Ground zero in tensions over war in Afghanistan

macca says:

12:23pm | 04/08/10

@TheRealDave,

My first reaction was similar, I think its increadibly inconsiderate of the families of the people who lost their lives at Ground Zero.

However, there is another victim in all this, and that would be innocent Americans of the Islamic Faith. I have no doubt (although I have no proof) that many Muslim people in New York are marginalised and discriminated against because of their faith. Placing the Mosque at Ground Zero helps to welcome these victims back into the New York community, and also tries to compete with the message the America is at War with Islam

I do not think either message will be acheived, and as I said, my initial response is shock, but I can empathise with what Bloomberg is trying to acheive

TheRealDave says:

01:15pm | 04/08/10

@Macca, I thought of this as well, but I remember that Islam has a history of this kind of thing. Dropping a huge Mosque on the most holy place in Judaism springs to mind. I am sure plenty of others can find other examples.

Its like they are saying ‘We beat you right here, look how mighty we are’

I am sure the Japanese might raise the odd objection if McDonalds wanted to build a 15 story McDonalds franchise beside the Hiroshima Peace Memorial.

I just can’t fathom how the hell this is supposed to bring about a ‘Healing Process’

Heath Karl says:

01:18pm | 04/08/10

I guess you were also shocked by the revelation that they built Christian churches right across the aboriginal continent, sometimes right on top of sacred sites.

Steely Dan says:

01:23pm | 04/08/10

@ TheRealDave

I personally feel that all religion is ultimately useless, and blame Muslims 100% for the Twin Towers attack.  From my perspective, I can’t wait to see religion disappear.

However, that does nothing to change the fact that the peaceful Muslims (yes, of course they exist) were not responsible for September 11.  They still have a right to their religious beliefs, and it’s a right that I will respect and defend, despite my wish to see Islam go the same way as Zeus, Thor and Ra.

Punishing all Muslims for the actions of somebody who happens to worship the same god is like running the Christians out of Waco.

James1 says:

01:24pm | 04/08/10

How is it inconsiderate?  Did those particular Muslims fly the planes?  Should we blame every Muslim for the 9/11 attacks, and should we then blame every American for the massacre at My Lai?  I guess we should ban Catholic churches wherever the Inquisition was active too.  And the US embassy in Hanoi is very close to a hospital that was bombed during the Christmas bombing campaign - perhaps they are “taking the piss” as well?  What emotive rubbish.

TheRealDave says:

01:47pm | 04/08/10

@Steely mate, I agree with you, religion is a plague upon the world, all of them that is. But I see this as not a religious issue. This is just about a bit of common decency. 9/11 has and still does affect Americans not just in NY, not just Black or White, not just Christain or Jew or Muslim but ALL Americans.

I have no objection to building Mosques. None at all, well apart from my whole ‘All Religion is nonesense’ beleifs, but I do have to stick my hand up and ask when its not jsut a mosque but a huge monstrocity right near something that affects so many people across the country so deeply. Right or wrong as some of that feeling may be.

At best its just misguided. At best.

@Heath - really? Somehow aboriginals get dragged into this? Which particular ‘sacred sites’ are we talking about? Real ones or ones that become ‘scared’ once they are worth a few bob?

If the Catholics were going to put up a Cathedral on Ayers Rock I’d raise the exact same type of concerns. But their not, so your point is moot. At best.

Heath Karl says:

02:11pm | 04/08/10

@Real Dave

I drag the aboriginals into the debate deliberately. Are they connected to 9/11? ofcourse not. Is what happened to them deserving of the same sense of outrage that you show to the Manhattanites. It is worth more. The fact that you ignore your duty to moral consistency shows how baseless your morality is.

And on Uluru, Australians insist it is their right to walk on it, in direct opposition to the wishes of the people who consider the rock religious. That is the same affront to the aboriginies as the building of of a mosque may be to new yorkers. Unless construction imparts some special moral value that Im not aware about, they are exactly the same.

Steely Dan says:

02:55pm | 04/08/10

@ therealdave

“But I see this as not a religious issue.”
This is clearly a religious issue.  Would Christians be able to build a church on the same spot.  Of course they would.

“This is just about a bit of common decency.”
Which isn’t what’s being shown to the innocent Muslim community who are trying to build their mosque.

“9/11 has and still does affect Americans not just in NY, not just Black or White, not just Christain or Jew or Muslim but ALL Americans.”
Nobody’s trying to be insensitive.  But those Americans who can’t distinguish peaceful worship from a terrorist attack don’t have the right to ignore the establishment clause in their constitution (a very important part of the document - Aus liked it so much we borrowed it almost word for word).  If people are offended by freedom of religion, they don’t get my sympathy for that.

TheRealDave says:

03:37pm | 04/08/10

@Steely - No, I don’t think its a religious issue. Of course if it was a Christian Church it wouldn’t attract any attention. Same as if it was Jewish or FSM appreciation centre.

Would it be a religious issue if the Japanese put up a memorial to dead Japanese soldiers at Sandakan? No, its not a religious issue - its an issue of common sense and respect for what occured on that site. I would never put blame on all modern Japanese people but I would recognoise the inflammatory nature of the act that would upset a lot of people.

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

03:38pm | 04/08/10

@ Steely Dan

‘‘Nobody’s trying to be insensitive’’ - perhaps it is out of ignorance (doubtful) but the fact remains that it is INCREDIBLY insensitive.

Steely Dan says:

04:59pm | 04/08/10

@ therealdave

“Of course if it was a Christian Church it wouldn’t attract any attention.”
I think that shows pretty conclusively that its a religious issue.

“Would it be a religious issue if the Japanese put up a memorial to dead Japanese soldiers at Sandakan?”
No.  And for the record, I wouldn’t oppose it, so long as it was recognising the dead without glorifying failed Japanese imperialism.

Definitive says:

09:48pm | 04/08/10

It’s called the hand of friendship, a very civilised thing to do.  I will be happy if the Taliban do the same thing in Afghanistan lol.  Also a message for the dope that keeps pushing the indigenous issue into this debate.  Hey just in case you did not notice these things grew out of settlement over 200 years ago maybe not as far behind the times as our Islamist chummies, but a long time ago all the same.  Now run along a vote for the snotty Greens at the election.

Rhys says:

12:37pm | 04/08/10

You say that like Islam itself perpetrated this atrocity rather than a radical terrorist organisation.

Your analogy is flawed because this is more like opening a German style pub outside Auschwitz or building a Sony factory at Pearl Harbour.

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

12:52pm | 04/08/10

The atrocities at Auschwitz were committed in Hitler’s name, those at Pearl Harbour in Hirohito’s name. The atrocity in New York was committed in the name of their god, Allah. 

And now they wish to build a temple to that god, adjacent to the killing field and among the families of those they killed. The analogy stands.

Budz says:

01:12pm | 04/08/10

Scarlet, it was in the name of Allah, but that’s like if I murder someone in your name, it doesn’t mean that you wanted it to happen.

Heath Karl says:

01:23pm | 04/08/10

Or, as I said above, exactly like a christian church being built on aboriginal land. Everytime an aborignal sees a crucifix, terrible memories of invasion and genocide must be invoked. Neither crime committed against the New Yorkers in 2001 is as profound as those committed by the english against the Australian native. How can you abide such a society, Scarlet Pimpernel?

James says:

01:29pm | 04/08/10

I feel, whilst this is a valid point, Hilter did what he did in the name of Germany which then was warped and deformed into the monstrous results we are more than familiar with. My concern is that you don’t tar all German’s with same brush as Hilter, as we can not tar all of Islam with responsibility of a very small and extremist off shoot of this religion.

I agree its location could have been better decided but after all that this city has been through I think this decision is core to the cities founding, a haven for the persecuted, marginalized and disenfranchised. Islam in America (and the western world)  fits this category, this as a step along the long path of healing. Let’s not also forget many Muslims also lost their lives in the WTC as well.

James1 says:

01:30pm | 04/08/10

Sorry Scarlet, but it doesn’t stand.  If you can not see the difference between the systematic attempt to kill every single European Jew and a terrorist attack that killed 3000, then you deserve to have Godwin’s Law invoked (and completely lose the argument as a result).  That is completely aside from the fact that you have cheapened the memory of the 6 million that were killed in the Holocaust, and the millions of Asians killed by Japan, to make a dubious point, which to me is the most insulting and offensive part of your post.

The Scarlet Pimpernel says:

01:41pm | 04/08/10

@Budz

of course not, but that does not make the survivors or witnesses feel any better. It shows insensitivity towards the families of the victims and it denigrates the sacrifices of those who died in the immediate aftermath, trying to rescue others. 

If the perpetrators committed this act in the name of capitalism (to move away from individuals, gods and personalities) - would you want a bank plonked on the site, or the new HQ for a stockbroking firm?

Heath Karl says:

01:55pm | 04/08/10

In the world I live in, the powerful dictate the terms. When the English invaded the Aboriginal nations, and won, they built an English society, and destroyed the aboriginal one. When the Zionists recieved the gift of Palestine from the victors of WW2, they set about building, not mosques, but synagogues. They built these temples on former religious sites, former battle grounds, former places of profound historical importance. Wherever you look, the question is not legitimacy, but ability. They do it because they can, not because it is right.

So spend the afternoon faking a sense of moral indignation if you like, its a nice little mental exercise. But there can be no moral code for the muslims to obey that is plucked from the air

TheRealDave says:

01:21pm | 04/08/10

Wether or not they do is irrelevant Gregg. The fact is that those who did do it did it for their faith, in the name of their faith, on behalf of their faith. In this case Islam. Of course this does not mean every Muslim is a fanatical terrorist. The point still stands that radical Islam perpetrated this crime.

Why is it that its OK to offend the sensibilities of the majority of American citizens just so we don’t offend the sensibilities of a minority?

Why is it more sensible to allow the construction of a huge trophy right near such a tragic site that speaks to ALL Americans?

Steely Dan says:

01:39pm | 04/08/10

@ TheRealDave

A “trophy”?!? It’s a mosque, Dave.  If you’re seeing the construction of a mosque as a salute to Al Qaeda, that’s your own strange issue.

TheRealDave says:

01:54pm | 04/08/10

@Steely a 13 (or is it 15 I can never remember) storey Mosque. Not just an ordinary average Mosque. Its being built to standout, to attract Muslims from all over the place. Why right there. Why right next to a site that goes to the heartstrings of nearly all Americans? A gargantuan monolith to Islam.

Don’t you see or even accept this could be a major issue to many Americans? Why do the sensibilities of a minority outweight the concerns and sensibilities of the majority?

New York is a big place…why right there?  At that location ??

Steely Dan says:

03:17pm | 04/08/10

@ therealdave

“a 13 (or is it 15 I can never remember) storey Mosque. Not just an ordinary average Mosque.”
You’re right, it’s not an ordinary average mosque.  It’s a building in New York city.  A 15-storey building is hardly going to dominate the skyline.  And even if it did, that doesn’t make it a ‘trophy’.

“Its being built to standout, to attract Muslims from all over the place.”
Isn’t that the point of a religious building?  If it was a basement door with a ‘keep out’ sign on the front, then I’d be worried.

“Don’t you see or even accept this could be a major issue to many Americans? Why do the sensibilities of a minority outweight the concerns and sensibilities of the majority?”
Because they live in a democratic republic where the majority do not get to impose their will all the time.  We’re not a republic, but the same thing happens here.  There are two parties in the dispute, one of which would be offended at the end of the day.  The difference is one party would be offended, the other would be offended and have their constitutionally guaranteed rights denied.  The latter wins the dispute, whether its the majority or the minority.  What would happen if 99.9% of Americans voted to outlaw Islam?  Nothing.  Their constitution - like ours - protects the minority from persecution by the majority.  Grief does not entitle people to demolish the rights of others - especially when that grief manifests as misdirected rage and bigotry. 

“New York is a big place…why right there?  At that location ??”
Not sure.  I don’t know what NY real estate is like.  They may want a shiny mosque full of well-to-do Americanised Muslims there to show the local community that they’re not like the fundies in the Middle East.  I honestly don’t know.  But assuming their motive is sinister is ridiculous.  Prove they do and I’ll change my position.

TheRealDave says:

04:39pm | 04/08/10

It doesn’t have to be a ‘sinister’ purpose Steely. I can’t argue that it is 100% sinister, and I’d agree that my statement that it was a ‘trophy’ is unfounded, just an opinion based on past beahviours, as none of us can speak to the inner workings of the organisation building said Mosque. If they’ve got the money to buy a huge building in New York then they would have options.

But what I can say is that it is just plain incosiderate, ill-conceived and offensive to a lot of every day Americans - based on the reaction and outrage thats happening in the US, even outside Fox News viewers. And thats the crux of the issue.

Surely someone, if they are the sensible moderates we are all told they are, might have turned around and said ‘Hey guys, this location could cause a major problem for us, maybe we should look elsewhere’

Budz says:

01:13pm | 04/08/10

@The Scarlet Pimpernel - It depends if the victims families blame the Islamic religion as a whole for what happened on 9/11 or if they blame more specifically Al Qaeda and the loonies that flew those plans and supported their actions. Big difference.

T.Chong says:

02:06pm | 04/08/10

Thats th problem shayne, the US is now so imperial , that to defy it is asking for murderous retribution.
Now , very convienently, any and evry armed opposition to the US and its puppets is immediately labelled terrorist, and the worst bogeyman strawman of all , the al queada terrirst is lurking every where, so we need to be afraid of all muslims,as theyre all the same,( just like all jews are hate filled zionist looony settlers, and all christians are waco davidians.)
As the US and its quislings know, the only good terrist, towel/rag head is a dead un.

Budz says:

02:29pm | 04/08/10

Amy, firstly you can’t say patriotic to the core, because I dont believe the attack was an attack on the US specifically. It was more against the Western world and plenty of people from other countries died.

Let’s say for arguments sake someone travelled from Los Angeles to blow up the mosque, should they not allow a company based from there to build there next?

Amy says:

03:38pm | 04/08/10

Budz, what you believe about whether the attack was on the US specifically doesn’t matter one iota to a fundamentalist white-bred American who sees the September 11 attacks as a direct “F*** you” to the United States.

There are PLENTY of Americans (and non-Americans, for that matter) who consider September 11 a VERY personal attack on the US [whether or not they blame Islam as a whole] - a view that, logically, would only be amplified by anyone extreme enough to blow up a mosque.

There is no room for logic or rational thought where extremism is concerned, remember?

As for not allowing a company based in California to build in/around the WTC site if someone from California were to attack the mosque: of course they shouldn’t be banned from building on/near the WTC site.

That is beside the point.

I’m did not say they shouldn’t be ALLOWED to build a mosque on or near the site. My point is that doing so would be inviting further trouble and, I suspect, would in fact defeat the efforts to ease Muslim and non-Muslim relations in America.

Leigh says:

04:00pm | 04/08/10

Another example of using our democracy against us, try it in any islamic country and see how far you get.
Agree with an earlier comment, this is a trophy, and that is how it will be seen by the Islamic faithful around the world.

Steely Dan says:

05:05pm | 04/08/10

@ Leigh

“Another example of using our democracy against us, try it in any islamic country and see how far you get.”
Ah, two wrongs make a right!  Let’s oppose religious freedom to show those Islamic countries we can do oppression better than they can! 
Try again, Leigh.

Pete says:

10:22pm | 04/08/10

Why wouldn’y they be allowed to? Its a Muslim Community Centre, not a Taliban Community Centre! I know heaps of Muslim women who go to the gym.

FredLime says:

10:12am | 05/08/10

Pete, Islam is Sharia, Sharia is Islam, go shopping in Dubai. women only shops and cafes. Enlighten your knowledge read something from Ayaan Hirsi Ali. US mosques force gender-segregated worship. Go and find a man of Islam to say women are equal to men.

James1 says:

10:40am | 05/08/10

Fred,

US synagogues force the same gender separation.

Steely Dan says:

10:55am | 05/08/10

@ FredLime

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a secularist, Fred.  You can oppose a religion without oppressing it.

James2 says:

10:50am | 05/08/10

Bali is a province of Indonesia, and Indonesia is neither a Muslim nor a Hindu country, it is a pluralist democracy in which a majority of its citizens are Muslims.

Steely Dan says:

11:07am | 05/08/10

@ Orhan

“There were Muslims who also died in the twin towers attacks hence the excuse of using the deceased doesn’t hold any ground.”
Good point.

Ginzou says:

12:07pm | 03/10/10

Well said, the Taliban have won if the US ignores it’s founding values and principals.

If I lived in NY then the only objection I’d have is i’d prefer it to be a multi-faith community centre that all people from all cultures can use.

Steely Dan says:

11:00am | 05/08/10

I agree with the piece - except for this bit:

“The attacks of Sept. 11 were not a religious event. They were mass murder.”

They’re not mutually exclusive terms.  The attackers did what they did with religion being the principal motivator.  That doesn’t justify punishing people who worship a god of the same name, but 9/11 was religious murder.

TheRealDave says:

01:24am | 06/08/10

@Pete - given that over , what is it up to now? 4000 odd US servicemen have died directly stemming, right or wrong depending on your viewpoint, directly from 9/11 I think that many of the families of those servicemen and women who were and are being killed in action today would look back to 9/11 as a symbolic link for them. Which is the point I was making. 9/11 and the WTC isn’t just a special place for the families of the victims on that day in that place. Its touch was and still is being felt right across America.

Re: Afghanistan - You know I’ll be there when another thread about the Ghan takes place