaeda and Islam are the same thing. I know many muslims who detest the very idea of being linked with 9/11. Building A Islamic Cultural centre on the site of Ground Zero may help the people see that there is more to Islam than what terrorists do.
Can't say I read more than the last couple of pages, but agree with this post - to a certain extent.... what I suspect I'd find if I read more would be (and no offense to our American chums) certain US members nearly kicking off at the fact that this was even thought up, and that is the very reason there may be problems with this being given the go ahead.... just like the whole Al-Qaeda/Islam scenario, there's a very small percentage of overly.......erm....patriotic shall I say??... Americans who just might try and bomb the thing! Like Al-Qaeda, it's not even 1% of the American public, just a tiny minority that will not listen to a word anyone says, spoil it all for the rest of the US people and go for this building.... I remember an old US bloke running down some random Islamic girl in the streets after 9/11 because of what 'they' did to his beloved country - THAT sort of person is your problem!
For that reason alone, I'm gonna say no..... if we could make sure such types don't get near the building though, then it's a definite yes on all accounts!
Tempers as in emotions?phoenixgoddess27 said:Tempers still flare in this thread.
I don't believe this is what the OP intended when they made the thread.
First one I believe. Don't let the stuff going on now fool ya', none of it has anything to do with this thread._Chaz_ said:Tempers as in emotions?phoenixgoddess27 said:Tempers still flare in this thread.
I don't believe this is what the OP intended when they made the thread.
Or Tempers as in the site members?
Sterl500 said:Just let me say that nowhere in my post did I say shut down existing facilities. I have heard multiple accounts that they are going to tear the building down/remodel it. What I meant by my post is that no new facilities should be built at an inappropriate distance to Ground Zero. Which I guess is a 2 block reference now.
Sterl500 said:Just let me say that nowhere in my post did I say shut down existing facilities. I have heard multiple accounts that they are going to tear the building down/remodel it. What I meant by my post is that no new facilities should be built at an inappropriate distance to Ground Zero. Which I guess is a 2 block reference now.
Sterl500 said:Nothing should be built near Ground Zero... Nothing. The only thing that should even be in the vicinity is a memorial. I don't care if I am a Christian, this is wrong and everyone knows it. If a mosque cannot be built there, neither may any other religious place of worship. I stand by my belief in the Constitution.Bri said:I'm sure that those who claim that the problem with the proposed Islamic Center is simply its location near "hallowed ground" will be equally outraged over the proposed Christian Center:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_roo...und_zero_church
Not a peep from Newt yet.
-Bri
Those are completely wrong. If you don't rebuild, then you cannot complete the healing process. It's as simple as that.Ferrariman said:Nothing should be built in London because it got bombed in WW2
Nothing should be built in hiroshima or nagasaki because the US bombed that in WW2
Nothing should be built in New York because of 9/11
Vampire Hunter D said:I think the concept here is the Imam in charge at this site to be is a known problem,
He was just joking around and mocking the haters.Sterl500 said:Those are completely wrong. If you don't rebuild, then you cannot complete the healing process. It's as simple as that.Ferrariman said:Nothing should be built in London because it got bombed in WW2
Nothing should be built in hiroshima or nagasaki because the US bombed that in WW2
Nothing should be built in New York because of 9/11
Vampire Hunter D said:I think the concept here is the Imam in charge at this site to be is a known problem, and without an open discussion about it in general and the usual brush off and silence causes many to suspect other motives.
Sterl500 said:Do I have to clarify yet again? I meant by my post that if this mosque was barred from construction, then nothing else should be built as a result. This was in response to another post that another person was countering this mosque with a church. At which I was outraged. If this mosque cannot be build, then nothing else that represents a religious faction should be able to either. Also I think that rebuilding the WTC would be best because it would be a sign that America is rebuilding.