Hi Billy, On Aug 2, 2010, at 11:50 AM, [email protected] wrote: > "Ultimately this is not a question of rights, but a question of what is > right," the ADL said in a statement. "In our judgment, building an Islamic > center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more > pain - unnecessarily - and that is not right." > It is a complex issue, and the ADL seems to have a measured response. But the language used to describe the geography varies from blatantly false to (as in this case) aggressively suggestive.
A Street-Level View of the "Ground Zero Mosque" http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/07/polls-reporting-on-ground-zero-mosque.html > There's pretty much no way that you're going to be able to see a 12-story > building located two blocks behind a 16-story building that occupies the > entire block, with another ~14-story building wedged in between. I also > walked the entire northern permiter of the WTC site -- there's nowhere that > you'd get even a passing glimpse of the mosque. And I walked the stretch of > Park Place where Cordoba House would be located -- it's a fairly incoherent > and downtrodden block that you'd have no particular reason to visit, unless > you were going there specifically to see Cordoba House, nor is it one that > you'd happen upon unintentionally. Is there a case against building a mosque anywhere near the World Trade Center? Absolutely. But I want to see that case made based on the bare facts, not misleading scare tactics. To me, being a radical centrist means taking pains to be extremely accurate in all our facts, not glossing over those that make us look worse or our our opponents look better. -- Ernie P. -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
