RE : annually recurring commemoration of Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr at the Empire State Building
As I review a few of your most recent message board posts (good sir), a number of unfinished thoughts are percolating in the back of my mind. But let me begin at the beginning, with your assertion (immediately above) that a new precedent was established on Friday when the nocturnal exterior illumination of the uppermost section of the Empire State Building was switched from the baseline white color format to green, to commemorate the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr (Eidul Fitr or "Eid"), which is proclaimed every year at the end of Ramadan.
After considering the evidence that is available to me online, I find your assertion entirely unsupportable.
This is the first time that the Empire State Building will be illuminated for Eid, and the lighting will become an annual event in the same tradition of the yearly lightings for Christmas and Hannukah.
Two days after the Telegraph's sensational reportage, and almost eight years before your surprising assertion that this was the first "green lighting" of Eid at the Empire State Building, FOX News reported what was described as the first "greening" of the famous building in acknowledgement of the Eid holiday--in October of 2007. George W. Bush was President and the national elections that propelled one Barack Hussein Obama into his first day as the nation's chief executive were just beyond a year's full distance away, relative to the future of that horizon.
According to New York Magazine, the building went green for Eid in 2012.
The Empire State Building will shine its world-famous tower lights in green to honor the holiday Eid-al-Fitr from Thursday, August 8, 2013 through Friday, August 9, 2013.
The IslamiCity staff writers continued:
quote
Eid-al-Fitr, or "the Festival of Fast-Breaking," is a joyous celebration which commemorates the end of Ramadan and marks the completion of a month of spiritual renewal for the global Muslim community. During the holy month of Ramadan, Muslims around the world observe a strict fast from sunrise until sunset, participate in prayer and demonstrate acts of kindness. In Islam, the color green symbolizes a happy occasion and the importance of nature.
The IslamiCity deposition does not stand alone, but is supported by a convergent Facebook entry from August 8, 2013:
quote
To celebrate #Eid al-Fitr and mark the end of #Ramadan, our lights will glow green tonight and tomorrow night. Empire State Building.
The Empire State Building's own website (Is there a more authoritative source on this topic?) reports that Eid was honored with green lighting displays in 2014, on July 28 and 29. (Their online calendar only goes back that far.)
Two days ago, when the Times of Israel provided the very same report which you referenced previously (using online link format) about this year's Eid celebration, their bulletin remarked (again, for your reference) that this was not an inaugural event, but was, in reality, the annually recurring observance of an Empire State Building tradition which began several years ago:
quote
The skyscraper has carried out the tradition [of green lighting at night for the Eid holiday] “for several years now — it is an annual lighting,” a building spokeswoman told AFP [Agence France-Presse].
Were this a courtroom, sir, and not a message board post masquerading as an official memorandum, I would conclude with "I rest my case."
At your service.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 07-20-2015).]
Empire state building and the land it sits on are privately owned and operated, and have been fro many many decades. Lighting pattern, purpose of pattern and colors are protected 1st amendment rights. Congress [government] shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech, ....
RE : annually recurring commemoration of Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr at the Empire State Building
As I review a few of your most recent message board posts (good sir), a number of unfinished thoughts are percolating in the back of my mind. But let me begin at the beginning, with your assertion (immediately above) that a new precedent was established on Friday when the nocturnal exterior illumination of the uppermost section of the Empire State Building was switched from the baseline white color format to green, to commemorate the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr (Eidul Fitr or "Eid"), which is proclaimed every year at the end of Ramadan.
After considering the evidence that is available to me online, I find your assertion entirely unsupportable.
Were this a courtroom, sir, and not a message board post masquerading as an official memorandum, I would conclude with "I rest my case."
At your service.
I stand corrected on the date of the first lighting, my sources were off, However, that in no way, shape, or form discredits my original assertion, that we cater to terrorist. From your first link
quote
In March, Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, an al-Qa'eda member, revealed that the Empire State Building had been among the group's targets in a wave of post-9/11 attacks.
So it would have been ok to light the Empire State Building up like the confederate battle flag, one day after Dylan Roof's massacre? What if it landed on confederate day? The answer is no. It is in extremely poor taste to honor a Islamic holiday a day after a Islamic terror attack, I understand it is private property, but the precedent established with the confederate battle flag shows such things are not tolerated.
So my dear sir, it seems we are at a impasse.
[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 07-20-2015).]
Empire state building and the land it sits on are privately owned and operated, and have been fro many many decades. Lighting pattern, purpose of pattern and colors are protected 1st amendment rights. Congress [government] shall make no law.... abridging the freedom of speech, ....
But they can remove a flag from the face of the planet because a few racist idiots used it as their rebellion flag. I say if we have to not display a flag why should they get special privilege to celebrate their racist celebration by a country who has a religion started by a racist, child molesting rapist.
Sounds fair to me, let those who are responsible for all the resent killings in this and many other country's because they are the worst racists in the world from what I have seen in the news lately.
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't
But they can remove a flag from the face of the planet .... Steve
No, "they" (govt) cannot--nor have they. Almost all those who have stated they will not sell, manufacture, distribute, or display Stars and Bars are privately owned companies. I've read of no "law" (govt) that states it is illegal to make, sell, or display any particular flag on the basis of private or personal choice.
No, "they" (govt) cannot--nor have they. Almost all those who have stated they will not sell, manufacture, distribute, or display Stars and Bars are privately owned companies. I've read of no "law" (govt) that states it is illegal to make, sell, or display any particular flag on the basis of private or personal choice.
Then I think you need to read between the lines, see what is ahead for us and whats left of the country we call home.
The government is right at the point of making things illegal that never were before and never should be, like others have said I think the IS, or is ISIS today flag is more racist than any other flag in the world, they are simply destroying old relics of history as we speak and if Faracan or WTF ever his name is has his way the American flag is not far behind the rebel flag.
This is the way our so called government of the people, by the people, for the people works. They chip away at anything they can as slowly as possible so that few see what their end game is and that is complete control of the populous by those who are supposed to be representing us. They are no longer the afore mentioned of, by, for. They are now a government of themselves, for themselves and the corporations for themselves and god forbid anyone say they are wrong. They will simply make a law or amendment to make everything they want legal and everything the American people want illegal.
That's just the way I have seen it going in the last 60 years anyway.
Edit to add,
If our own government has its way soon it will be legal for all people of any color to shoot white people and no white person will even be allowed to defend themselves because they will be considered racist.
Steve
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 07-20-2015).]
A Navy officer and a Marine fired their sidearms hoping to kill or subdue the gunman who murdered five service members last week in Chattanooga, Tennessee, according to multiple military officials familiar with internal reporting on the tragedy.
It remains unclear whether either hit Muhammad Abdulazeez, who was shot and killed Thursday after he gunned down four Marines and a sailor at the Navy Operational Support Center in Chattanooga. It's also unclear why they were armed, as it is against Defense Department policy for anyone other than military police or law enforcement to carry weapons on federal property.
A report was distributed among senior Navy leaders during the shooting's aftermath saying Lt. Cmdr. Timothy White, the support center's commanding officer, used his personal firearm to engage Abdulazeez, Navy Times has confirmed with four separate sources. A Navy official also confirmed Monday's Washington Post report indicating one of the slain Marines may have been carrying a 9mm Glock and possibly returned fire on the gunman.
What do you want to bet they face charges for illegally carrying a side arm? [sarcasm]How DARE they try to prevent a terrorist attack on US soil! The gall![/sarcasm]
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 07-21-2015).]
What do you want to bet they face charges for illegally carrying a side arm? [sarcasm]How DARE they try to prevent a terrorist attack on US soil! The gall![/sarcasm]
Yes , local news says the military will investigate if they two service members were authorized to have their guns... Thats total BS ,, In the above article it only mentions one gun , but all local reports mention 2 guns belonging to two different service members were recovered.
News says: Born in Kuwait but spent most of his life here--graduated from a Tenn high school, then graduated from U of T at Chattanooga with a BS degree in electrical engineering and worked at TVA as a student intern. FBI says he was not on their watch list. I guess we can be thankful he didn't use his US college elect engineering education to build bombs.
don't be so greatful, send one to learn, that can inturn teach others..
What do you want to bet they face charges for illegally carrying a side arm? [sarcasm]How DARE they try to prevent a terrorist attack on US soil! The gall![/sarcasm]
That's not exactly right. They are allowed to bring their own guns onto bases as long as they check in and tell someone that they have them. At least that's what someone on here had said a while back, I think it may have been someplace else. So they could have been there with guns as long as they told the right people. Not sure about the carrying of those guns on base, what they are allowed to carry on base, just that they can have them and bring them in as long as the base knows you have them. I think it came out when the Texas base was shot up if I remember right, and we all know my memory is infallible. At least my long term memory is still fairly good.
Nothing personal but I feel safer when I am around people who carry, rather than when it is just a bunch of defenseless pansies who are afraid of their own shadows. Steve
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 07-23-2015).]
That's not exactly right. They are allowed to bring their own guns onto bases as long as they check in and tell someone that they have them. At least that's what someone on here had said a while back, I think it may have been someplace else. So they could have been there with guns as long as they told the right people. Not sure about the carrying of those guns on base, what they are allowed to carry on base, just that they can have them and bring them in as long as the base knows you have them. I think it came out when the Texas base was shot up if I remember right, and we all know my memory is infallible. At least my long term memory is still fairly good.
Nothing personal but I feel safer when I am around people who carry, rather than when it is just a bunch of defenseless pansies who are afraid of their own shadows. Steve
Originally posted by Formula88: Recruiting centers aren't on base.
Aren't military personnel allowed to carry in public anyway? I mean it is a free country and everyone else has a dam gun, I would think those guys would at least have their side arm with them, hell I don't go far without mine.
Sorry 84, I defend your rights. I don't actually get to have them. I can carry when I am off work but not bring a weapon on the base. Makes me so happy to know that if anyone with ill intent sees me in uniform they pretty much know I'm not carrying. I'm a mobile gun free zone. Makes perfect sense to do that to a military member with more weapon training than the average citizen. Heck they trust me to fly a $35 million hovercraft at 50 knots with a pretty expensive M1A1 tank on board but a $300 9mm is just too much for me to handle. Al
At least my long term memory is still fairly good. 
