I am not a practicing Muslim. Perhaps, then, not a muslim at all. Growing up in a secular but, nevertheless, un-officially and majority muslim country, I have been exposed to Islam, learned about its traditions, customs, and, as an architect, developed great appreciation for the design of its places of worship.
I don't necessarily want this mosque in Manhattan be built because it worries me that it will further radicalize the violent right wing fanatics in United States who see Islam as a threat to their existence, as the enemy and as the source of all evil on earth.
To them, this is the clash of civilizations. The enemy is described as a bloody and oppressive force raising from hellish petro-rich Arabian deserts and Afghany caves, whose ugly bearded men with hooked noses trying to destroy the ever so innocent, fair and humane, blessed and all superior kingdom of western civilization.
On the personal front, because of this proposed mosque, if in fact built, I will be subjected to even more hatred and racial profiling than what became an unwelcomed fact of my already complicated diaspora life after 9/11.
In short, my work will be distracted, it will be harder for me to prevail professionally, and most disturbingly, my well being will be exposed to actual violence, consuming my time while continuously negotiating my rights with angry and righteous people in everyday situations.
Consider the thinkable and highly possible, some of the aggressions toward muslims, without discrimination, could develop into further psychological and racial repression, physical disturbances, such as public beatings and other torturous humiliations, downward spiraling all the way to lynching.
Muslims don't have many reliable and empathetic organizations to turn for protection.
Their faith and culture is demonized at worst, disliked and mistrusted by the significant section of the American society at best.
And, what is the most worrisome, these negative sentiments are now getting institutionalized in the Crusades like causes of tea partying masses.
These are not exaggerations.
I have been looking at hundreds of readers' comments in newspapers and websites regarding this issue and most of them are outright life threatening to my profile. These disturbing and eerily aggressive group-thinking are freely circulated and unchallenged by the authorities in charge of protecting the well being of the innocent.
America's sizable muslim community is openly attacked and made to suffer the highly orchestrated accusations. The horrors generated, vocalized, broadcasted.
These are well beyond the usual discriminations I was just getting used to.
"Bomb their mosques"
"Build it, get them all inside - then burn it down"
"Deport them"
"Gather and send them to labor camps"
"Nuke their homeland"
"Chop their heads and display them in Ground Zero"
"Strip them naked and make them piss on Quran"
"They don't deserve to practice their despicable religion in Manhattan buildings when an abandoned small factory or a farm building will suffice. What's a building for a barbaric camel jockeys anyway?"
So on, and uglier.
These should be alarming to people who are living peacefully in this country.
No doubt, when the hooligans are done with muslims and eradicated them from 'their chosen' society and 'finalized their dissolution,' they will re-concentrate their efforts to purify and rid of their communities from non believers, gays, abortionists, liberals, socialists, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Gypsies, drug users, illegal aliens, hippies, independent women, men, prostitutes, Chinese, Africans, intellectuals, dangerous books and progressive thinking, just to name a few.
This is their occupational therapy, purpose of their vengeful existence, evil passion and manipulated brains for easy exploitations. This is what glues the sheep together.
I imagine, the falsity of their valor goes undetected until much later, when they realize that the war they made believe to fight was a lie.
Watch and be proactive for the disinformation carnage and violence of 2012 general election campaigns.
I'm always amused at topics like this, that always seem to draw out the hyperbole of the True Believers on either side of the issue. As is almost always the case, the "truth" (whatever that is!) usually lies in between the hysterical fringes.
A couple of humble observations, an my personal opinion only: I think that the project site is a couple of blocks from the WTC site, and is functionally a different neighborhood. You can't really even see the proposed site from Ground Zero. So the proximity argument is a bit weak, IMO.
I think the unfortunate reality is that, if the project goes through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this.
But I understand the outrage some people feel. Imagine if the Japanese wanted to build a Japanese cultural center a stone's throw from the wreck of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor in, say, 1949? Or if the German government proposed a German cultural center right next to Treblinka? There is tremendous pain associated with Pearl Harbor, and the Holocaust, and 9/11. To dismiss that pain simply as bigotry or racism or religious intolerance, and the proponents as stupid or uneducated seems sadly simplistic and shameful to me.
The Constitution guarantees that the government can't favor or persecute any particular religion. However, that doesn't mean that citizens shouldn't offer opinions on the appropriateness of this project in the court of public opinion. I believe in property rights, and if they are hell-bent on building this thing, they should be permitted to do so. My understanding is that the Mayor has offered to work with the developers to find another appropriate site. It's my opinion that if they are truly interested in finding common ground and healing wounds, they would take him up on the offer.
EKE, and JoeyD, when you contribute something of fucking value, all be all in your shit. as i have pointed out way above your inane, racist santorum laced froth, you are both douche-bags.
Knowing that it is pissing people off, I personally wouldn't even consider building anything there, just because the constitution says I can. Knowing that it can cause violence, terrorism, vandalism against my project and people attending this center, I would certainly move the building to avoid that, unless there are some other principles behind.
Orhan,
I've been reading comments as well, and I'm quite surprised at what some people say. It's primitive and disgusting just like the above comment about "burning them" from JoeyD.
This was the first post I've made in this topic. You don't know me. Is this the way you deal with people you disagree with generally, or is this childish little rant just message board behavior?
I hope this Joey guy doesn't talk like this as an employee at an architecture firm.
If he was at my firm, his ass would be canned in a second. Many of our clients are those "smelly people" who he wants to corral into one place and burn. Not exactly the way you want to build business relationships in hard times like these.
There was a guy from a construction firm a few years back that continuously called this American-born Muslim project manager at my firm "Ali-Baba." The Construction firm which clearly has a zero-tolerance policy for that kind of behavior fired him on the spot.
since i created this thread and am a native new yorker may i chime in:
the imman of this proposed cultural center was appointed by W to be our muslim envoy to the middle east in '06 to help those countries understand the usa and its policies @ that time. he is considered the MOST moderate muslim in our county.
AND for those who have never taken a mass transit ride in nyc - it stinks. people stink! perfume. hair do. men's perfume! clothes. food. booze. smoke. blacks. whites. asian. yellow. green. blue. muslim. jew. catholic. protestant. episcopalian.WASP. latin. spanish. italian. polish. german. u name it...........we all stink!!
i'd love to play some stickball with some of you folks....just to see how long you'd last with me an my ny brothers and sisters.
now - if you'all would take another look at the heading of this thread and answer the question - maybe we would have some real discourse here - rather than everyone's political viewpoint (and its ALL good).
from a strict planning edge: do you see this as a good planning decision? please take into account socio-political-economic-demographic-psychological aspects of the proposal.
Come on. I hope you can appreciate the difference between well-considered opinion that you don't agree with (EKE's post above) and JoeyD's frothing-at the mouth right-wing idiocy.
Please don't treat them the same.
I may not agree with what EKE said, but he/she has a reasonable, rational argument. It was presented coherently and with respect. That much I can see. This ability to respectfully disagree is what separates engaged citizens from degenerates like JoeyD who advocate violence and reaction.
EKE, those comparisons about Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan you bring up are not the same in any way shape or form. this is what has been insulting throughout this entire discussion.
Al Qaeda was the culprit of the 9/11 attacks. They never were and never will be the representitives of Islam or Muslims. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that is vehemently rejected by an overwhelming majority of Muslims and Muslims nations. Even countries like Iran and Iraq (during Saddam's regime) were and are against Al-Qaeda. Countries like Egypt, Jordan, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Turkey have been battling against Al-Qaeda even before anyone in the US heard of the organization.
Perhaps the biggest fact that everyone completely misses is the fact that the majority of victims of Al-Qaeda have been Muslims themselves. Al Qaeda has thrived off of Western anti-Islam sentiment in an attempt to push moderates into the extreme. Example: They have been stiring up civil strife between the Shi'a and Sunni in Iraq so that there would be an all-out war. What they see as now Shi'a domination in Iraq is something that they want to capitalize off of. They think that if the Shi'a begin to retaliate against the Sunnis, other Sunni-dominated countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt will throw all their support to the Sunnis in Iraq and consequently Al-Qaeda.
The radicalization of Americans who are turning more right-wing and anti-Islam is exactly what Al-Qaeda wants so that the moderates will have nowhere to go but to Al-Qaeda. In many striking ways, this is exactly how Hamas gained power in Palestine. The Palestinians (no matter what their politics are) are hated by the US, Israel, Arab countries, and just about everyone else so many just turned to Hamas.
Again with this Islamic Community Center, I afraid this will be a sign of many controversies to come down the stretch. Soon it will be impossible for Muslims to build mosques anywhere in the US.
I think the unfortunate reality is that, if the project goes through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this.
argument fails to recognize a fundamental flaw, because the converse opinion is also true: if the project does NOT go through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this....
and then there's this gem:
But I understand the outrage some people feel. Imagine if the Japanese wanted to build a Japanese cultural center a stone's throw from the wreck of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor in, say, 1949? Or if the German government proposed a German cultural center right next to Treblinka? There is tremendous pain associated with Pearl Harbor, and the Holocaust, and 9/11. To dismiss that pain simply as bigotry or racism or religious intolerance, and the proponents as stupid or uneducated seems sadly simplistic and shameful to me.
hey EKE, i apologize for offending you, but this point is so absurdly idiotic, that it should have you running back to your history books. so, in the 21st century, we should remember not to forget, that 60 years ago something like this would not happen? we put japanese in camps, whole families, should we then apply that same logic and round up all muslims, because that's what you are suggesting.
for the simple fools; we have evolved, this country has evolved in 60 years. we are not germany, we are not any other country that forbids christian religion, we are americans; endowed by a [creator] with certain rights, and those rights are not up for debate. [period]
"Al Qaeda was the culprit of the 9/11 attacks. They never were and never will be the representatives of Islam or Muslims. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that is vehemently rejected by an overwhelming majority of Muslims and Muslims nations. Even countries like Iran and Iraq (during Saddam's regime) were and are against Al-Qaeda"
Go on believing this. You can not apply your template of tolerance so squarely across the board. Pakistan to was heralded as a enemy of Al Qeada until wikileaks showed us they were supporting both sides. Irag clearly has holes in it's borders and government allowing the jihadists to enter and fight the Americans. Saudi Arabia must simply be sending money to Al Qaeda as mission of peace because theres no way they could be supporting such non-muslim endeavors. Even the Barbary Pirates were misunderstood.
And I have yet to hear the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims speak out against radicalization within the west. Appeasement is not tolerance.
I heard an interesting stream of thought, calling this a "victory
mosque" on M. Savage last night-
in the same tradition of:
"Al Aqsa Mosque - on the site of Solomon’s temple;
Hagia Sofia - former site of cathedral in Constantinople;
Babri Majid mosque - destroyed Hindu temple in process; Great Mosque
of Cordoba"
Except-
in these instances it seems that existing buildings/sites were
redeveloped for new use..and all of these were religious sites-
perhaps the WTC was a religiou$ site in America-
But..the proposed building is 2 blocks away...2 blocks can be like 10
miles in a busy city- will there be line-of-sight from the WTC site?
because-
I think that the iconic nature of the facade, although somewhat
humble, makes a strong statement compared to the average city block in lower Manhattan-
I don’t mind the mosque/community center - I eat Halal all the time in NY.
I understand the argument that if this building causes so much stress, then it might be more sensitive to rethink their development-
that doesn’t mean I agree with it-
I think it is an easy wedge-issue on the political front.
And >>>>>
Likely the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolition, so the whole
think is kind of clouded in a deeper truth that is getting more twisted with side-issues
(A truth that I am sure a lot of architects have thought about at one time or another-)
hey dick, where are you hanging out, does foxnews have a public cafeteria? you really think, that cable news is interested in focusing on positive issues regarding muslim faith? were you born yesterday?
Joey - you have clearly and categorically advocated the entire Muslim population to be collected into one facility and burned alive. How does that make you any different from a terrorist?
And then you have just summarized all people of the Muslim faith as people who smell bad.
Nothing you say can possibly be taken seriously.
But please by all means please spread the word of your revalation of how Muslims smell to all of your coworkers and colleagues at firms around your city.
Your post:
republican
favor 24%
oppose 82%
no opinion 1%
Real numbers
17%
82%
1%
How "24%" is a typo of "17%" is beyond me.
AT Unicorn Ghost
if you really must know, i was copy/clipping the 'party, favor, oppose, no opinion' part then changing the numbers per cnn's poll numbers. so i copy/clipped the 'independent' set of numbers, changed to republican but forgot to change 24% favor to 17%.
"The truth is that Osama bin Laden and his ilk face much bigger problems. The story of the past decade in the Muslim world is that of the widespread rejection - or "refudiation," to borrow a phrase - of terrorism. A study by the Pew Research Center earlier this year found that support in Muslim countries for suicide bombings has fallen precipitously from post-9/11 levels. One-third of Pakistanis believed terrorism was justified in 2002; now just 8% do. For all our anxiety about the rise of religious extremism, no government in the Arab world has been toppled by forces sympathetic to al-Qaeda since 2001. And though some militant Muslims surely wish us harm, their ability to actually inflict it has eroded; it has been more than five years since the last successful al-Qaeda attack in the West."
MED - Because its a statement not an action like blowing up and burning down the WTC.
Its funny the folks on this board are the same folks who go ape-shit over a christmas tree in an airport or nativity scene in a park, yet scream bloody murder when we arent being tolerent to radical religious groups. Look around you, at the comment sections of newspapers, grocery stores and barber shops, listen and you will hear the great silent majority getting ready to blow it's collective fucking top off. You dont want to be in the way of it.
@ Joey D: "And I have yet to hear the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims speak out against radicalization within the west. Appeasement is not tolerance."
OK, I'm far from any majority for white, christian western dudes, but I hereby like to speak out against the radicalization of idiots such as Joey D within the west.
Simply because you have something in common with a bunch of radicals, doesn't mean that you agree, unless you denounce them. For instance: some of the 9/11 terrorists lived in Germany. I've lived in Germany. Should I therefore speak out against them? I have dark hair - should I speak out against all evil done by those with dark hair?
I know that this is a slightly simplistic view, but the view that if a Muslim doesn't explicity voices a opinion that they disagree with whatever kind of terrorirst they are condoning it is exactly what causes people to radicalize within a society - it is killing for whatever kind of belonging. You cannot blame an entire religion for the deeds of some lunatics and expecting the normal people to stay calm and swallow your bullshit.
Look around username and you will see you far from "the normal people" in this company.
Did you know that this Radical Iman also supports a Sharia Law system for civil courts and banking within this country? How do you feel about that? On the same grounds as the founding of the greatest liberty loving and mercantilist system ever created, an institution dedicated to abolishing it will rise with the support of the lunatic fringe. After we let them build the mosque, we will then be asked to build them seperate courts? Hows this all working out in London, Der Neiderlande and Sweeden?
1. You said: "we put japanese in camps, whole families, should we then apply that same logic and round up all muslims, because that's what you are suggesting."
What are you talking about? Where did I ever suggest that? Before you dismiss someone's comments as "absurdly idiotic", it's recommended that you at least correctly characterize what they actually said.
2. You said: "for the simple fools; we have evolved, this country has evolved in 60 years. we are not germany, we are not any other country that forbids christian religion, we are americans; endowed by a [creator] with certain rights, and those rights are not up for debate. [period]"
I may be a "simple fool" to you, but I know the difference between having the right to do something and it being wise or respectful to do something. I'm not debating their right to build the project. I said that very clearly in my post. I question the wisdom of building it. Those are two very different things.
Just because something is a right in a free society doesn't at all mean that it's smart, wise, respectful, advisable or worthy of praise.
20th century americans would not have allowed a japanese cultural center in pearl harbor [and for the record Hawaii became a state in 1959] = 21st century americans not allowing a muslim cultural center in lower manhattan [and for the record there is a mosque near world trade, and has been there since 1970]
hence, given the above moral equivalency:
20th century americans interned japanese in camps [and applying the logic above] = 21st century americans rounding up muslims and placing them in camps [can't trust that scary language, burka wearing, non-jesus worshipping crowd]
how is not easy to see that once one slippery slope is breached that it becomes that much easier to overcome the next.
lastly, since when did rights only apply to what is smart and respectful, that is why we have rights: to protect the disrespectful and inappropriate.
so, are most of you responders islamophobic? are muslim - americans that different from italian - americans; afro - americans; polish - americans...etc?
there are more mosques being built in america today than ever before - all over america.
again - folks please give this your best: is this project a good PLANNING decision? religious tolerance is a cornerstone of our country. location, location, location is a cornerstone in real estate development. the powers that be in nyc planning agree that the location works and have approved the project. without letting emotions take over, put your professional brains together, answer the question: is this project a good PLANNING decision?
remember that the project is a community center with a small prayer mosque within - no minaret to call for prayer is included.
the area is zoned for this buildings use (community center). the planning board was included cause the existing building (to be torn down and replaced with a 15 story community center including a swimming pool and gym) was up for landmark status - the community planning board did not deem the building warranted landmark status - hence the firestorm.
as architects we have a standing ability to view the clients program from all sides - so planning wise is this project a good decision? if you (not u donna) are an islamophobic - please put that aside and stay focused on the planning side of the question - thanks.
I asked about zoning because I was thinking of the building as a worship use - in one of my early design studios I bumped up against what a bad idea it would be to zone a part of a town "religious", like having a "church quarter" or something, similar to a "red light district". In the case of religious institution that just seems like a bad idea.
But this really is a community center with a small chapel, yes?
randy are you concerned that the tearing down of a potentially landmark-able building is a bad thing? From the image you posted it looks like a cute but unremarkable historic building. The image 1234dddd posted of a lacey-screened block looks, to me, nice but unremarkable as well - very pretty, though - and it must fulfill a community need for recreation and education space, which the existing building likely can't do, so that seems to me like a good argument for why it's a net benefit to the neighborhood - yes?
I'm sorry now I'm veering away from the planning ideas, but if nothing else we should be talking about the importance of a building seeming to have permanence and representing certain ideals - that architecture has power to shape our society, in other words. Our world is full of crap commercial buildings that would seem to signify that ideals don't exist any longer.
Actually Donna, having a religious quarter isn't a terrible idea!
Despite them all having similar infrastructural needs, I doubt that they could play together well enough without some sort of significant sabotaging eventually happening. Churches may have similar messages and intents but... business-wise, they are in direct competition!
I think the real question is do the people of the Financial District and the Lower East Side want it?
(I just tried searching around and found this press release from "President Scott M. Stringer, Office of Manhattan Borough":
“The development of both the mosque and the center gained strong support of the local community board earlier this month,” said NYC Comptroller John C. Liu. “Both are dedicated to promoting education and understanding, and intended to help bridge the divide and unify New York.”
So, it seems like the residents of lower Lower Manhattan want it.
@ Joey D: "After we let them build the mosque, we will then be asked to build them seperate courts? Hows this all working out in London, Der Neiderlande and Sweeden?"
I am guessing that with "Der Neiderlande" you mean "The Netherlands"? If so, funny that you happen to mention this country. Because that's where I live. So I think I can safely say that I know "how things are working out around here."
For starters: at the last governmental election, a large proportion of the populated voted right wing. Let me rephrase that: they voted for bunch a close-minded, islamophobic zeolots. To give you an idea: members of the party seem to make a game out of trying to blame Muslims for everything. If the debate is about unemployment: that's because there are too many lazy Muslims in the country. If there are too many deaths in traffic: that's because Muslims don't know how to drive a car. If there are fights at a football game, that's because there's a muslim player on the pitch. I can more examples of this if you wish, but I think you get my point: they are blatantly anti-islam.
The funny thing is: if you look at a map of how the voters of this party are spread across the country, the vast majority of the voters are from rural (anti-urban) areas. Places where there are virtually no muslims whatsoever. Having ended up in more than one discussion with someone who voted for them, you tend to hear the argument "but where you live (in Amsterdam), it's really bad what is going on with all the Muslims, I understand that you cannot walk the street at night etcetera etcetera. The truth is: the majority of them doesn't have any first hand experience of the so-called "trouble makers", and is just mimicking fear spread by some right wing populists.
That is not to say that there are no problems. Mainly with youthful (second or third generation) immigrants. But in my eyes the main problem has nothing to do with their religion, but with language and schooling. Many of them come from relatively low socio-cultural classes. Their parents often hardly speak dutch. The kids fall behind in school because they have problems with the language, and after a while get frustrated and start skipping school. Dropping out, not able to find decent jobs, they start to make some problems here and there. But then again, in my eyes that has nothing to do with the fact that they come from a Muslim background.
But my guess is that your initial question wasn't geared at that, right? You probably wanted to hear how bad things were over here, with the building boom of mosques and the sharia court and whatnot.
Well, the first isn't really true: there are some new mosques being built (since the numbers of Muslims are, in fact, increasing). But similarly: there are new synagogues being built. Not so many churches (since there are quite some people dropping that religion over here). And true, some of the imams at those mosques are sketchy, to say the least. They preach radical and violently. There's a policy (both by islamic organisations and the government) to throw those imams out of the mosques (and, if possible, out of the country). It could be that there are still some radical imams preaching, but to my knowledge it isn't as widely spread as anyone might suggest.
And, might I add: the radical christians (the so-called dutch-bible belt) is probably worse: they don't allow their children to get vaccinated, cast (potential) gays out of the community (there are even cases of physical attacks against gays by radical christians). and are (to put it lightly) not that enlightened considering women's rights. Hell, there's even a radical christian party in the parlement that doesn't allow women to be a member of the party, because they feel women should be either on their backs or on their knees...
That's probably more like you'd expect from the radical muslims, but it's from "our" christians, part of "our" heritage.
I'm not writing this to denounce Christians, but only to show that there are radical idiots anywhere. But it's just as insane to think all Muslims are as radical and bizarre as the worst ones around, as it is to think that all Chriistians are as bad as the radicals...
And about the Sharia: to my knowledge, there is no such thing in the Netherlands. In England, there are several Sharia councils, though. The funny thing is: you'd expect them to decide who gets stoned or something. Well, not quite: most issues are about marriage rights etcetera. And the courts aren't even legally binding, only (religious) guidance for those who who chose to accept it. And you won't get butchered as a muslim if you chose not to have anything to do with the sharia court. You can read more here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576066/We-want-to-offer-sharia-law-to-Britain.html , to get a hint of what it is actually like over there...
oh, and back to the original question: there are so many things inappropriate concerning Ground Zero, whe should protest that! This, for instance: http://hotchickssmilingatgroundzero.com/
This is so fucking disgusting that the White House had to make a statement clarifying our president is in fact a Christian...
This is like accusing #1 person in the US with a thought crime.
"Jesus Christ guys, I am a Christian, goddammit.."
some say: "just because you say it is so doesn't make it so".......
and user; if you take a walk around the "ground zero" neighborhood you will find several "gentlemen's clubs" for your "viewing" pleasure. oh yes the area is zoned for that use too.
for design professionals this topic can be an open ended discussion about: developers property rights, community spirit answering the neighborhoods growth needs, economic feasibility, political incorrectness (sic), and a mixed use project within a very vibrant part of manhattan.
i view the project brings another layer of interest into the area that can only be positive - its the swimming pool/gym, lecture hall, auditorium, restaurant and culinary school, a library, reading room and art studio, and child care services, a 9/11 memorial, and a mosque - run separately.
everyone's response has been great - but - let's give this our best and keep the rants as positive to the point as you can. i am interested in how our profession responds to a "hot button" building type - not necessarily your political bent (right or left) - is this a good planning decision?
mosque
I am not a practicing Muslim. Perhaps, then, not a muslim at all. Growing up in a secular but, nevertheless, un-officially and majority muslim country, I have been exposed to Islam, learned about its traditions, customs, and, as an architect, developed great appreciation for the design of its places of worship.
I don't necessarily want this mosque in Manhattan be built because it worries me that it will further radicalize the violent right wing fanatics in United States who see Islam as a threat to their existence, as the enemy and as the source of all evil on earth.
To them, this is the clash of civilizations. The enemy is described as a bloody and oppressive force raising from hellish petro-rich Arabian deserts and Afghany caves, whose ugly bearded men with hooked noses trying to destroy the ever so innocent, fair and humane, blessed and all superior kingdom of western civilization.
On the personal front, because of this proposed mosque, if in fact built, I will be subjected to even more hatred and racial profiling than what became an unwelcomed fact of my already complicated diaspora life after 9/11.
In short, my work will be distracted, it will be harder for me to prevail professionally, and most disturbingly, my well being will be exposed to actual violence, consuming my time while continuously negotiating my rights with angry and righteous people in everyday situations.
Consider the thinkable and highly possible, some of the aggressions toward muslims, without discrimination, could develop into further psychological and racial repression, physical disturbances, such as public beatings and other torturous humiliations, downward spiraling all the way to lynching.
Muslims don't have many reliable and empathetic organizations to turn for protection.
Their faith and culture is demonized at worst, disliked and mistrusted by the significant section of the American society at best.
And, what is the most worrisome, these negative sentiments are now getting institutionalized in the Crusades like causes of tea partying masses.
These are not exaggerations.
I have been looking at hundreds of readers' comments in newspapers and websites regarding this issue and most of them are outright life threatening to my profile. These disturbing and eerily aggressive group-thinking are freely circulated and unchallenged by the authorities in charge of protecting the well being of the innocent.
America's sizable muslim community is openly attacked and made to suffer the highly orchestrated accusations. The horrors generated, vocalized, broadcasted.
These are well beyond the usual discriminations I was just getting used to.
"Bomb their mosques"
"Build it, get them all inside - then burn it down"
"Deport them"
"Gather and send them to labor camps"
"Nuke their homeland"
"Chop their heads and display them in Ground Zero"
"Strip them naked and make them piss on Quran"
"They don't deserve to practice their despicable religion in Manhattan buildings when an abandoned small factory or a farm building will suffice. What's a building for a barbaric camel jockeys anyway?"
So on, and uglier.
These should be alarming to people who are living peacefully in this country.
No doubt, when the hooligans are done with muslims and eradicated them from 'their chosen' society and 'finalized their dissolution,' they will re-concentrate their efforts to purify and rid of their communities from non believers, gays, abortionists, liberals, socialists, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Gypsies, drug users, illegal aliens, hippies, independent women, men, prostitutes, Chinese, Africans, intellectuals, dangerous books and progressive thinking, just to name a few.
This is their occupational therapy, purpose of their vengeful existence, evil passion and manipulated brains for easy exploitations. This is what glues the sheep together.
I imagine, the falsity of their valor goes undetected until much later, when they realize that the war they made believe to fight was a lie.
Watch and be proactive for the disinformation carnage and violence of 2012 general election campaigns.
I'm always amused at topics like this, that always seem to draw out the hyperbole of the True Believers on either side of the issue. As is almost always the case, the "truth" (whatever that is!) usually lies in between the hysterical fringes.
A couple of humble observations, an my personal opinion only: I think that the project site is a couple of blocks from the WTC site, and is functionally a different neighborhood. You can't really even see the proposed site from Ground Zero. So the proximity argument is a bit weak, IMO.
I think the unfortunate reality is that, if the project goes through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this.
But I understand the outrage some people feel. Imagine if the Japanese wanted to build a Japanese cultural center a stone's throw from the wreck of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor in, say, 1949? Or if the German government proposed a German cultural center right next to Treblinka? There is tremendous pain associated with Pearl Harbor, and the Holocaust, and 9/11. To dismiss that pain simply as bigotry or racism or religious intolerance, and the proponents as stupid or uneducated seems sadly simplistic and shameful to me.
The Constitution guarantees that the government can't favor or persecute any particular religion. However, that doesn't mean that citizens shouldn't offer opinions on the appropriateness of this project in the court of public opinion. I believe in property rights, and if they are hell-bent on building this thing, they should be permitted to do so. My understanding is that the Mayor has offered to work with the developers to find another appropriate site. It's my opinion that if they are truly interested in finding common ground and healing wounds, they would take him up on the offer.
Respectfully submitted.
horseshit.
respectfully submitted.
That was a really helpful contribution to the dialogue. Thanks for that!
Orhan forgot they smell really bad too
EKE, and JoeyD, when you contribute something of fucking value, all be all in your shit. as i have pointed out way above your inane, racist santorum laced froth, you are both douche-bags.
Knowing that it is pissing people off, I personally wouldn't even consider building anything there, just because the constitution says I can. Knowing that it can cause violence, terrorism, vandalism against my project and people attending this center, I would certainly move the building to avoid that, unless there are some other principles behind.
Orhan,
I've been reading comments as well, and I'm quite surprised at what some people say. It's primitive and disgusting just like the above comment about "burning them" from JoeyD.
This was the first post I've made in this topic. You don't know me. Is this the way you deal with people you disagree with generally, or is this childish little rant just message board behavior?
JoeyD
Total Entries: 2
Total Comments: 29
08/17/10 11:36
"build it, get them all inside - then burn it down."
Joey D @
Total Entries: 2
Total Comments: 29
08/18/10 10:17,
"Orhan forgot they smell really bad too"
------------
Joey D,
of course, the 'burned' human flesh does not smell good. 'you' should know...
but you seem to enjoy setting it up...
What is your problem Joey? Have a civilized conversation or fuck off!
I hope this Joey guy doesn't talk like this as an employee at an architecture firm.
If he was at my firm, his ass would be canned in a second. Many of our clients are those "smelly people" who he wants to corral into one place and burn. Not exactly the way you want to build business relationships in hard times like these.
There was a guy from a construction firm a few years back that continuously called this American-born Muslim project manager at my firm "Ali-Baba." The Construction firm which clearly has a zero-tolerance policy for that kind of behavior fired him on the spot.
DOES ANYONE KNOW WHO DESIGNED THE "GROUND ZERO MOSQUE"
(nobody loves a community center more than an architect)
ALL SEARCHES HAVE GIVEN ME A BLANK...
USING KEYWORDS LIKE "DESIGNER" AND "ARCHITECT"
<img src="http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/4/419/41965.jpg">
http://media.bonnint.net/seattle/4/419/41965.jpg
since i created this thread and am a native new yorker may i chime in:
the imman of this proposed cultural center was appointed by W to be our muslim envoy to the middle east in '06 to help those countries understand the usa and its policies @ that time. he is considered the MOST moderate muslim in our county.
AND for those who have never taken a mass transit ride in nyc - it stinks. people stink! perfume. hair do. men's perfume! clothes. food. booze. smoke. blacks. whites. asian. yellow. green. blue. muslim. jew. catholic. protestant. episcopalian.WASP. latin. spanish. italian. polish. german. u name it...........we all stink!!
i'd love to play some stickball with some of you folks....just to see how long you'd last with me an my ny brothers and sisters.
now - if you'all would take another look at the heading of this thread and answer the question - maybe we would have some real discourse here - rather than everyone's political viewpoint (and its ALL good).
from a strict planning edge: do you see this as a good planning decision? please take into account socio-political-economic-demographic-psychological aspects of the proposal.
beta,
Come on. I hope you can appreciate the difference between well-considered opinion that you don't agree with (EKE's post above) and JoeyD's frothing-at the mouth right-wing idiocy.
Please don't treat them the same.
I may not agree with what EKE said, but he/she has a reasonable, rational argument. It was presented coherently and with respect. That much I can see. This ability to respectfully disagree is what separates engaged citizens from degenerates like JoeyD who advocate violence and reaction.
okay did it wrong - click the link above to view the building that a 15 story tower will replace - who the architect is - is unknown.
didn't SOM do that other mosque in NYC?
EKE, those comparisons about Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan you bring up are not the same in any way shape or form. this is what has been insulting throughout this entire discussion.
Al Qaeda was the culprit of the 9/11 attacks. They never were and never will be the representitives of Islam or Muslims. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that is vehemently rejected by an overwhelming majority of Muslims and Muslims nations. Even countries like Iran and Iraq (during Saddam's regime) were and are against Al-Qaeda. Countries like Egypt, Jordan, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Turkey have been battling against Al-Qaeda even before anyone in the US heard of the organization.
Perhaps the biggest fact that everyone completely misses is the fact that the majority of victims of Al-Qaeda have been Muslims themselves. Al Qaeda has thrived off of Western anti-Islam sentiment in an attempt to push moderates into the extreme. Example: They have been stiring up civil strife between the Shi'a and Sunni in Iraq so that there would be an all-out war. What they see as now Shi'a domination in Iraq is something that they want to capitalize off of. They think that if the Shi'a begin to retaliate against the Sunnis, other Sunni-dominated countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt will throw all their support to the Sunnis in Iraq and consequently Al-Qaeda.
The radicalization of Americans who are turning more right-wing and anti-Islam is exactly what Al-Qaeda wants so that the moderates will have nowhere to go but to Al-Qaeda. In many striking ways, this is exactly how Hamas gained power in Palestine. The Palestinians (no matter what their politics are) are hated by the US, Israel, Arab countries, and just about everyone else so many just turned to Hamas.
Again with this Islamic Community Center, I afraid this will be a sign of many controversies to come down the stretch. Soon it will be impossible for Muslims to build mosques anywhere in the US.
this:
I think the unfortunate reality is that, if the project goes through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this.
argument fails to recognize a fundamental flaw, because the converse opinion is also true: if the project does NOT go through, it will be perceived as a much greater victory for Muslim extremism precisely BECAUSE people made such a big stink about this....
and then there's this gem:
But I understand the outrage some people feel. Imagine if the Japanese wanted to build a Japanese cultural center a stone's throw from the wreck of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor in, say, 1949? Or if the German government proposed a German cultural center right next to Treblinka? There is tremendous pain associated with Pearl Harbor, and the Holocaust, and 9/11. To dismiss that pain simply as bigotry or racism or religious intolerance, and the proponents as stupid or uneducated seems sadly simplistic and shameful to me.
hey EKE, i apologize for offending you, but this point is so absurdly idiotic, that it should have you running back to your history books. so, in the 21st century, we should remember not to forget, that 60 years ago something like this would not happen? we put japanese in camps, whole families, should we then apply that same logic and round up all muslims, because that's what you are suggesting.
for the simple fools; we have evolved, this country has evolved in 60 years. we are not germany, we are not any other country that forbids christian religion, we are americans; endowed by a [creator] with certain rights, and those rights are not up for debate. [period]
"Al Qaeda was the culprit of the 9/11 attacks. They never were and never will be the representatives of Islam or Muslims. Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization that is vehemently rejected by an overwhelming majority of Muslims and Muslims nations. Even countries like Iran and Iraq (during Saddam's regime) were and are against Al-Qaeda"
Go on believing this. You can not apply your template of tolerance so squarely across the board. Pakistan to was heralded as a enemy of Al Qeada until wikileaks showed us they were supporting both sides. Irag clearly has holes in it's borders and government allowing the jihadists to enter and fight the Americans. Saudi Arabia must simply be sending money to Al Qaeda as mission of peace because theres no way they could be supporting such non-muslim endeavors. Even the Barbary Pirates were misunderstood.
And I have yet to hear the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims speak out against radicalization within the west. Appeasement is not tolerance.
I heard an interesting stream of thought, calling this a "victory
mosque" on M. Savage last night-
in the same tradition of:
"Al Aqsa Mosque - on the site of Solomon’s temple;
Hagia Sofia - former site of cathedral in Constantinople;
Babri Majid mosque - destroyed Hindu temple in process; Great Mosque
of Cordoba"
Except-
in these instances it seems that existing buildings/sites were
redeveloped for new use..and all of these were religious sites-
perhaps the WTC was a religiou$ site in America-
But..the proposed building is 2 blocks away...2 blocks can be like 10
miles in a busy city- will there be line-of-sight from the WTC site?
because-
I think that the iconic nature of the facade, although somewhat
humble, makes a strong statement compared to the average city block in lower Manhattan-
I don’t mind the mosque/community center - I eat Halal all the time in NY.
I understand the argument that if this building causes so much stress, then it might be more sensitive to rethink their development-
that doesn’t mean I agree with it-
I think it is an easy wedge-issue on the political front.
And >>>>>
Likely the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolition, so the whole
think is kind of clouded in a deeper truth that is getting more twisted with side-issues
(A truth that I am sure a lot of architects have thought about at one time or another-)
hey dick, where are you hanging out, does foxnews have a public cafeteria? you really think, that cable news is interested in focusing on positive issues regarding muslim faith? were you born yesterday?
Joey - you have clearly and categorically advocated the entire Muslim population to be collected into one facility and burned alive. How does that make you any different from a terrorist?
And then you have just summarized all people of the Muslim faith as people who smell bad.
Nothing you say can possibly be taken seriously.
But please by all means please spread the word of your revalation of how Muslims smell to all of your coworkers and colleagues at firms around your city.
republican
favor 24%
oppose 82%
no opinion 1%
Real numbers
17%
82%
1%
How "24%" is a typo of "17%" is beyond me.
AT Unicorn Ghost
if you really must know, i was copy/clipping the 'party, favor, oppose, no opinion' part then changing the numbers per cnn's poll numbers. so i copy/clipped the 'independent' set of numbers, changed to republican but forgot to change 24% favor to 17%.
lighten up and give me a fucking break !!
Good Article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/08599201140000
"The truth is that Osama bin Laden and his ilk face much bigger problems. The story of the past decade in the Muslim world is that of the widespread rejection - or "refudiation," to borrow a phrase - of terrorism. A study by the Pew Research Center earlier this year found that support in Muslim countries for suicide bombings has fallen precipitously from post-9/11 levels. One-third of Pakistanis believed terrorism was justified in 2002; now just 8% do. For all our anxiety about the rise of religious extremism, no government in the Arab world has been toppled by forces sympathetic to al-Qaeda since 2001. And though some militant Muslims surely wish us harm, their ability to actually inflict it has eroded; it has been more than five years since the last successful al-Qaeda attack in the West."
"One-third of Pakistanis believed terrorism was justified in 2002; now just 8% do"
Funny how the big stick changes hearts and minds isnt it?
JoeyD: "build it, get them all inside - then burn it down."
How is this any different from being a terrorist?
MED - Because its a statement not an action like blowing up and burning down the WTC.
Its funny the folks on this board are the same folks who go ape-shit over a christmas tree in an airport or nativity scene in a park, yet scream bloody murder when we arent being tolerent to radical religious groups. Look around you, at the comment sections of newspapers, grocery stores and barber shops, listen and you will hear the great silent majority getting ready to blow it's collective fucking top off. You dont want to be in the way of it.
Again:
JoeyD: "build it, get them all inside - then burn it down."
You were not advocating the elimination of terrorists, you were advocating the anihlation of all Muslims.
Simpletons like you aren't even worthy of a response.
Now tell us again how bad Muslims smell since they are (as you claim) all the same.
Knowingly feeding a troll:
@ Joey D: "And I have yet to hear the "overwhelming majority" of Muslims speak out against radicalization within the west. Appeasement is not tolerance."
OK, I'm far from any majority for white, christian western dudes, but I hereby like to speak out against the radicalization of idiots such as Joey D within the west.
Simply because you have something in common with a bunch of radicals, doesn't mean that you agree, unless you denounce them. For instance: some of the 9/11 terrorists lived in Germany. I've lived in Germany. Should I therefore speak out against them? I have dark hair - should I speak out against all evil done by those with dark hair?
I know that this is a slightly simplistic view, but the view that if a Muslim doesn't explicity voices a opinion that they disagree with whatever kind of terrorirst they are condoning it is exactly what causes people to radicalize within a society - it is killing for whatever kind of belonging. You cannot blame an entire religion for the deeds of some lunatics and expecting the normal people to stay calm and swallow your bullshit.
Look around username and you will see you far from "the normal people" in this company.
Did you know that this Radical Iman also supports a Sharia Law system for civil courts and banking within this country? How do you feel about that? On the same grounds as the founding of the greatest liberty loving and mercantilist system ever created, an institution dedicated to abolishing it will rise with the support of the lunatic fringe. After we let them build the mosque, we will then be asked to build them seperate courts? Hows this all working out in London, Der Neiderlande and Sweeden?
b3tadine[sutures]-
Apology accepted.
A couple of points I wanted to address:
1. You said: "we put japanese in camps, whole families, should we then apply that same logic and round up all muslims, because that's what you are suggesting."
What are you talking about? Where did I ever suggest that? Before you dismiss someone's comments as "absurdly idiotic", it's recommended that you at least correctly characterize what they actually said.
2. You said: "for the simple fools; we have evolved, this country has evolved in 60 years. we are not germany, we are not any other country that forbids christian religion, we are americans; endowed by a [creator] with certain rights, and those rights are not up for debate. [period]"
I may be a "simple fool" to you, but I know the difference between having the right to do something and it being wise or respectful to do something. I'm not debating their right to build the project. I said that very clearly in my post. I question the wisdom of building it. Those are two very different things.
Just because something is a right in a free society doesn't at all mean that it's smart, wise, respectful, advisable or worthy of praise.
let me explain:
20th century americans would not have allowed a japanese cultural center in pearl harbor [and for the record Hawaii became a state in 1959] = 21st century americans not allowing a muslim cultural center in lower manhattan [and for the record there is a mosque near world trade, and has been there since 1970]
hence, given the above moral equivalency:
20th century americans interned japanese in camps [and applying the logic above] = 21st century americans rounding up muslims and placing them in camps [can't trust that scary language, burka wearing, non-jesus worshipping crowd]
how is not easy to see that once one slippery slope is breached that it becomes that much easier to overcome the next.
lastly, since when did rights only apply to what is smart and respectful, that is why we have rights: to protect the disrespectful and inappropriate.
Larry Flynt vs. Jerry Falwell.
so, are most of you responders islamophobic? are muslim - americans that different from italian - americans; afro - americans; polish - americans...etc?
there are more mosques being built in america today than ever before - all over america.
again - folks please give this your best: is this project a good PLANNING decision? religious tolerance is a cornerstone of our country. location, location, location is a cornerstone in real estate development. the powers that be in nyc planning agree that the location works and have approved the project. without letting emotions take over, put your professional brains together, answer the question: is this project a good PLANNING decision?
remember that the project is a community center with a small prayer mosque within - no minaret to call for prayer is included.
I guess i don't understand what you mean by "planning" decision. Do you mean zoning?
Emotions, design, planning...how dare they go together!
first real question donna - thanks.
the area is zoned for this buildings use (community center). the planning board was included cause the existing building (to be torn down and replaced with a 15 story community center including a swimming pool and gym) was up for landmark status - the community planning board did not deem the building warranted landmark status - hence the firestorm.
as architects we have a standing ability to view the clients program from all sides - so planning wise is this project a good decision? if you (not u donna) are an islamophobic - please put that aside and stay focused on the planning side of the question - thanks.
-
what difference does the zoning make?
planning wise it's TERRIBLE because it upsets everyone-
It all goes back to the EMOTION and the ICONIC nature of the design.
And if you can SEE the building from street level-
-
but, planning wise it's GOOD because the street can use a facelift and it could attract more traffic to the area--
it could become the Muslim center of NYC where muslims worldwide know they can enjoy the area around the community center-
Eat, Pray, Love
-
"And if you can SEE the building from street level-"
From the GROUND ZERO tourist sites
b3tadine[sutures] -
I said what I said, and I didn't say what I didn't say.
By all means, continue to construct your strawmen and tear them down.
I'm out.
The wise souls over at the Daily Show on the subject-
.....It would be like building a Catholic church next to a playground. I mean its just too soon!
EKE you can't run from your own logical constructs.
I asked about zoning because I was thinking of the building as a worship use - in one of my early design studios I bumped up against what a bad idea it would be to zone a part of a town "religious", like having a "church quarter" or something, similar to a "red light district". In the case of religious institution that just seems like a bad idea.
But this really is a community center with a small chapel, yes?
randy are you concerned that the tearing down of a potentially landmark-able building is a bad thing? From the image you posted it looks like a cute but unremarkable historic building. The image 1234dddd posted of a lacey-screened block looks, to me, nice but unremarkable as well - very pretty, though - and it must fulfill a community need for recreation and education space, which the existing building likely can't do, so that seems to me like a good argument for why it's a net benefit to the neighborhood - yes?
I'm sorry now I'm veering away from the planning ideas, but if nothing else we should be talking about the importance of a building seeming to have permanence and representing certain ideals - that architecture has power to shape our society, in other words. Our world is full of crap commercial buildings that would seem to signify that ideals don't exist any longer.
Actually Donna, having a religious quarter isn't a terrible idea!
Despite them all having similar infrastructural needs, I doubt that they could play together well enough without some sort of significant sabotaging eventually happening. Churches may have similar messages and intents but... business-wise, they are in direct competition!
I think the real question is do the people of the Financial District and the Lower East Side want it?
(I just tried searching around and found this press release from "President Scott M. Stringer, Office of Manhattan Borough":
“The development of both the mosque and the center gained strong support of the local community board earlier this month,” said NYC Comptroller John C. Liu. “Both are dedicated to promoting education and understanding, and intended to help bridge the divide and unify New York.”
So, it seems like the residents of lower Lower Manhattan want it.
@ Joey D: "After we let them build the mosque, we will then be asked to build them seperate courts? Hows this all working out in London, Der Neiderlande and Sweeden?"
I am guessing that with "Der Neiderlande" you mean "The Netherlands"? If so, funny that you happen to mention this country. Because that's where I live. So I think I can safely say that I know "how things are working out around here."
For starters: at the last governmental election, a large proportion of the populated voted right wing. Let me rephrase that: they voted for bunch a close-minded, islamophobic zeolots. To give you an idea: members of the party seem to make a game out of trying to blame Muslims for everything. If the debate is about unemployment: that's because there are too many lazy Muslims in the country. If there are too many deaths in traffic: that's because Muslims don't know how to drive a car. If there are fights at a football game, that's because there's a muslim player on the pitch. I can more examples of this if you wish, but I think you get my point: they are blatantly anti-islam.
The funny thing is: if you look at a map of how the voters of this party are spread across the country, the vast majority of the voters are from rural (anti-urban) areas. Places where there are virtually no muslims whatsoever. Having ended up in more than one discussion with someone who voted for them, you tend to hear the argument "but where you live (in Amsterdam), it's really bad what is going on with all the Muslims, I understand that you cannot walk the street at night etcetera etcetera. The truth is: the majority of them doesn't have any first hand experience of the so-called "trouble makers", and is just mimicking fear spread by some right wing populists.
That is not to say that there are no problems. Mainly with youthful (second or third generation) immigrants. But in my eyes the main problem has nothing to do with their religion, but with language and schooling. Many of them come from relatively low socio-cultural classes. Their parents often hardly speak dutch. The kids fall behind in school because they have problems with the language, and after a while get frustrated and start skipping school. Dropping out, not able to find decent jobs, they start to make some problems here and there. But then again, in my eyes that has nothing to do with the fact that they come from a Muslim background.
But my guess is that your initial question wasn't geared at that, right? You probably wanted to hear how bad things were over here, with the building boom of mosques and the sharia court and whatnot.
Well, the first isn't really true: there are some new mosques being built (since the numbers of Muslims are, in fact, increasing). But similarly: there are new synagogues being built. Not so many churches (since there are quite some people dropping that religion over here). And true, some of the imams at those mosques are sketchy, to say the least. They preach radical and violently. There's a policy (both by islamic organisations and the government) to throw those imams out of the mosques (and, if possible, out of the country). It could be that there are still some radical imams preaching, but to my knowledge it isn't as widely spread as anyone might suggest.
And, might I add: the radical christians (the so-called dutch-bible belt) is probably worse: they don't allow their children to get vaccinated, cast (potential) gays out of the community (there are even cases of physical attacks against gays by radical christians). and are (to put it lightly) not that enlightened considering women's rights. Hell, there's even a radical christian party in the parlement that doesn't allow women to be a member of the party, because they feel women should be either on their backs or on their knees...
That's probably more like you'd expect from the radical muslims, but it's from "our" christians, part of "our" heritage.
I'm not writing this to denounce Christians, but only to show that there are radical idiots anywhere. But it's just as insane to think all Muslims are as radical and bizarre as the worst ones around, as it is to think that all Chriistians are as bad as the radicals...
And about the Sharia: to my knowledge, there is no such thing in the Netherlands. In England, there are several Sharia councils, though. The funny thing is: you'd expect them to decide who gets stoned or something. Well, not quite: most issues are about marriage rights etcetera. And the courts aren't even legally binding, only (religious) guidance for those who who chose to accept it. And you won't get butchered as a muslim if you chose not to have anything to do with the sharia court. You can read more here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576066/We-want-to-offer-sharia-law-to-Britain.html , to get a hint of what it is actually like over there...
oh, and back to the original question: there are so many things inappropriate concerning Ground Zero, whe should protest that! This, for instance: http://hotchickssmilingatgroundzero.com/
This is so fucking disgusting that the White House had to make a statement clarifying our president is in fact a Christian...
This is like accusing #1 person in the US with a thought crime.
"Jesus Christ guys, I am a Christian, goddammit.."
"Tell that to the wizard boy..."
Would it matter if he was? I know it wouldn't to me and many of my friends. Joey would NOT like that for sure!
some say: "just because you say it is so doesn't make it so".......
and user; if you take a walk around the "ground zero" neighborhood you will find several "gentlemen's clubs" for your "viewing" pleasure. oh yes the area is zoned for that use too.
for design professionals this topic can be an open ended discussion about: developers property rights, community spirit answering the neighborhoods growth needs, economic feasibility, political incorrectness (sic), and a mixed use project within a very vibrant part of manhattan.
i view the project brings another layer of interest into the area that can only be positive - its the swimming pool/gym, lecture hall, auditorium, restaurant and culinary school, a library, reading room and art studio, and child care services, a 9/11 memorial, and a mosque - run separately.
everyone's response has been great - but - let's give this our best and keep the rants as positive to the point as you can. i am interested in how our profession responds to a "hot button" building type - not necessarily your political bent (right or left) - is this a good planning decision?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.