NBC/CBS reject "Kill the Ground Zero Mosque" ad

British_Rover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
4,288
Location
Torrington, CT United States
Car(s)
2005 Gr Cherokee, dealer demo
The topic here has changed a bit...

I've said before that there's nothing that can or should be done about building Cordoba House, but on the other hand, all this about "what's right" does have a point.

I would consider it legal but highly insensitive for across the street from a mosque for a building to have a large-screen display that shows nothing but clips of women removing burkas to reveal they are wearing skimpy lingerie, interspersed with depictions of Allah engaged in sexual activities with farm animals.

Would it be legal to do such a thing? Of course. Would it be right? I don't think so.

Steve
That is one hell of a straw man argument. In just pretty much every city in the US something like that would be against decency standards anyway and would never get approval for being built.

The YMMA is not going to be in Line of Sight of ground zero anyway. Unless they make the building more then double the height of what is planned not even the top floor is going to be able to see over nearby buildings to ground zero. The buildings built at ground zero will be very tall and will eventually be able to see the roof of the YMMA but that is about it.

This is old news time was but first I have heard of it.

Right-Wing Radio Host On NY Mosque: ?I Hope Somebody Blows It Up?


The American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative recently presented plans to build a community center two blocks away from Ground Zero in New York City that would include ?a mosque, performance art center, gym, swimming pool and other public spaces.? Even though a community advisory board voted in favor of the proposal, conservatives have continued to attack the plan, with Rep. Peter King (R-NY) calling it ?offensive.?

On Wednesday, a man named ?Tony? called into the KTRH-AM (Houston, TX) radio show of right-wing radio host Michael Berry in support of the Muslim center. First, Berry asked the caller whether ?Tony? was his real name, because with his accent, he didn?t ?sound like a ?Tony.?? He repeatedly tried to link to the mosque to terrorists, eventually saying that if the mosque is built, he hopes someone blows it up:

BERRY: No, Tony, you can?t build a mosque at the site of 9/11.

TONY: Why not? Why not?

BERRY: No, you can?t. And I?ll tell you this: If you do build a mosque, I hope somebody blows it up. ? I hope the mosque isn?t built, and if it is, I hope it?s blown up. And I mean that. ? It?s right-wing radicals like me that are going to keep this country safe for you and everyone else from the people who are flying the planes from the country you fled from. If you want to identify with those people, go live with them.

Listen here:

Yesterday, the Muslim civil rights organization CAIR filed a complaint against Berry with the FCC. ?Calls for acts of violence against houses of worship must never be tolerated or excused,? said CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad. ?We ask the FCC to demonstrate that incitement to violence is never acceptable on our nation?s airwaves.?

On his website, Berry has responded to CAIR?s charge by saying, ?I did NOT advocate bombing any mosque? because ?the supposed mosque does not exist.? He then accused CAIR of trying to ?scare people into believing that having differing opinions will cost you your job.? However, right after all of these accusations ? in a markedly different tone (and, interestingly, a different font) ? Berry apologizes for his remarks:

While I stand by my disagreement of the building of the mosque on the site, I SHOULD NOT have said ?I hope someone blows it up.? That was dumb, and beneath me. I was trying to show ?Tony? how much I opposed his opinion, but I went too far. For that, I apologize to my listeners.

Berry?s comments are especially disturbing in light of a recent terrorist incident directed at an Islamic Center in Jacksonville, FL. A man firebombed the mosque when there were about 60 people inside, although no one was injured.

Berry has been a substitute host for Mark Levin and a guest on the shows of Bill O?Reilly and Sean Hannity. On March 20, he wrote on his Twitter page, ?NYC at talk radio convention. Sean Hannity very supportive of my career, offering to help. Said he listens when I sub for Mark Levin.?
 

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
The topic here has changed a bit...

I've said before that there's nothing that can or should be done about building Cordoba House, but on the other hand, all this about "what's right" does have a point.

I would consider it legal but highly insensitive for across the street from a mosque for a building to have a large-screen display that shows nothing but clips of women removing burkas to reveal they are wearing skimpy lingerie, interspersed with depictions of Allah engaged in sexual activities with farm animals.

Would it be legal to do such a thing? Of course. Would it be right? I don't think so.

Steve
Just to be totally clear, you just made a parallel that suggested that peaceful Muslim prayer services are as offensive as bestiality, didn't you?
 

Steve Levin

Master of Disaster
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
1,482
Location
Sunnyvale, California
Car(s)
Spec Racer Ford!
Just to be totally clear, you just made a parallel that suggested that peaceful Muslim prayer services are as offensive as bestiality, didn't you?
No, I made the point that clearly such a thing would be offensive to Muslims.

We could just have a store that specialized in selling paintings and comic books of Allah and it would be just as offensive to a Muslim. And certainly that wouldn't cross any decency laws in any part of the nation (to defeat B_R's silly strawman claim).

Just as it's clear that, despite everything, there are lots of people that find the proposed location of the Cordoba House offensive. To those people -- and it's far from a fringe -- it's quite upsetting.

Now, you can make the argument that those people should "just deal with it" -- but you can make the same argument that Muslims should just deal with the fact that in many Western non-Muslim countries images of Allah (in profane acts or not) are entirely acceptable.

The reality is that the Cordoba House, if built, will certainly never advance acceptance of Islam in New York.

Much like the Carmelite convent once located at Auschwitz, it will do more harm and upset than good.

Does that mean they can't build it? Of course not. And back to the original commercial -- that was still beyond the pale.

Neither act, however, is "right" in my personal opinion. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Steve
 
Last edited:

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
No, I made the point that clearly such a thing would be offensive to Muslims.
Well, OF COURSE an image of Muhammad raping an animal would be offensive to Muslims. An image of Jesus raping a goat would be offensive to Christians too. Same with Buddha fucking a yak. What does that have to do with law-abiding religious institutions holding routine services in a neighborhood where several other religious institutions also hold routine religious services?

We could just have a store that specialized in selling paintings and comic books of Allah and it would be just as offensive to a Muslim. And certainly that wouldn't cross any decency laws in any part of the nation (to defeat B_R's silly strawman claim).
It would be legal. It wouldn't be right because the only reason they're there is to deliberately incite offense. Muslims aren't praying at Cordoba house to deliberate incite offense, any more than the Christians and [edit]Jews[/edit] who can go to the church and synagogue two blocks from Ground Zero are doing that to deliberately incite offense.

Just as it's clear that, despite everything, there are lots of people that find the proposed location of the Cordoba House offensive. To those people -- and it's far from a fringe -- it's quite upsetting.

Now, you can make the argument that those people should "just deal with it" -- but you can make the same argument that Muslims should just deal with the fact that in many Western non-Muslim countries images of Allah (in profane acts or not) are entirely acceptable.
Yes, they should just deal with it. A lot of people find interracial marriage offensive. Doesn't mean their offense is worth a damn thing.

No, the fact that Saudi Arabia and all are backwards, oppressive, bigoted governments doesn't change a damn thing. The fact that Saudi Arabia does oppresses its religious minorities doesn't mean we should do the same. In fact, considering that many American Muslims are here because they were trying to get away from those repressive governments in the Middle East, it's remarkably ironic that you apparently are seeking to punish American Muslims for the repressiveness of Middle Eastern governments.

The reality is that the Cordoba House, if built, will certainly never advance acceptance of Islam in New York.
Does it have to? Does the cathedral that's directly across the street from Ground Zero have to "advance acceptance of Catholicism in New York" to not be "wrong"?

Much like the Carmelite convent once located at Auschwitz, it will do more harm and upset than good.
For the record, I see nothing wrong with a convent being near Auschwitz. Blaming all Christians for the actions of Nazis is equally ridiculous as blaming all Muslims for the actions of al-Qaeda.

Regardless, Auschwitz isn't the middle of frickin' Manhattan. There weren't already three other religious institutions in a two-block radius of Auschwitz when the nuns built that convent. Very different situation.
 
Last edited:

Dogbert

Helsinki Smash Rod
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6,458
Location
N38? 43', W90? 22'
Car(s)
Roger Dean's Rocks
Well, OF COURSE an image of Muhammad raping an animal would be offensive to Muslims. An image of Jesus raping a goat would be offensive to Christians too. Same with Buddha fucking a yak. What does that have to do with law-abiding religious institutions holding routine services in a neighborhood where several other religious institutions also hold routine religious services?
I think the argument falls flat because such a thing could/would be offensive to anyone, not just Muslims.

No, the fact that Saudi Arabia and all are backwards, oppressive, bigoted governments doesn't change a damn thing. The fact that Saudi Arabia does oppresses its religious minorities doesn't mean we should do the same. In fact, considering that many American Muslims are here because they were trying to get away from those repressive governments in the Middle East, it's remarkably ironic that you apparently are seeking to punish American Muslims for the repressiveness of Middle Eastern governments.
In fact, Americans came to America seeking freedom from religious persecution. How sad is it that now we're the ones inflicting the persecution?
 

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
In fact, Americans came to America seeking freedom from religious persecution. How sad is it that now we're the ones inflicting the persecution?
As a minor aside, probably not the best example, as the Puritans didn't actually want religious freedom, just to no longer be the oppressed minority. The burning of the "witches" of Salem are the classic example of how little religious freedom in Puritan New England.

Religious freedom in the United States was primarily just lip-service until the 20th century (edit: except for Rhode Island!). But now that we've got it, I'll be damned if we give it up.
 
Last edited:

wooflepoof

Watermelon Connoisseur
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
5,047
Location
Texas
Car(s)
Genesis Sedan 3.8
As a minor aside, probably not the best example, as the Puritans didn't actually want religious freedom, just to no longer be the oppressed minority. The burning of the "witches" of Salem are the classic example of how little religious freedom in Puritan New England.

Religious freedom in the United States was primarily just lip-service until the 20th century (edit: except for Rhode Island!). But now that we've got it, I'll be damned if we give it up.
Nonsense. Freedom of and from religion was a big deal for our country's founders...and many religious groups, as it would allow them to proselytize without fear of prosecution or oppression by a state endorsed religion.
 

Jay

the fool on the hill
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,280
Location
Aurora, IL
I guess I see it as a place of worship for people who do not want to travel X amount of miles by cab, bus, tube or train to the nearest mosque. Same reason I chose a church that is two miles away from where I live; it is convenient. I would think that if you live in Manhattan, you probably work there, too.

The site of it will certainly offend many, because it is a)so very close to ground zero and b)maybe it is too soon. To put it quite simply, Americans equate terrorists with Muslims; if that goes against your reality, you are free to stick your head back into the sand.
BUT! What I love about this country is that we didn't firebomb mosques in droves or slaughter Muslims by the score after 9/11. We hate, despise and loathe terrorists, but not their religion. If you are an American, and see everything wrong with our country, remember that before you speak badly of her.

If going by immigrants in the past decades, America will become more and more Catholic, not Muslim. I doubt it will ever gain a majority here.
 

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
Nonsense. Freedom of and from religion was a big deal for our country's founders...and many religious groups, as it would allow them to proselytize without fear of prosecution or oppression by a state endorsed religion.
I may have overstated it, but it isn't that simple either.

The 2,500 Jews in America in 1790 faced a number of legal restrictions in various states that prevented non-Christians from holding public office. Delaware, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Georgia soon eliminated barriers that prevented Jews from voting, but these barriers did not fall for many decades in Rhode Island (1842), North Carolina (1868), and New Hampshire (1877).
Major General Ulysses S. Grant was influenced by these sentiments and issued General Order No. 11 expelling Jews from areas under his control in western Tennessee:

The Jews, as a class violating every regulation of trade established by the Treasury Department and also department orders, are hereby expelled ?within twenty-four hours from the receipt of this order.

This order was quickly rescinded by President Abraham Lincoln but not until it had been enforced in a number of towns.[11]

Grant later issued an order "that no Jews are to be permitted to travel on the road southward." His aide, Colonel John V. DuBois, ordered "all cotton speculators, Jews, and all vagabonds with no honest means of support", to leave the district. "The Israelites especially should be kept out?they are such an intolerable nuisance."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_the_United_States
 

Dogbert

Helsinki Smash Rod
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6,458
Location
N38? 43', W90? 22'
Car(s)
Roger Dean's Rocks
The site of it will certainly offend many, because it is a)so very close to ground zero and b)maybe it is too soon. To put it quite simply, Americans equate terrorists with Muslims; if that goes against your reality, you are free to stick your head back into the sand.
BUT! What I love about this country is that we didn't firebomb mosques in droves or slaughter Muslims by the score after 9/11. We hate, despise and loathe terrorists, but not their religion. If you are an American, and see everything wrong with our country, remember that before you speak badly of her.
These two statements contradict each other.
 

British_Rover

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
4,288
Location
Torrington, CT United States
Car(s)
2005 Gr Cherokee, dealer demo
No, I made the point that clearly such a thing would be offensive to Muslims.

We could just have a store that specialized in selling paintings and comic books of Allah and it would be just as offensive to a Muslim. And certainly that wouldn't cross any decency laws in any part of the nation (to defeat B_R's silly strawman claim).
No, my argument had a basis in reality. Many communities have rules on what type of business can be within XXXX feet of a religious building, school or community center. Probably not in Cali or up north but in the south I think you would have a hard time putting up any kind of comic type shop that close to a place of worship.

Just as it's clear that, despite everything, there are lots of people that find the proposed location of the Cordoba House offensive. To those people -- and it's far from a fringe -- it's quite upsetting.
And when it comes to religious freedom since when do we give into any particular group fringe or not? The Constitutional amendments were specifically put in to defend the minority from the potential oppression of the majority

Now, you can make the argument that those people should "just deal with it" -- but you can make the same argument that Muslims should just deal with the fact that in many Western non-Muslim countries images of Allah (in profane acts or not) are entirely acceptable.
Yes, they should they deal with it and if they do something to infringe on a person's free speech right to say or do something like that then they should be punished. That argument is nearly as weak as Newt's, "There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. The time for double standards that allow Islamists to behave aggressively toward us while they demand our weakness and submission is over. "

Side note: Does anyone else feel like they should take a shower after being to Newt's site?

I love how Newt backs himself into a corner on this. We are fucking America and we are better then other countries. We came up with the concept of religious tolerance and freedom. I will take this bit of American Exceptionalism and stick it up Gingrich's ass.



The reality is that the Cordoba House, if built, will certainly never advance acceptance of Islam in New York.
So you deal in negative absolutes about religion now? Good to know.

Much like the Carmelite convent once located at Auschwitz, it will do more harm and upset than good.

Does that mean they can't build it? Of course not. And back to the original commercial -- that was still beyond the pale.

Neither act, however, is "right" in my personal opinion. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Steve
This is Manhattan we are talking about. How many places do you think fit the bill for the kind of building they want to construct? AFIK there are no Mosques in lower Manhattan at all. None show up on Google maps anyway. A friend of my wife's from college who is Muslim and though she doesn't know of any either. She lives north of central park though so isn't a 100% familiar with the area.

Just built it somewhere else isn't going to work in a place like Manhattan where space is so limited. I bet you couldn't find another suitable empty lot or building in need of demolition/remodeling in lower Manhattan or if you could it would be at the extreme northern edge up by 14th street and not near the central business district.

Part of the point in having this building where it is proposed is to give Muslims working or living in lower Manhattan a place to go in the community. Other faiths have that in the area but they do not.
 

Jay

the fool on the hill
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
11,280
Location
Aurora, IL
These two statements contradict each other.
...And your point? :dunno: If you do not want to read honest answers answered honestly, read the honeyed and and deceitful words of others. I type how I think.
 

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
...And your point? :dunno: If you do not want to read honest answers answered honestly, read the honeyed and and deceitful words of others. I type how I think.
If you're going to admit that you contradict yourself within a single paragraph, don't say that anyone who disagrees with your position (whatever the hell it actually is) speaks "honeyed and deceitful words."
 

Dogbert

Helsinki Smash Rod
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6,458
Location
N38? 43', W90? 22'
Car(s)
Roger Dean's Rocks
...And your point? :dunno: If you do not want to read honest answers answered honestly, read the honeyed and and deceitful words of others. I type how I think.
Uh?

If Americans "equate terrorists with Muslims", and we "hate, despise and loathe terrorists", that means we "hate, despise and loathe Muslims"... which contradicts your "but not their religion" statement.
 

Mitlov

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
1,374
Location
Medford, Oregon, USA
Car(s)
2011 Civic Si, 2002 SV650
Uh?

If Americans "equate terrorists with Muslims", and we "hate, despise and loathe terrorists", that means we "hate, despise and loathe Muslims"... which contradicts your "but not their religion" statement.
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Dogbert again."

Just for the record. Nice post.
 

Firecat

Politically Charged
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
5,730
I think I understand what Jay was saying. We routinely separate the actions of the government from the people. For instance...

When people blame American foreign policy for [insert action here], many wouldn't hold the American public responsible. It's the government, not the people.

So it works both ways. The people may equate muslims with terrorists, but in this case the government does not. So America (as a nation) is standing up for the rights of muslims (because they aren't blocking the construction).
 

Steve Levin

Master of Disaster
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
1,482
Location
Sunnyvale, California
Car(s)
Spec Racer Ford!
No, my argument had a basis in reality. Many communities have rules on what type of business can be within XXXX feet of a religious building, school or community center. Probably not in Cali or up north but in the south I think you would have a hard time putting up any kind of comic type shop that close to a place of worship.
But not in New York. So in New York, if someone wants to actively sell pictures of Allah and Mohammed -- just plain old images, nothing obscene -- they can do so. You're certainly not suggesting we should actively curtail someone else's right to free speech, now are you? You understand that Muslims seeing depictions of the Prophet and Allah just need to learn to deal with it, right? That they have no more right to find such things offensive than those that don't want Cordoba House built so close to Ground Zero do, right?

And when it comes to religious freedom since when do we give into any particular group fringe or not? The Constitutional amendments were specifically put in to defend the minority from the potential oppression of the majority
Who is debating religious freedom? I think we all agree they have a right to build there. I'm debating the "rightness" of it from a moral and ethical standpoint. A practical one as well... do you really think, given the significant opposition to Cordoba House, that it helps things?

Yes, they should they deal with it and if they do something to infringe on a person's free speech right to say or do something like that then they should be punished.
Of course.

Again, I would prefer not to see "Paintings of the Prophet" stores open across from mosques, etc. I wouldn't consider it "right." But it would certainly be legal. And if there's some backward law anywhere in the country that prohibits that, it should be repealed. There's nothing fundamentally offensive about pictures of the Prophet or Allah unless you hold that religious belief -- and as you've pointed out, free speech should triumph.

Steve
 

Viper007Bond

Chicken Nugget Connoisseur
STAFF MEMBER
Joined
Sep 21, 2003
Messages
31,049
Location
Portland, Oregon
Car(s)
2008 Dodge Viper, 2006 MB CLS55 AMG
This thread is TL;DR, but did someone post Bloomberg's excellent speech?

This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions or favor one over another. The World Trade Center site will forever hold a special place in our city, in our hearts. But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans if we said no to a mosque in lower Manhattan.
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2010/08/bloomberg-stands-up-for-mosque.html
 

scpunk11

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2010
Messages
39
Location
Canada
Car(s)
1977 Saab 99GL fuel injected
saw this on CBC today. Lawsuit against the city? I think that theres something wrong with this concept.
[video]http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/ID=1558776456[/video]

I haven't really followed this that much. I don't really understand why that this is such an issue. It isn't Islam that caused this. I think it was mentioned earlier. I just don't understand how that this could even be considered a problem. I can't begin to explain how little an issue I feel this should be. I support the building of the mosque, and I dont at all disagree with the Imam's statements after 9/11. Until Americans come to grips with the fact a lot of people around the world are unhappy with the implication of American policy and culture on their respective nations. I guess that is obvious to everyone but them. The mosque will go ahead, some people will be angry, but I think that we should all see the ridiculousness of the arguments against it.

We are all people and we all believe in different things. We are all people of this world, and as soon as we all realize that we will move in a better direction. Until we give up these prejudiced stereotypes of people based on religion, ethnicity, country of origin etc. and examine the root causes of these misconceptions we will continue to be misguided.

That's my little piece for the night. I'll try to read more of this thread when I have more time. Sorry if i'm repeating arguments already made, or simply ranting
 
Last edited:
Top