AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

It's actually terrible. Comparing hundreds of acres of land out in the middle of the country, to a site in the middle of the densest population zone in America with the highest real-estate values, is completely crazy. The two are not comparable.



Yaknow, I would take you more seriously on this issue if you had done any research at all. The families had their chance to come and speak at the Zoning hearing and the Historical Building permit hearing. Many of them did, and many spoke in support of the project.

What you keep saying SHOULD happen, already DID happen. It just didn't turn out the way you wanted it to.

Cycloptichorn

Actually I think you are obviously wrong. Both are sites involving a massacre of innocent and peaceful people. About 160 Native Americans were massacred by over zealous and misguided U.S. Cavalrymen at Sand Creek, while almost 3,000 Americans were massacred in New York by fanatical and extremist Islamic jihadists. In both cases, the guilty perpetrators became way too caught up in their mission to become heros of their misguided causes. Both events have historical significance, but the event in New York probably has more worldwide significance and probably will have more long lasting impacts upon future events throughout the world. Real estate values and geographical differences, sure, but those factors can be dealt with as appropriate in each setting as presented to us.

Yes, you're right. And like I said, they were dealt with. You just don't like the way it turned out, and now are spending time bitching about it.

Cycloptichorn

I am not the only one unhappy about it, cyclops. In my opinion, it is but another example of Democrats bungling issues right and left. This one I think stems from phony political correctness which Democrats and liberals are famous for.

What do the Democrats have to do with this? Nothing. You are upset at the local zoning and historical preservation boards, neither of which have anything to do with Democrats.

I understand that when you're blown out of the water, however, it's a common practice to just repeat a few of your favorite tropes and then sort of hope the conversation dies off. It's cool.

Cycloptichorn

After I've won the argument, why beat a dead horse, cyclops?

Or maybe its a bit like when my brother and I used to put on the boxing gloves for a few punches. After we had thrown some of our best ones and made the points that we wanted to make, it was time to quit. After all, we were brothers , were not fighting a real match, and didn't want to get hurt, and so are we all Americans and this is just an opinion board, not Congress or the Supreme Court.

Won what? The people you said should take things into account, did. There's no legal right to stop them. It passed the appropriate zoning boards. There's no moral right to stop them either; it's been pretty clearly established on this thread that Bigotry towards Muslims is the reason that you and others are opposed to this project. With a dash of xenophobia and illogic thrown in to boot. What did you win, exactly?



Yeah, lots of people who are completely wrong suddenly offer to compromise and call it a tie at the end.

Cycloptichorn

Cyclops, you probably notice that I have the common weakness to keep editing my posts to improve on them slightly, and often you quote before my final edits, and that happened here again. Sorry about that again.

We all do that - there's no need to apologize.

Cycloptichorn

I guess I am confused about what the discussion is here.
The twin towers stood on the World Trade Center property owned by the Port Authority. There were also other buildings on that 16 acre site. All destroyed on 9/11. This was commonly known as Ground Zero.
After a lot of discussion amongst a lot of interested parties, along with a few lawsuits, here is the status of Ground Zero as of May, 2010:
1 World Trade Center Office Building- construction began 4/06 with completion in 2013;
2 WTC Office Building- construction began 7/08;
3 WTC Office Building- construction began 3/08;
4 WTC Office Building- construction began 2008;
5 WTC Office Building- construction began 1/09;
7 WTC Office Building- construction completed 5/06 (not on PA land);
The National September 11th Memorial and Museum design was selected from 5,000 entrants from around the world. The memorial is scheduled to open on 9/11/11 with the museum to follow a year later.
You can find the design for the WTC memorial by doing a google search.

Only recently has there been the notion of expanding the definition of Ground Zero to include a much wider area around the WTC to an area that, by coincidence, contains the cultural center on Park Place.

okie, Your brain just can't accept simple ideas. When there is a restriction placed on any site, it restricts everybody from building there. They do not discriminate who can or can't; it's all groups no matter what their makeup.

rjb, its the standard practice of ci and perhaps some others ridiculing anybody that posts ideas or opinions that ci disagrees with, plus guys like cyclops calling conservatives bigots, that is most of the discussion.

Anyway, thanks for the summary of what has happened in the 9/11 area, that is informative and helpful to the discussion. I learned something from your information and by doing a bit more web searching in regard to the National September 11th Memorial and Museum that is being built. I was not even aware of its progress as described in the following website, and that it is privately funded and sponsored or managed so far by public and private sector leaders, including family members of 9/11 victims.

So from that information, we learn that not only do the family members care about the area but they actually have taken on a large role of helping build the Memorial and Museum near Ground Zero. Obviously, I was not only correct that they could and should provide input into the planning of any historical site there, but my recommendation and opinion have already taken form in actual actions by them and others to build the Memorial and Museum.

Therefore, would it be unreasonable at all at some point for this museum to become part of a national historic site managed by the National Park Service? No, I think the answer is an obvious no, and so not only was my opinion correct, but it has already proven to have begun to take form by actual construction there in the area. I would add to this information with the obvious observation that they should not only have input into the museum they have helped begin already, but they should also be asked to provide advice and input into any other planning that takes place for that area, including any other construction and zoning planning that takes place. Cyclops tells us that this has already happened and that the die is cast for this mosque and Islamic Cultural Center, perhaps so, but count me as one that is not all convinced that the local authorities did the proper homework and have made the right decisions so far. I don't know what lawsuits are ongoing, but this could all drag on for quite some time in regard to what all happens there.

http://www.national911memorial.org/site/PageServer?pagename=New_About_Page

You show such sorrow on the losses but there were agents who could have really reduced the loss or eliminated the loss altogether. 5 Israeli were caught celebrating the WTC burning and could have prevented this horror. They had explosives in their van and taking pictures. They could have been co-conspirators. They knew in advance the WTC attacks.

talk, funny but I don't believe a word you say. Of course if you had actual credible evidence, it might be different. No, I don't buy that kind of conspiracy crap. Do you actually believe that stuff? Do you also believe the holocaust never happened?

Okie and Realjohnboy you both have good and defensible points but I must demure as to the size and placement of any memorial for 9/11. I think that it is important to, somehow, memorialize and institutionalize the events of 9/11. I remember, when growing up, the constant reminders of Pearl Harbor and the horrors of Hitler's Third Reich. This was a constant reminder of what happens to those nations that, whether by choice or not, are perceived as weak or vunerable by their neighbors. The Japanese attack (On Oahu) was a little different than their historic agression towards China and the Korean pennisula who were perceived weak. Those who ordered the attack saw it only as a delaying tactic that, if successful, would keep the U.S. out of the Pacific theater long enough so that Japanese conquest in their sphere of influence would present a Fait accompli to the U.S.

There is a considerable difference between the above WWII episodes and 9/11 and this difference presents a history of the 9/11 event where it is not at all clear the proper societal memory will instruct future generations as to the danger embodied by, not only the jihadist threat, but by those national actors who expliciitly and impliciitly support such jihadist efforts. Indeed it must be pointed out that the GZ Mosque Iman, Rauf, has stated that the U.S. was an "acomplice" to the events on 9/11. Further, when asked whether funds from Iran or other jihad supporters would be accepted as contributions to the Mosque, he refused to say: No!

However, the biggest road block to institutionalizing the memory of 9/11 is those on the left that refer to the 70% of Americans that are against the Mosque as "Anti-American" such as Mayor Bloomberg. This seems a thinly veiled attempt to denigrate their political opponents. After the recent demise of the racist charge ,which has lost its virulence due to overuse during the Obamacare debacle, the left needed a new cudgel and 'Anti-American' seems to fit this Journolist II need quite nicely. (Remember Bloomberg carefully offering how the Times Square Bomber was probably just someone pissed off about Obamacare?) But this attempt to denigrate Mosque disbeleivers may backfire on the left in the future.

How are we to include the reality of jihadist success on 9/11 into America's official history if the ruling class will not allow that reality into our lives, let alone our history books?

Speaking of reality, at this point the chance of the Mosque actually being built is pretty slim. The developers have not been able to purchase all the land, this 100 million dollar project has less than 100 grand in the the fund , and local resistance is growing ( Local Hard Hats have vowed not to work on it). But even though the Iman does not display the sensitivity of a Catholic Pope towards the wishes of Jews in Auschwitz, this dust-up has been enlightening. It has exposed those on the left who would use this as just another political football which they hope will translate into votes for them in the mid-terms. This issue is not about freedom of religion or the right of landowners to use their property (given they actually own it) as they see fit. Its about the sensitivity and honest intentions of the Mosque proponents.

Oh, it wouldn't hurt to ask for clarity regarding where its donations come from, would it?

JM

i am sick and tired of the word, "actually."

Excellent post, James. Now don't be surprised if cyclops labels you as a bigot.

JM, You fail the "What Is America" test; there is nothing comparable to 9-11 that can be deemed as an attack on the US by a race or country. They were simply "terrorists" who were able to accomplish their dastardly deed, because GW Bush failed to heed all the warnings before him. There is nothing sacred about ground zero; it just so happens that the WTC stood there. How people love to designate anyplace they see fit to call sacred as a result of terrorist activity/destruction is laughable. What does "sacred" mean? Does it all of a sudden become a place of worship? For whom? Is it comparable to a church?

You should listen to George Carlin's spoof on god, prayer, and wearing or not wearing hats in the Catholic Church. He has the wit and acumen to make fun of those who believe that god is on their side.

You had too many football days without helmet okie.

http://www.todayscatholicworld.com/mossad-agents-911.htm

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/israelispys.html

http://killtown.blogspot.com/2005/11/dancing-israelis-on-911.html

Holocaust has nothing to do with 911! You are using the Holocaust to bludgeon critics of Israel and it doesn't work.

The AMerican Right, pulled as they are by their nose rings, may be in a state of high dudgeon over the proposed Islamic Center the right deems to be too close to Ground Zero. okie has proclaimed that the 911 families should have their say but later denied making such a statement.

Well, some of those 911 families have spoken and guess what? They favor the Muslim project:

The planned mosque and Islamic center blocks from ground zero got a new boost Wednesday from a coalition of supporters that includes families of Sept. 11 victims.

New York Neighbors for American Values rallied for the first time at a municipal building near ground zero.

"I lost a 23-year-old son, a paramedic who gave his life saving Americans and their values," Talat Hamdani said, and supporting the Islamic center and mosque "has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with standing up for our human rights, including freedom of religion."

Among the nearly 2,800 people killed when the World Trade Center was attacked in 2001 were more than 30 Muslims, she noted.

Opponents of the Islamic center project argue it's insensitive to the families and memories of Sept. 11 victims to build a mosque so close. Supporters cite freedom of religion.

The new coalition was started by members of 40 civic and religious organizations that "spontaneously called each other, because we had the feeling that something very negative was happening," said Susan Lerner, executive director of the New York office of the watchdog group Common Cause.

The controversy was triggered by "irresponsible politicians" using it as an election issue, she said. Names mentioned at the rally included former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Republican, and the highest-ranking Democrat in the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Gingrich has suggested that building the mosque near ground zero is akin to putting a Nazi sign "next to the Holocaust Museum." Reid has broken ranks with President Barack Obama by saying he thinks the mosque should be built elsewhere.

Coalition members are now contacting officials, asking them to support the project as a reflection of religious freedom and diversity, and the rejection of "crude stereotypes meant to frighten and divide us."

They plan a candlelight vigil near ground zero on Sept. 10, the eve of the ninth Sept. 11 anniversary.

"This is not just about Muslims; this is about who we are as Americans," said Lerner, adding that to oppose the Islamic center is "a slippery slope. There will always be people who are offended standing next to people who are different from others."

Rabbi Arthur Waskow, director of New York's Shalom Center, said the project will show the world a form of Islam that espouses peace — not the Islam of the terrorists.

"It is right; it is wise to build it," he told hundreds of people gathered under the arches of Manhattan's Municipal Building, a short walk from ground zero.

Several coalition members noted that the mosque site's developer, Sharif el-Gamal, modeled it after the Jewish Community Center on Manhattan's Upper West Side. It serves anyone who wishes to participate, they said, and so will the Muslim center near ground zero.