You forget that Katie Couric will come out and tell us that babies really do come from a cabbage patch and Oprah herself will part the atlantic ocean and pay someone to carry her to Europe to join Mz. Obama in Spain.
Terrible? Hell, none of them have turned up any even remotely questionable links. Unless you happen to think any Muslim funding source is “questionable” by virtue of being Muslim.
You have a real estate map showing a space closer to the WTC that is up for sale?
Who are “these people” exactly? Where is the money coming from? When you have a city that finds it objectionable then who is being insensitive?
Marist Poll. showing the majority of New Yorkers.
You would be incorrect. There are plenty of unoccupied buildings and vacant lots closer to the WTC site.
It isn’t, actually. Land in this area is pretty much bargain basement by Manhattan standards – there are numerous unoccupied buildings, some still structurally damaged, around the WTC site. The building site they propose to use, is, in fact, currently both unoccupied and damaged.
Why should it, exactly ? What do you expect an investigation would/could uncover ?
Bargain basement by Manhattan standards has no dollar per square foot meaning in real estate.
I thought you were saying this property was as close as possible to the WTC, which it is not. They did deliberately pick a site near the WTC. Whether it’s the closest, I don’t know.
If you’re so curious, read their web page and find out. The Imam behind this project has been in New York and leading a mosque for decades, so he’s not exactly a shadowy man of mystery. And plenty has been written about them in recent months. They bought this space more than a year ago.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion/09mosque.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1
There is no money for the much more expensive construction of the Park51 building, as far as I know.
The people who are suggesting without evidence that a land deal is a terrorist plot.
53 percent is a bare bones majority and does not equate to “the citizens of New York have questions about this project.” Particularly considering how many people have busied themselves with lying about it over the last three months.
The source of the funding behind a building that the majority of New Yorkers currently object to.
… yes, I got that. My question was : what do you expect this source of funding could be ?
“Slightly more than half the people in your general area don’t like you” is not grounds for an investigation. That’s a combination of a bad argumentum ad populi and bad police work.
A planned building without funding. What does that mean?
It means they haven’t raised the money for their project yet. They already own the property and they have been using the existing building, and they have announed their plans for a new building but don’t have the money for it yet. I don’t think they even have a final design for the building. This place is years from being complete.
It is grounds for acceptance when the structure is meant to be a cultural bridge.
So they can’t do cultural outreach unless their culture is already accepted and popular. That’s some catch, that Catch-22.
The Imam’s remarks regarding 9/11 were not received in the spirit of cultural bridge building. Your catch 22 analogy does not really apply here. Whether you admit it or not the location of the Mosque is a sensitive place and because of his remarks people question the motives of a building whose funding is unknown.
True. It’s called “being anti-Republican.”
Heh, zing!
Magiver has no intention of admitting he’s incorrect. He argued against basic physics for like ten pages in the monkey-punching thread.
Magiver, can I ask? They own the land. They want to build. Do you support denying them the freedom to build based on your personal feelings? Where does that line end?
Do you want to live in a free country or not?
Yes, I want to live in a free country. That mean expressing my opinion on whether or not something is considered sacred ground and the motives behind the proposed building.
The building is located in a sensitive place. It’s not on the WTC site but it’s near it, and that’s by design. It’s a statement and they have been upfront about that. Your implications about the financing of the building don’t make any sense. Do you think Saudi radicals are going to give them money so they can build their basketball court? Do you think Bin Laden is going to want to put his name on the library? Do you think they are planning a terrorist training camp in lower Manhattan? That would be quite a step up in visibility for them!
They already bought the land, so presumably the investors received whatever approval they needed for that. I am sure their funding will receive whatever vetting is standard, and given that they’re Muslims they’ll probably get a good deal of extra scrutiny on top of that. But this stuff about funding is a canard. It’s about distrust of Muslims in general. These particular Muslims have been in the area for decades. Why they would suddenly be sinister now is left unexplained because nobody can think of a reason.
And New Yorkers want assurances the $100 million dollar cost is not funded by those who made it a sensitive place. It’s not a court of law, it’s a court of public opinion.
Do you not see the value in the knowledge of where the money comes from for this cultural bridge?