Out of respect...
It's not on-site, it's nearby. I highly doubt the owners of the WTC property would sell to Muslims building a mosque, or if it's even zoned to allow that.
Furthermore, no one said it would be wrong to open any other type of establishment nearby, either, so long as there aren't zoning/licensing conflicts. Blood Red Sandman and I simply pointed out that intentionally evoking an association between the neighboring structure and items that conflict with it (beer and pork) is a stunt with the intention of "getting a rise" out of others. I advised that if you're going to do that, hire a good private security company. Maybe some personal security, as well, if you can be identified as the owner.
On that note, does anyone know who sold the property in question? It's probably some bank that doesn't care if it's being developed into a mosque or a strip club. And as much as I find strip clubs offensive, I'd be saying the same thing about the transfer of private property.
Are you insinuating that Muslims might commit violence against those who disagree with them? Because if so, well-done on supporting their right to build a terror-house right near Ground Zero. 206.74.178.104 (talk) 13:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
The thing is, I think you honestly believe all Muslims are terrorists.
How, I wonder, do you react to the Christian terrorists throughout history?
The example is not one of disagreement but deliberate provocation.
After some digging, it looks like this was owned by a private citizen. The property was sold about a year ago to the real-estate agency that owns it now. It is physically connected to property currently owned by Consolidated Edison, which has a lease agreement with the agency. The agency is trying to exercise its purchase option so that it can own the entire building and develop the mosque.
The groups proposing the establishment of the mosque to the agency don't want to reveal their funding sources, and since they're not publicly traded companies nor do they receive government assistance, I guess they don't have to (by the law). It would be a good use of intelligence operations to discreetly determine the sources so that the government can evaluate the threat of it being a terrorist front; but that's the government's business, and it's a kind of business that they won't exactly tell us about.
It would go a long way towards validating their intentions, though, if they just saved us the trouble and disclosed their investors. Other Muslim groups are asking them to do this, as well. Regardless, there is law, which needs to transcend our passions and fears.