Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

Heston Allred

Eng 102
Section 76151

"Mosque Madness at Ground Zero"


Andrea Peyser
NY Post
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/mosque_madness_at_ground_zero_OQ3
4EB0MWS0lXuAnQau5uL

"Ban a ground zero mosque?"


Steve Chapman
Chicago Tribune
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-07-22/news/ct-oped-0722-chapman20100722_1_ground-zero-mosque-muslims

Heston Allred
Eng 102
Section 76151

The article "Mosque Madness at Ground Zero" by Andrea Peyser uses a


number of techniques to argue its point. The overall tone of the article is very
openly critical of the mosque. This is supported when the author writes things
like, "The opening date shall live in infamy: Sept. 11, 2011. The tenth anniversary
of the day a hole was punched in the city's heart. How the devil did this happen?"
The language choice from this example is interesting as well. It presents the
author's attitude and feeling toward the topic as almost incredulous. This feeling
of the authors is supported further when she asks the question, "How the devil
did this happen?" As if to say this is absurd, there is no way this should be
happening, we should all be shocked and outraged! Her critical tone and
incredulous attitude continue. She goes on to quote someone working on the
mosque projected and then calling her comments into question "We were

Heston Allred
Eng 102
Section 76151
pleased to see that the community welcomed us as an asset to lower
Manhattan," she added, "the community board approved it." Not so fast" The
headline choice is revealing as well, "Mosque Madness at Ground Zero" is a very
critical title asserting that either the proposed idea to build a mosque is uncalled
for or the attention around it is. I think the author really tries to appeal to pathos in
the article as demonstrated by these examples because her claims are fairly
emotionally charged and rely on opinion and feeling rather than logic or wellgrounded ethical views.

The article "Ban a Ground Zero Mosque?" also has a critical and
incredulous tone just as the first article. This is evidenced by a number of
elements within the article. For one, the title "Ban a Ground Zero Mosque?"
conveys a feeling of incredulity. I feel it is trying to say why would you want to ban
a mosque at ground zero or are it is asking are we serious? The authors tone
can be identified as critical in a number of places. His critiques mainly find
reference to Sarah Palin and since Palin has openly conveyed her opposition to
the mosque the author asserts his support of it by criticizing comments she has
mad against it. He states, "This week, she posted Twitter comments urging

Heston Allred
Eng 102
Section 76151
Muslims and New Yorkers to put a stop to a proposed Islamic community center
near ground zero because the pain from the 9/11 attacks "is too raw, too real."
He also goes onto criticize conservatives as not supporting anything that is
Muslim when he says, For some conservatives, anything Muslim has no place
there. When Tea Party Express chairman Mark Williams was forced to resign for
writing a racist satire, he said he was stepping down so he could concentrate on
fighting the ground zero mosque, which he says would honor "the terrorists'
monkey god." These two examples rely heavily on all three strategies of ethos,
pathos, and logos and so are effective and convincing. He gives examples for the
claims he makes which I would classify as an appeal to logos. The claims he
makes in the two examples cited are based on moral beliefs widely held among
people in the U.S. and so they make an appeal to both ethos and pathos.