www.ditl.org

I have a question, was a mosque destroyed in the collapse of the buildings? If so then they are simply replacing it and all of the complainers need to unclench their collective anus. What prompts the question is a comment by the Imam (or what ever the heck he is) that they have been worshiping in that area for decades.

The Imam probably meant backroom worship. A Muslim can worship wherever the heck they want as long as they can carry the holy carpet thing (I cannot remember the name) and a compass that points to Makkah al Mukarramah or Mecca. And if its clean of course.

The whole point of constructing a Mosque wasn't actually all about prayer since thats an infinitesimally small part of what occurs at most Mosques (over here at least, most don't actually worship at Mosques at all 5 of the Salah, generally only the men would go and worship at the Asr Salah (afternoon) if they like.

It's meant to be more of a community centre with the Prayer rooms within. Since this building is meant to have a swimming pool and cafes and such, prayer is a very small part of it.

Vic wrote:I have a question,

So did I,

Tyyr wrote:...what the f**k are you on about?

Answer it.

was a mosque destroyed in the collapse of the buildings?

Irrelevant.

Reliant121 wrote:It's meant to be more of a community centre with the Prayer rooms within. Since this building is meant to have a swimming pool and cafes and such, prayer is a very small part of it.

It's going to be a full community center and I believe one of the largest centers for Muslim worship in the US.

Exactly the point. Being such a centre, its far less a mosque, more that a specific section of it contains a mosque.

Vic wrote:I have a question, was a mosque destroyed in the collapse of the buildings? If so then they are simply replacing it and all of the complainers need to unclench their collective anus. What prompts the question is a comment by the Imam (or what ever the heck he is) that they have been worshiping in that area for decades.

No, a mosque wasn't destroyed in the attack. His comment of having worshipped in the area for decades reffers to another mosque in the area, one which is actualy a lot closer to the WTC site than the proposed mosque and which has been there since (IIRC) the 70's. The problem is that the place is run down and too small to allow all the local Muslims to worship there - which is presumably why they want to build a new mosque in the same area.

Reliant121 wrote:...Since this building is meant to have a swimming pool and cafes and such, prayer is a very small part of it.

They have a pool?

I'm in. Allahu Akbar.

There won't be any women though.

Which is one of the reasons I don't care for Islam personally. That, and no bacon cheeseburgers.

But, there will be falafel, and they have a pool.

I've already got the beard, and I know which direction Mecca is without a compass. It's to the east.

Well, yes, however if my "associate" is correct theres like a 10 degree leeway where you have to be pointing exactly at Makka

Should be simple enough with Google Maps.

Sionnach Glic wrote:

Vic wrote:I have a question, was a mosque destroyed in the collapse of the buildings? If so then they are simply replacing it and all of the complainers need to unclench their collective anus. What prompts the question is a comment by the Imam (or what ever the heck he is) that they have been worshiping in that area for decades.

No, a mosque wasn't destroyed in the attack. His comment of having worshipped in the area for decades reffers to another mosque in the area, one which is actualy a lot closer to the WTC site than the proposed mosque and which has been there since (IIRC) the 70's. The problem is that the place is run down and too small to allow all the local Muslims to worship there - which is presumably why they want to build a new mosque in the same area.

Since that is the case all of the people doing a freaky dance about it need to pop a downer and calm down.

Or pop a Viagra and then do the freaky dance.

Tyyr wrote:

Vic wrote:I have a question,

So did I,

Tyyr wrote:...what the f**k are you on about?

Answer it.

Did it sting a little Tyyr? I find it ironic that a group that seems so intent on gutting one religion is so vehement in defending another.

Tyyr wrote:

Vic wrote:was a mosque destroyed in the collapse of the buildings?

Irrelevant.

The reasons for putting in a mosque are very much relevant, to replace a run down mosque with a new one is a reason many can accept. To put in a mosque as a way to gloat over a tragedy as if it were a victory is what has everybody up in arms.

Vic wrote:Did it sting a little Tyyr? I find it ironic that a group that seems so intent on gutting one religion is so vehement in defending another.

Obviously you haven't been paying attention. Hi, I'm Tyyr, the resident right wing nutjob. Your accusations didn't sting because I couldn't locate a coherent thought or sentence amongst them. I wanted an explanation about what you were ranting about.

The reasons for putting in a mosque are very much relevant...

No, they are utterly irrelevant to the discussion. They own the building, they aren't asking to do anything illegal, they will be infringing on no ones rights in doing what they want to do, therefore they can do as they please. "Why" is utterly irrelevant to the legality of what's happening. If anything it's the system working. The assholes who tried to get the building declared historic for no other reason than to screw over the church should be the ones vilified.