# Resolved: WTC Site is not "sacred ground" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 7, 2010, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473 "2010-08-07T01:33:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2010, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/41 "2010-08-09T17:08:29Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > Xenophobia is a fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign. Rejecting a national culture that is openly hostile to women and other religions is not xenophobia. > > There is no “national culture” involved in this discussion except as it is brought up as camouflage for more general anti-Muslim hysteria. Demonizing one sixth of the world’s population because some segment of that population includes bad ideas is just exactly the sort of silliness in which that minority of the larger group engages. Nobody is demonizing 1/6 of the world population. Saudi Arabia does not represent Islam. Your broad brush attempt at political correctness ignores the extremism responsible for 9/11. ---
**Author:** ![Death\_of\_Rats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a6a055/32.png) [@Death\_of\_Rats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Death_of_Rats)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2010, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/42 "2010-08-09T19:30:15Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@tomndebb](#): > > > > There is no “national culture” involved in this discussion except as it is brought up as camouflage for more general anti-Muslim hysteria. Demonizing one sixth of the world’s population because some segment of that population includes bad ideas is just exactly the sort of silliness in which that minority of the larger group engages. > > Nobody is demonizing 1/6 of the world population. Saudi Arabia does not represent Islam. Your broad brush attempt at political correctness ignores the extremism responsible for 9/11. and your broad brush paints 1/6th of the worlds population for the actions of 19 people. Not all Muslims are extremists. Not even a majority of Muslims are extremists. That is what makes extremists "extreme’. > [@Magiver](#): > > > [@El\_Kabong](#): > > > > I’ve asked this question before, but haven’t managed to get an answer yet. It’s clear that for some people (perhaps Magiver), constructing a mosque two blocks away from the WTC site is unacceptable. OK, so how many blocks away would be the minimum acceptable distance for construction of a mosque? > > It depends who is financing it. If it is Saudi money then it should be located the same distance as Christian churches are from the Masjid al-Haram mosque in Mecca. Right, because what all Americans aspire to is to be just like the Saudis. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Gregg64](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9f8e36/32.png) [@Gregg64](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gregg64)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2010, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/43 "2010-08-09T20:38:51Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > I sure hope everyone protesting that Ground Zero is sacred ground not to be built on will come out and help protest Wal-Mart and Disney buying up Civil War battlefields. Man, we could use an injection of new volunteers. Oh the casino in Gettysburg just gets on my last nerve! ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2010, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/44 "2010-08-09T22:36:59Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > > > Which is why we don’t allow Japanese people in Hawaii to this day. > > That makes no sense. Nobody is suggesting anything of the sort (unlike the Saudi Arabia where Christians are banned from the city of Mecca). A better analogy would be a Japanese war memorial next to the Arizona. A mosque near ground zero is not analogous to a war memorial for the opposing side near a battle. Unless you view 9/11 as the start of a war against Islam. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2010, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/45 "2010-08-09T22:58:26Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > No, it would not be a better analogy. A better analogy would be a Shinto or Buddhist shrine in the general area. Google maps shows quite a number of Buddhist temples and missions (most with obviously Japanese names, too) in the vicinity of the Arizona Memorial. They’re more than two blocks away, but most everything is more than two blocks away from the memorial. You have to get all the way into Honolulu proper before you find any Shinto temples, though. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/46 "2010-08-10T00:25:25Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I don’t think there was anything wrong with the WTC design. It was innovative and allowed for large open floor space and more flexibility for the tenants. Nobody could have forseen that large planes with virtually full tanks of fuel would be deliberately crashed into them. If that was a design parameter back when it was designed, sure they may have built it differently. Right, but now we know. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/47 "2010-08-10T01:41:53Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Actually, obsessing over one mm up or down in one’s daughter’s cleavage seems rather unhealthy to me. > > Meanwhile, it’s really not that hard of a question. Here, I’ll re-arrange it so there is a clear, unambiguous answer: > > 1. two blocks or less, OK or not? > > 2. more than five blocks, OK or not? > > 3. anywhere outside lower Manhattan, OK or not? > > 4. anywhere outside of Manhattan, OK or not? Of ocurse, but then the unspoken “Why?” comes into play. Why a Buddhist temple yes and mosque no? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/48 "2010-08-10T03:17:20Z")
Um… who’s Hindu? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/49 "2010-08-10T03:18:03Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@tomndebb](#): > > > > There is no “national culture” involved in this discussion except as it is brought up as camouflage for more general anti-Muslim hysteria. Demonizing one sixth of the world’s population because some segment of that population includes bad ideas is just exactly the sort of silliness in which that minority of the larger group engages. > > Nobody is demonizing 1/6 of the world population. Well, aside from the poster who submitted the following, substituting the code words “national culture,” (an irrelvant reference to Saudi Arabia), as a cover for the intended “Muslim.” > [@](#): > > Rejecting a national culture that is openly hostile to women and other religions is not xenophobia. There is no indication that Saudis have any connection to the Cordoba Initiative. > [@Magiver](#): > > Your broad brush attempt at political correctness ignores the extremism responsible for 9/11. More name calling and code words. I have demonstrated no “political porrectness”; I have simply pointed out that the arguments against the Park51 plan have been based on unsupported speculations that lack any evidence in some cases and are demonstrably false in others. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/50 "2010-08-10T16:05:19Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > Nobody is demonizing 1/6 of the world population. > > Well, aside from the poster who submitted the following, substituting the code words “national culture,” (an irrelvant reference to Saudi Arabia), as a cover for the intended “Muslim.” There is no indication that Saudis have any connection to the Cordoba Initiative. There is no “code” to anything I’ve said and do not involve other people’s opinion when addressing me again. I don’t give a rats ass what another poster said and you know better than to make the association. I referenced Saudi Arabia and I meant Saudi Arabia. They are not singularly bankrupt in this respect nor do they represent Muslims beyond being the keeper of a few square meters of rock. > [@tomndebb](#): > > > [@Magiver](#): > > > > Your broad brush attempt at political correctness ignores the extremism responsible for 9/11. > > More name calling and code words. I have demonstrated no “political porrectness”; I have simply pointed out that the arguments against the Park51 plan have been based on unsupported speculations that lack any evidence in some cases and are demonstrably false in others. My opinion is that the group associated with it can’t begin to finance the building and that the money trail is worth vetting. Political correctness demands it be ignored. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/51 "2010-08-10T16:20:40Z")
**Magiver** , if your intention is not to demonize all Muslims, then could you please give us an example of a Muslim group you’re not intending to demonize? Because the ones behind Cordoba House are the ones trying to work towards good relations with the rest of the world, and you’re certainly demonizing them. If you’re demonizing the peaceful ones, but you’re not demonizing all of them, does that mean that you’re supporting the terrorists? ---
**Author:** ![blanx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f04885/32.png) [@blanx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blanx)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/52 "2010-08-10T16:29:43Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Political correctness demands it be ignored. No, I think THIS- Congress \*\*shall make no law \*\* respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances- demands it be ignored. You think that the west is better than the eeeeeevil mooslims? Here’s how you prove it. Why are some conservatives so afraid? Liberty requires guts. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/53 "2010-08-11T01:53:30Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@tomndebb](#): > > > > Well, aside from the poster who submitted the following, substituting the code words “national culture,” (an irrelvant reference to Saudi Arabia), as a cover for the intended “Muslim.” There is no indication that Saudis have any connection to the Cordoba Initiative. > > There is no “code” to anything I’ve said and do not involve other people’s opinion when addressing me again. I don’t give a rats ass what another poster said and you know better than to make the association. I was quoting you. > [@Magiver](#): > > I referenced Saudi Arabia and I meant Saudi Arabia. They are not singularly bankrupt in this respect nor do they represent Muslims beyond being the keeper of a few square meters of rock. Yes. You introduced a red herring to the discussion by making a big deal about Saudi Arabia when no one has provided any hint of any connection between the Cordoba Initiative and “Saudi Arabia” (regardless whether one means the Saudi goverenment or some or all of Saudi society). > [@Magiver](#): > > > [@tomndebb](#): > > > > More name calling and code words. I have demonstrated no “political porrectness”; I have simply pointed out that the arguments against the Park51 plan have been based on unsupported speculations that lack any evidence in some cases and are demonstrably false in others. > > My opinion is that the group associated with it can’t begin to finance the building and that the money trail is worth vetting. Political correctness demands it be ignored. However, your illogical and unsupported claim of political correctness is still just hand waving and name calling as I have never opposed any investigation into the finances of the Cordoba Initiative. I do note that with all the hate groups that are up in arms about CI, no one has actually turned up any terrible links–and they have had plenty of time to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/54 "2010-08-11T04:19:16Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I don’t think there was anything wrong with the WTC design. It was innovative and allowed for large open floor space and more flexibility for the tenants. Nobody could have forseen that large planes with virtually full tanks of fuel would be deliberately crashed into them. Well, other than the “deliberately” part, it shouldn’t have been [that hard](http://history1900s.about.com/od/1940s/a/empirecrash.htm) for people to foresee it. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/55 "2010-08-11T05:56:41Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > **Magiver** , if your intention is not to demonize all Muslims, then could you please give us an example of a Muslim group you’re not intending to demonize? Because the ones behind Cordoba House are the ones trying to work towards good relations with the rest of the world, and you’re certainly demonizing them. If you’re demonizing the peaceful ones, but you’re not demonizing all of them, does that mean that you’re supporting the terrorists? I haven’t passed judgment on any of it yet. the Mosque representing Cordoba house does not have the financing to build it. The money trail is in question. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/56 "2010-08-11T06:00:20Z")
[It’s not a mosque.](http://www.cordobainitiative.org/) > [@](#): > > While we reiterate our point that the Cordoba House is not intended to be a house of worship, exclusive to Muslims, we echo [Mayor Bloomberg’s] statement, and value his support. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/57 "2010-08-11T06:02:38Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I was quoting you. No, you weren’t. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Yes. You introduced a red herring to the discussion by making a big deal about Saudi Arabia. A paper trail has not been established. > [@tomndebb](#): > > However, your illogical and unsupported claim of political correctness is still just hand waving and name calling as I have never opposed any investigation into the finances of the Cordoba Initiative. . Then we are in agreement that it should be investigated. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/58 "2010-08-11T07:21:13Z")
But the cold hard fact is the 19 story building is 2 blocks away from what used to be the Tower turf. There is nothing there to be sacred. If they were building 2 blocks closer I would listen to the arguments, as silly as they are. But 2 blocks away negates the whole discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/59 "2010-08-11T18:12:55Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > But the cold hard fact is the 19 story building is 2 blocks away from what used to be the Tower turf. There is nothing there to be sacred. If they were building 2 blocks closer I would listen to the arguments, as silly as they are. But 2 blocks away negates the whole discussion. I can’t cite this but it stands to reason the location represents the closest possible location to ground zero. It is also an expensive chunk of real estate to put a mosque and that takes the argument back to who is financing it. There are already 30 mosques in the city and any of those could suffer a $100 million dollar face lift without controversy. If this building is suppose to represent a cultural bridge then the backers are deliberately trying to locate it in a place that the citizens of New York find questionable. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473/60 "2010-08-11T18:25:04Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@gonzomax](#): > > > > But the cold hard fact is the 19 story building is 2 blocks away from what used to be the Tower turf. There is nothing there to be sacred. If they were building 2 blocks closer I would listen to the arguments, as silly as they are. But 2 blocks away negates the whole discussion. > > I can’t cite this but it stands to reason the location represents the closest possible location to ground zero. It does not. Look at the map. > [@](#): > > It is also an expensive chunk of real estate to put a mosque and that takes the argument back to who is financing it. These people do not deserve some type of abnormal scrutiny based on where they are putting their building. They already had the money for the land because they bought it a year or two ago and started using it for overflow prayer space. They don’t have the money for the construction, obviously. > [@](#): > > There are already 30 mosques in the city and any of those could suffer a $100 million dollar face lift without controversy. This is irrelevant. They don’t want to build a mosque or refurbish one. (And they do have their own a little further uptown.) They are talking about building something different, which is a 13- or 15-story community building with a mosque on one floor. A mosque is a space mostly for prayer and Islamic community gatherings. This has a broader purpose. > [@](#): > > If this building is suppose to represent a cultural bridge then the backers are deliberately trying to locate it in a place that the citizens of New York find questionable. I’ll thank you respectfully for not speaking on behalf of the citizens of New York. There are 1.6 million people in Manhatatn and 8 million people in the city, few of them shy and retiring by nature, but the loudest complaints about this building seem to be coming from Republican governors and presidential candidates, many of them based nowhere near the city. So a statement that the citizens of New York find the location “questionable” is nonsense. Some people don’t like it, but then again, a lot of people are ignorant and a lot of people in New York City are crazy. New York City is not in an uproar about this. It takes a lot to get people worked up over here, and a building going up in lower Manhattan is not going to do it. If this building is finished before the WTC reconstruction, I could see some people getting upset. 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-wtc-site-is-not-sacred-ground/549473.md?page=4)