World Politics

OBAMA, KAGAN RELISH HIGH COURT APPROVAL

Washington..A beaming Elena Kagan and President Barack Obama, on Friday celebrated her imminent ascension to the Supreme Court with jokes and references to the irreverent sense of humor she put on display during her Senate confirmation hearing. An audience in the East Room of the White House, filled with Kagan's friends and extended family, along with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy screamed with joy, and applauded as Obama intorduced "Justice Elena Kagan":bolian:

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS~
 
Here's some political news about what's going on in the U.S., the big controversy right now is the "Mosque" wanting to be built near 'ground zero', From what I've read and knowing folks who live in N.Y, their against this not because of the religion part, the location is the issue. Most Americans are against it.. how do the rest of you feel in other countries about this 'hot topic'?

http://www.aolnews.com/category/politics/
 
Last edited:
i've heard about this one - frankly i think some of the reactions are kind of... well, pathetic. holy crap (so to speak), you live in a nation where one of the biggest and most important elements of the constitution is freedom of expression and freedom of religion (the latter being pretty much inherent in the former, but i think it's stated anyway), and you say you think it's vitally important to defend the constitutional integrity of your nation, not to mention being really quite fanatical in your defences of your so called christianity (because let's face it (a) some of the things the more extreme christian groups do are not much better than some of the things the more extreme muslim groups do, and (b) many of those things would make jesus spin in his grave if he still had one (not that i actually believe that but you get the point), and then you get all pissy about *fanfare* freedom of religion. being expressed in a nation where freedom of religion is, apparently, really important. no, it isn't, what is important is freedom of YOUR religion, the one that the state sanctions. everyone else might as well not bother.

also, what do they think will happen? all those dirty middle easterners will come and invade new york? will it be arizona part 2, with racially (or religiously) motivated discrimination? america is a country based on (1) immigration and (2) freedom - you can't start getting all het up because the immigrants and religion are ones you don't like - in a land of the free, you should just shut up and let them get on with it - they're not doing anything to you, and until they do, just let it be.

personally, and ranting aside, i think it's quite a good idea - i think it's a clear message to the muslim community that this site is not going to give up its defence of the religious freedom of the nation despite what happened there; to the terrorist sections of the islamic community that muslims ARE welcome, even at that site which, let's face it, is the one most likely that they wouldn't be; personally i think it's a bit of a middle finger up at terrorists - saying "you can try all you like but we're still gonna play nicely, now deal with it". it's a negotiation tool. and it's definitely an indication of a desire for harmony which we really need right now.

[/ranting]
 
Good points lisa I'm just kinda of neutral at this point, but am wondering why they choose this particular location:confused:Here's one journalist's view on this~

WHY A MOSQUE NEAR "GROUND ZERO" WOULD BE SACRILEGE

A place made sacred by a wipespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent [Lourdes, the Temple Mount], by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice [Gettysburg] or by blood martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent [Auschwitz]. When we speak of Ground Zero as "hallowed" ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there..and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated. That's why when Disney's early 90's proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition fearing vulgarization of the Civil War [and wiser than me:at the time I obtusely saw little harm in the venture]. It's why the commercial view tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It's why no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive. Even Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who denounced opponents of the proposed 15-story mosque and Islamic center near Ground Zero as tramplers on religious freedom, asked the mosque organizers "to show some special sensitivity to the situation". Yet, as columnist Rich Lowry pointedly noted, the government has no business telling churches how to conduct their business, shape their message, or show "special sensitivity" to anyone about anything. Bloomberg was therby inadvertently conceding the claim of those he excoriates for opposing the mosque, namely, that Ground Zero is indeed like any other place and therefore unique criteria govern what can be done there. Bloomberg's implication is clear::If the proposed mosque was controlled by "insensitive" Islamist radicals either excusing or celebrating 9/11, he would not support it's construction. But then, why not? By the mayor's own expansive view of religious freedom, by what right do we dictate the message of any mosque? Moreover, as a practical matter, there's no guarantee this couldn't happen in the future. Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi-spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and one time imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists? An Aulaqi preaching in Virginia is a security problem. An Aulaqi preaching at Ground Zero is sacrilege. Location does matter. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American History..perpretrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed. Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims, Islam is not more intrinsically Islamist tha present day Germany is Nazi..yet despite contemporary Germany's innocence, no German of good will would even think of proposing a German Cultural center at, say Treblinka. Which makes you wonder about the good will behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy "an accessory to the crime" of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied "I'm not a politician..the issue of terrorism is a very complex question". America is a free country where you can build whatever you want ..but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, not strip malls where they offend local sensibilites, and if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all. These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency, and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz.. and no mosque at Ground Zero. Build it anywhere..but there. The governor of New York offered to help find land to build the mosque elsewhere. A mosque really seeking to build bridges. Rauf's ostensible hope for the structure would accept the offer~

Charles Krauthammer..Washington Post~
 
Last edited:
i can totally understand that point of view, really - this morning i had got out of bed on the wrong side and was in a ranty kind of mood and that was the first thing i came across so i kind of let rip - i do understand the point about it being a... not sacred, but something like it site. on the other hand i think perhaps sites like that are the best for building "opposition" things, because they are the best places from which to start some kind of mutual understanding. for instance i don't see the idea of a german centre at treblinka as so bad either, because it could be a way for germans to amend for their past, assuming it was done sensitively, and with input from all parties. so yeah, i can see both sides of this really but my gut reaction is anger - although i think a lot of that comes not from the idea itself but the way that opposition to is has been couched in extremely reactionary screaming about it, as opposed to debate.
 
^Personally I just think the media made a mountain out of a molehill with this Mosque being built near ground zone. It shouldn't have been made a big deal out of and I don't it's an insult to the victims of 9/11. What happened on 9/11 was condemned by the Muslim community so what's the problem if they want to built a place to practice their religion.

In other, not so surprising news, Lord Pearson has resigns as party leader of UKIP - I cannot understand why he was party leader, he didn't even know the manifesto that well plus I found him rather annoying and well stupid and islamophobic at times.
 
Not really shazza most Americans are against, and it has nothing to do with the Media. And it's certainly not a mole-hill, nearly 3,000 people, were killed there. A new poll said 70% were against it. here's a few more responses from first readers from our daily paper and then other comments~

Our objection to the mosque is the location, and the insensitivity of the Muslims who wish to make a political statement by building a monument whrere thousands lost their lives at the hands of some rogue Muslims, and which would inflict pain as a remimder of that awful day~
namewitheld
Riverside, CA.

GOP ATTACKS OBAMA STANCE ON MOSQUE
Washington..Republican candidates around the country seized on President Obama's support for the right of Muslims to build a mosque near ground zero, assailing him as an elitist who is insensitive to the families of the Sept.11 vctims. Recalling the emotion of that deadly day, Eepublicans said that while they respect religious freedom, the president's position was "cold and academic, lacking compassion and empathy for the victims families" [he never said anything about the "location" only about religious freedom]:confused:

The Washington Post~
 
Desertwind said:
Not really shazza most Americans are against, and it has nothing to do with the Media. And it's certainly not a mole-hill, nearly 3,000 people, were killed there. A new poll said 70% were against it.
Click to expand...

Just have a general question regarding this topic (anyone who has the answer, feel free to jump in) ...

Were there any innocent Muslims killed during the attacks? For example, folks who may have been passengers on the planes, worked in the Towers/Pentagon or Muslims who survived? I find it hard to believe that in the entire vicinity of the Trade Center and Pentagon, there were only Christians, Jews, Atheists, other denominations etc. affected by the attacks.

If it were an extremist Christian group who had facilitated the attacks, would a chapel have been seen as just as outrageous and disrespectful?
 
Of course Muslims were killed, that's not the point. How would the Iraquis feel if we built a Catholic church in dowtown Baghdad? or a Baptist church in Tehran? It would be a low blow that country, beings by all accounts they hate us, and would probably be blown up. The Park 51 area where this is proposed was part of the attack, on 9/11. I've been baraged with all the news, and I didn't realize that:confused: So some are saying it's like building it on a graveyard:( I'm just listening to all the pros and cons on this issue~
 
Desertwind said:
Of course Muslims were killed, that's not the point. How would the Iraquis feel if we built a Catholic church in dowtown Baghdad? or a Baptist church in Tehran? It would be a low blow that country, beings by all accounts they hate us, and would probably be blown up. The Park 51 area where this is proposed was part of the attack, on 9/11. I've been baraged with all the news, and I didn't realize that:confused: So some are saying it's like building it on a graveyard:( I'm just listening to all the pros and cons on this issue~
Click to expand...

I understand why a lot of people are against a mosque (there's still a lot of hurt and anger, which I'm sympathetic to) and I'm not sure if Baghdad and Tehran have freedom of religion but America does and my view is since there were in fact innocent Muslim victims, why should they and/or their families be relegated to "anywhere but near Ground Zero" to practice their religion, especially if they were personally affected by the attacks in some way?

Somehow that would give me the impression that we've labeled and entire religion as "those big bad monsters over there" because of a growing group of loosely connected extremists who don't officially represent anyone but themselves and their actions.

It might not be the point of the entire issue but I felt it raised an interesting question related to the topic. Apparently that wasn't clear, for which I apologize.

That being said, maybe I'd find an establishment supporting the terrorists' actions and praising what happened to be far more disrespectful than a place of worship for those who practice a religion that teaches the opposite. Sadly, media distortion and misconceptions among the public that have been going on for decades will continue and no doubt has played a role in shaping many opinions regarding the subject.
 
Last edited:
Finch, Sept 11th Victims names (in ABC order) don't know if that will help.

As to the media not making something out of it, I disagree, Faux err fox news (as an example) is constantly hitting with their unbalanced attitude of be afraid of the scary black man, be afraid of the scary muslim's who are trying to take over the country starting at ground Zero. I feel bad for the victims and their families of all races. I am just sick of the fact that there are alot of people out there placing alot of blame on all muslims. It's like saying if a bunch of white, black, jewish, christian, etc did this then then that entire race is to blame. -- Before someone says no one is blaming the entire race, I beg to differ, shortly after the attacks, I went to see my then doctor (a specialist had the surgery, didn't need to see him anymore) and he lost well over sixty percent of his patients of whom honestly stated it was because he was muslim gee how nice they were honest about it. But news flash he was muslim before the attacks and it didn't bother them.

There was the car that drove into (on purpose) a little grocery store (think mom and pop) because it was owned by a family who were muslim, the driver and his buddies ranging from I believe it was 50 and younger said that was the reason they did it. Again nice to see the honesty there. -- Thing is with the doctor it didn't stop me from seeing him, he wasn't the one on those planes, it wouldn't have stopped me from shopping in that store they were not on those planes. I have read blogs, on such sites as fox nation where it took the moderators almost 8 to 10 hours to remove posts in which people wrote that they wouldn't hesitate to "Shoot one to save them from taking over our country". :rolleyes: Are they ignorant? HELL Yes!

I get what they are saying about "ground zero" I do, but I also get the fact that there are alot of people out there that are still afraid, and to a point some are still ignorant. I have to agree this whole mosque being built has been blown out of porportion. The terrorists were muslim, true, but they were were also al-Qaeda. I am not saying that muslims can't be bad some can be, so can some Americans, etc. There is no such race that doesn't have that one bad part that reflects on those who are good and decent trying their best and pray each day and night that there be love and forgiveness in this world we live in, and that those who are bad stop. No different then what I wish for. -- This isn't a rant, its just pure honest opinion, from a native american/irish chick, who just wishes that people in this world would remember that no matter what not all cultures are bad just that there are moronic's out there that wish nothing but pure evil and hate even on their own cultures.

True it sounds like my thoughts have nothing to do with the building of the mosque, but in away it does, because polls can be cited, thing is how many in those polls that said no, did it to be PC, or because they fear the scary muslims, because they feel guilty cause they said they wouldn't mind it. No way to tell that. It all comes down to the fact that if it's about the person who will be in charge of the mosque, fine compromise find someone else they can agree on to run it. Is it because of those scary muslims? Is it really because of the location? whats the difference if its a mosque or a [insert denomination] church, or something far worse? Is everything that surrounds Ground Zero hallow ground? I mean really, seriously? --- Again I felt and feel for the victims and the families of the attacks, and I don't mean to sound insensitive but this was as one said a mole hill that just became Mt. Everest, or really Mauna Loa volcano (which is actually the tallest mountain though a volcano, with Everest the tallest above sea level mountain) via the media.

Okay then thats just my opinion and two cents, a long one, but...
 
Finch said:
Somehow that would give me the impression that we've labeled and entire religion as "those big bad monsters over there" because of a growing group of loosely connected extremists who don't officially represent anyone but themselves and their actions.
Click to expand...

Destiny said:
As to the media not making something out of it, I disagree, Faux err fox news (as an example) is constantly hitting with their unbalanced attitude of be afraid of the scary black man, be afraid of the scary muslim's who are trying to take over the country starting at ground Zero. I feel bad for the victims and their families of all races. I am just sick of the fact that there are alot of people out there placing alot of blame on all muslims.
Click to expand...

completely agree with both of you and tbh that was really what triggered my rantage a couple of days ago - i can see the argument that this ground should be kept for a memorial and so on but the sheer volume and scale of press distortion is quite sickening - making the entire muslim religion out to be some kind of giant seething mass of terrrorists, it's ridiculous. i mean, do we think all christians go around placarding at soldiers' funerals to protest about gay people? no, we think it's a bunch of wackjobs with too much time on their hands. so we can't go around thinking all muslims are terrorists. but that is precisely what many elements in the news media wants us to think, at least in part because if we're all terrified of "the other" then politics and media and finance can keep going to bed with eachother and we'll all politely look the other way. fear = social control. don't fall for it. each person is different, each muslim is different, just as each christian is different. the koran doesn't tell you to blow stuff up any more than the bible does. so er, yeah, i'm in danger of ranting again, but yes, i agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top