“In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press….They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.

“An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers.”

U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 191

I don’t understand the beef here. Is the mosque/community center ON ground zero? No. Is it near ground zero? Yes. It seems to be accurate to describe it as near ground zero. I think it would be inaccurate to use a term “ground zero mosque” if the mosque isn’t on ground zero.

Color me puzzled.

Since a piece of one of the airplanes that slammed into the WTC towers fell onto, and damaged, the building on the proposed site, many are properly calling it the 9-11 Debris Field Mosque. The’Too Close To Ground Zero Mosque’ works for me as well.

@ Thane, the purpose of changing the terms used to describe the ground zero Mosque as not the ground zero Mosque isn’t in the interest accuracy but to prepare for the elements of spin that will be used in future coverage. For instance for several days the Socialist media kept insisting that Islamists had the constitutional right to build the Mosque on property that they owned. The Bolshevik press has attempted to create the impression that the sixty to seventy percent of Americans who want, at minimum, that the Mosque be built somewhere else don’t know that. In other words the elitist press prefers to insist that most Americans are ignorant bigots so they can prove their illusions of relevance. Since the effort to prove that all who oppose the Mosque are incapable of comprehending the constitution has failed I suspect the next step will be to prove that we can’t read a map. One might hope, futilely no doubt, that someday the MSM will come to understand that splitting very fine hairs is not the same as cleverness.
The Cross of St George or the Crescent Moon.

@Thane,
Site pictures here. You be the judge.

Can we now rename the ASSociated Press the Obama Press?!

Let’s see if I have this right:

1) Associated Press is going to stop lying about where it is, and maybe even about what it is.

2) The Other McCain is going to continue lying about both.

Do I have that right?

Actually, Stacy, its “Eastasia”.

But why quibble?

@Thomas L. Knapp

Can we all agree to just call it “The Mosque that’s really not at Ground Zero but was close enough to be inside the debris field”???

Then we’re telling the truth, right?

Only those who do not understand the issues consider the minimal significance of a couple blocks here and there to be a difference of any distinction. It is sad that intelligent people can have so much difficulty comprehending common sense morality.
Mr. Knapp in an infantile technically legalistic sense you have this “correct” but not “right” in any meaningful sense.

Knapp doesn’t even have it right. One of the landing gear from one of the planes struck the roof of the building being torn down to make way for this mosque, so like most Leftards on damned near everything, he’s wrong.

I see no indication he will ever be right about anything, so we can all safely ignore his blatherings.

jefferson101,

Since it’s not a mosque, not, we can’t all agree to call it “the mosque …”

Per the Wahabe fundamentalists whom the project’s opponents claim are behind it, a mosque:

1) Must publicly broadcast the call to prayer (Cordoba House won’t).

2) May not host non-Muslim services (Cordoba House will).

3) May not allow non-Muslims to eat or sleep there (Cordoba House’s halal food court will be open to all).

It’s a cultural center with a prayer room, not a mosque.

Rager,

The term “ground zero” has several definitions, all of which are specific and none of which can, even under their most liberal interpretations, be stretched to encompass a point two blocks from the target of a non-nuclear attack.

It’s not a mosque. It’s not at “Ground Zero.”

Anyone calling it “the Ground Zero mosque” is either a liar or a moron. And I don’t believe for a minute that Stacy and Smitty are morons, so that narrows it down, doesn’t it?

Semantics. No matter what the actual intentions of the people who want this “place” built, there are realities that can not be changed. The “moderate Muslim” (a Yeti like creature. Much is heard of them but very little from them) may insist that he only wants to build bridges. I doubt he is stupid enough to believe that will be the results. There will be Islamists who regard this as a monument to their 9/11 victory. No amount of good will or wishful thinking can alter that fact. There will be Americans who know that this building will be a victory monument to Islam’s murder of almost 3000 people. No amount of high minded bullsh*t about our enemies rights or “good intentions” can change that fact.
The Cross of St George or the Crescent Moon. I’ve chosen my side.

I can see the AP meeting now: “Can we call it a Tallywacker?”

So, does the AP have a track record of consistently refraining from close-but-technically-inaccurate popular nicknames and catchphrases?

How about the Ground One Mosque?

“Semantics.”

Fuckin’a skippy, semantics (“the study of the meanings of words”).

Words mean things.

Great; It’s a “cultural center with a prayer room” where no doubt, women without veils are welcome as are gays, Jews and Christians. The man behind it is very sensitive to the feelings of people who had “lost” loved ones in 9/11 but he wouldn’t think of moving it somewhere else. It just happened to be named Cordoba because he liked the car by that name. He thinks sharia is compatible with American law but he doesn’t really “think think” that. His wife Daisy thought that they might have to do a little “hand holding” (exact quote) with families opposed to it, but didn’t realize the opposition. She sounds like a very thoughtful, sensitive person too.

Thomas L. Knapp, re #13

That’s what they are telling us now. Once it’s built, and they change their minds?

And when they start broadcasting the call to prayer over the new loudspeakers, they’ll have a court case over denying them the freedom to practice their religion.

Yes semantics do matter. What are the semantics of the word prevarication, and how may one apply them, based on historical precedents?

hey thomas l knappy head when the imam forbids any infidels from entering will you stfu about all religions being allowed in you nutsack

How about we call it the baby mosque (inside a 13 story Muslim community center) ‘cuz that way everyone will love it because everybody loves babies.

Regarding whether it is, or is not, part of the ground zero site, look at it this way:

Is it close enough for muslim fanatics (am I being redundant here?) to brag to one another that they’ve built a mosque on an American “holy place”? I certainly think so, and thus it is appropriate for us here in the preconstruction phase to refer to it as the Ground Zero mosque.

Close your eyes and think back to the day the planes struck the twin towers; now visualize the TV news reports of palestinians dancing and cheering in the streets of Gaza.

There. Now does that clear it up for you?

Fair enough point GunRights4US, although I still disagree. I wonder how much of the tens of billions of dollars that the US government is spending to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan could instead be spent to ensure that the WTC/Pentagon bombing doesn’t occur again.