Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Help me articulate why this rant vs. NY Mosque is wrong
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/06/pat-condell-on-ground-zero-mosque-is-it-possible-to-be-astonished-but-not-surprised.html
My first thought was, 9/11 was not an act of "Islam" but just of some angry, crazy guys who happen to be Muslim. But, is it true what this guy says in the video - that the mosque plans to open on 9/11/2011? If so it does make me question the motives of the people building it.... |
Anonymous
| Can't watch the video right now, but I can say that JihadWatch, in general, is pretty extreme in its viewpoint and tends more towards propaganda than actual facts. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
|
It really is a waste of time to try to refute this type of thing because those who want to believe it will not be convinced otherwise. But, I've got time to waste, so here goes:
First, the guy making the rant is Pat Condell who is actually a comedian. I am not even sure if he means what he says. At any rate, he is (or at least portrays himself as being) militantly secular. He has attacked every major religion and you will find adherents of every major religion who believe that he is anti-whatever-religion-they-are. It's particularly funny to find people who enjoy his attacks on one religion suddenly discover his attacks on their own religion. Suddenly, their humor turns to anger. His attacks are so over the top that even other secularists don't like him (check out his website and you'll find a video of him whining about having been excommunicated from secularism). As to his rant, here were several problems I found with it (this was just a quick scan, I don't have time to do in-depth research): He places the center "a few yards" from Ground Zero. It's actually two blocks which is quite a bit more than most people's understanding of "a few yards". He describes the mosque as "triumphalist". However, the exact opposite is true. The imam leading the effort has a history of interfaith dialogue. He represents the exact opposite of Usama Bin Laden. In fact, because the imam is actually a Sufi, Bin Laden wouldn't even consider him a Muslim. Building the center would be the strongest demonstration possible of American values of tolerance and freedom of religion. Far from showing Bin Laden that he had won, this would show that American still holds true to its values. Condell calls Islam worse than Nazism. This is ignorant on the face of it. Condell falsely explains the history of Cordoba in Spain. Under Muslim rule, Cordoba was one of the most advanced cities of learning and hosted the world's largest library of the time. People of all religions lived peacefully and many non-Muslims from elsewhere came to study in the city. This was in marked contrast to what happened in the aftermath of the Muslim's overthrow when Jews and Muslims alike suffered from the Spanish Inquisition. Cordoba represents tolerance and learning and, as such, is a very appropriate name for the center. Condell claims the site was chosen to be a triumphalist monument. In reality, the imam currently leads a mosque only 10 blocks from the new location. He simply chose a near-by site for the new center. The center is not scheduled to open on the 10th anniversary of 9/11. This charge apparently came from a single opinion column in the New York Post. No opening date has been announced and financing has not even been arranged. Commonsense suggests that an opening cannot be scheduled until construction is planned and that cannot happen without financing. |
Anonymous
|
Watching it now...
1.) He refers to the Mosque as being a 'few yards' from Ground Zero when it is really several blocks. 2.) He speaks of Islam as if it is a monolithic group, with a completely uniform ideology. Example: He refers to "hair trigger sensitivity", which certainly describes SOME Muslims, but not all and certainly not the group proposing the Mosque. 3.) He says we don't know where the money is coming from (though I'd venture to say that this information could be found) and then makes pretty baseless assumptions about its roots and the implications of such funding sources. 4.) Why, specifically, is being "Islamo-friendly" bad? Oh yea... it is if you hate all Muslims. 5.) His characterization of Islam could pretty much be applied to any religion by utilizing the acts of such religion's extremist fringe. 6.) Godwin's law at minute-mark 2:58! 7.) Speaks of the unique value of individual liberties in American culture while denouncing a group's right to enjoy those liberties through the free expression of their religion. 8.) "Any Muslim who denies that ['Islam rejects everything America stands for, including liberty and diversity] is a liar." Outright slander. 9.) Misrepresentation of the use of a historical term for $500, Alex! 10.) "As close as possible to Ground Zero" would be on Ground Zero. Not several blocks away. This map illustrates the exact positioning: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=45+park+place+new+york+city&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=45+Park+Pl,+New+York,+NY+10007&gl=us&ei=fKdcTLzGLJLmsQPxjP3hCg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBMQ8gEwAA 11.) "Will be there forever..." Are they building it out of diamonds? Who knows what will be on that site in 10, 50, 100 years? 12.) He talks about public sentiment making a difference... which it can if the members of the Cordoba Initiative can be convinced. But if, as he states, public sentiment makes a difference through pressure on public officials, which would essentially represent a government restriction on religion, than he and his people have done far more damage to "America" than any terrorist group. |
Anonymous
|
Also, from Cordoba's website:
"The site will contain tremendous amounts of resources that otherwise would not exist in Lower Manhattan; a 500-seat auditorium, swimming pool, art exhibition spaces, bookstores, restaurants - all these services would form a cultural nexus for a region of New York City that, as it continues to grow, requires the sort of hub that Cordoba House will provide." Sounds really dangerous to me! |
Anonymous
|
Jeff-
You may be right that the video is indeed satirical, but clearly it is not satirical enough if the targeted group (which would be the JihadWatch crowd and the like if it was true satire) holds it up in celebration. True satire ultimately makes its target clear. So, yea, it may be satire and poor satire at that. What is scary is at how it just lends fuel to the fire of bigoted groups like JW. |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
|
I don't know if it is satire or not. Here is a funny example of how this guy causes people to tie themselves in knots:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/3474/why-i-dislike-pat-condell-stop-sending-me-ignorant-anti-israel-englishmans-anti-islam-videos/ Debbie Schlussel is very anti-Islam. She says she agrees with Condell about Islam. However, she won't post his videos. Why? Because he also criticizes Israel and Judaism. Consider this: "He gets it completely wrong on Jews and Israel and religion in general. And, therefore, you can’t listen to him on much of anything else, no matter how right he may be about the Islam he wants to enable in Israel, but not in his cozy British home." Too bad Debbie doesn't recognize anti-Islamic bigotry as easily as she recognizes anti-Semitism. |
Anonymous
| Interesting. Well, whatever it is, I find this video at least pretty objectionable. Satire or not, unique to Islam or not, the fact remains is that it is based is bigotry. And the whole "I'm an equal opportunity bigot" doesn't fly with me. |
Anonymous
|
If this is sacred ground, then they need to move the Duane Reade, Dunkin Donuts, Subway, the Dakota Club Remix, and the Off Track Betting parlor off the sacred ground. They are just a sampling of what sits between the mosque and Ground Zero.
Obviously the Starbucks can stay, and also the Dakota Roadhouse because that sounds like a good place to let it all out after paying respects. But you might be alarmed to find out that PIRG is mere yards away. I think they are in league with the Yasha shoe repair. I don't know where those guys come from, but the name sounds fishy. |
Anonymous
LOL! |
Anonymous
+100 |
Anonymous
|
You can make light, but this editorial in today's post from the daughter of a 9/11 victim (Iranian-American) opposing the mosque construction is heartfelt and considered:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080603006.html |
Anonymous
I did not mean to make light of the situation, only the sham defense that a location two blocks from Ground Zero is still considered "sacred ground". If you look at a map, it is clearly far from the site itself, and I wanted to highlight how many unsacred or just banal things exist. If there is an argument, it is not as simple as saying "sacred ground". But because you have brought an intelligent and thoughtful counterpoint, I will be more serious this time. While I appreciate the point of view of the writer, her concerns are that the mosque is politicizing Ground Zero. Her exact words, the part that defines her objection are contained here:
Note that she does not blame Islam. She says that the presence of a mosque creates controversy. But is it fair to blame the mosque or the protestors who think that Islam = Terrorist? In the 60's, many people believed in equality for blacks in America, but they still argued for separate society because they felt that desegregation would create too many problems, that society was not ready. In other words, they said to blacks: "you are right, but if we give you your freedom, it will cause too much trouble". So to this woman I would say that we cannot shy away from correcting the basic premise of this protest, that Islam is responsible for 9/11, merely because it would keep the peace. We have to move forward. This is no longer a matter of a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero and within a few blocks of three or four other churches. It is about the role of Islam in America. If you do not believe me, look at the following links. Read the article, and the protest signs to judge the true intent of the protest for yourself. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/us/08mosque.html?_r=1&hp http://www.newsweek.com/photo/2010/08/08/us-mosque-protests.html |
Anonymous
|
I think she is saying this is the only grave / memorial the families have, and keep it apolitical. You point out that some people place a negative slant on Islam and thus oppose the mosque. She says that, contrary, some people would imbue such a positive value to the mosque beyond what the organizers may intend. She points out--rightly--that mosques have long existed in America. The decision to place one there, now is problematic to her because it is so open to so many perceptions--when she and families go to the grave/memorial it will no longer be an experience of reflection of what they choose to bring--but politicized. I think her examples of choices to not build sensitive structures or hold sensistive events near sensitive places was right on. Believe me, I am a champion of free speech and about as un-PC as they come in terms of PC policing of language and action. But I have a line. I am uncomfortable with hate speech demonstrations outside military funerals. I understand what our constitution enshrines, but there are also principles of sensitivity and common sense. I am just saying, there are views of opposition to this mosque that don't come from a place of hate or prejudice--but just a different take on its appropriateness relative to the purpose of the 9/11 site-- a multivalent shrine that basically needs to be accessible to many people from many walks of life. Once it becomes politicized, will it be an accessible place of healing like the Vietnam Memorial has provided to so many vets (by the way. construction of which was HIGHLY politicized--some designs proposed were abandoned. That remarkable memorial did not come easy. Just saying, these things merit debate and do not need to be rushed if you care to 'get them right').
Thanks for responding sensitively above. |
Anonymous
| I might agree with the above, but the site is two blocks away. These are big, New York City blocks with high rise buildings in between. Each of the buildings looks to be greater than ten stories tall. You could not even see the mosque from the Trade Center property. Go to Google Street View and check it out for yourself. |