Cenk Uygur over at Huffpo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/ban-glenn-beck-from-groun_b_693920.html?ir=Politics), (while wildly taking Glenn Beck out of context (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200509090003)) tells us, "The Park51 Project is actually trying to heal wounds, spread a moderate form of Islam."

That should make everyone feel much, much better now. Swap "Southern Baptist Convention" for "Park51 Project" and "moderate form of Christianity" for "moderate form of Islam" and tell me you're just as on board as you are now.

This is hilarious . We have been told we were intolerant anti-Constitutionists because we dared to suggest that the sources of the funding for the project should be investigated.

Now here we have the same people giving kudos to
Jon Stewart's investigative team for doing the very same thing.
Jon Stewart must be an intolerant anti-Constitutionalist then.

Can anyone provide any other evidence that he is a terrorist or is a supporter of terrorism ? From everything I've read he is pretty much a Westernized Saudi pampered rich playboy.Hello again, tom:

Not really. I was just going by what FOX NEWS reported on their very own FOX NEWS PROGRAM. They're the fair and balanced people aren't they? So, they reported, and I decided.

excon

PS> In case you missed the punch line here, nobody really thinks Al-Waleed bin Talal is a terrorist. It's that FOX NEWS, the driving force behind the protest, can find a terrorist hiding behind ANY Muslim, even if that Muslim happens to be their BOSS..

Bwa, ha ha ha ha.

Fox is the driving force ? And here I thought it was some hate filled crazed blogger named Pam Geller at 'Atlas Shrugs' who is the driving force... at least that's what Huffpo is telling their sheep.

Hello tom:

I'm not responsible for what Huffpo posts, just like you're not responsible for what smoothy posts. WITHOUT FOX having picked it up, and made it their own, Pam Geller couldn't be the driving force behind a yellow cab. That's what I'm telling MY sheep.

You DO know, do you not, that BEFORE FOX decided to make it THEIR cause, Laura Ingraham, reported on the FOX NEWS television network, that "she LIKED" what the Imam was doing by building his mosque?

excon

Give us Ingraham's quote, ex.

Hello again, Steve:

Couldn't find it. I saw it, though. She was FRIENDLY with the Imam and ended the conversation with "I like what you're trying to do", or words to that effect.

excon

The unofficial results* are in for this question:

For/Leaning For the mosque: 26%

Against or Leaning Against the mosque: 68%

Undecided: 6%

CBS says 71% against, 22% for and 11% (?) don't know (and can't add either)

I am aware that some say votes can't determine rights---the founders flipped coins I guess.

*Based on first comment from each responder. Didn't check to see how many changed their minds.

Give us Ingraham's quote, ex.

This needs to be watched and put into context... I believe Ingrahm made the comments on December 21, 2009. Ms. Kahn was explaining they were trying to improve relationships between Muslims and Christians. Laura said something to the effect she was for a center that would do such a thing and she liked what Ms. Kahn was doing as far as trying to improve relationship. I can also post what Laura said concerning this very interview with to Ms. Kahn... she clarified her statements.

She also invited Ms. Kahn on the Factor this week ( she has been filling in for O'Reilly... but the woman declined the invite.)

YouTube - New Islamic Mosque at Ground Zero? (12.21.09) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7WbTv_gsx4)

Anybody with a brain and the rudiments of basic math would realize he meant his grandfather. I'm old enough that President Obama could be my son, and some of my high school classmates served in Vietnam. My uncle, who was 25 years older than I, served in WWII.

But... the lefties LOve Obama... isn't he the smartest man to ever walk the earth... the lefties called him the Smartest president we have ever had...


Mind you, nobody has actually seen his grades anyplace to prove it... he sued to hide them from everyone because he has something to hide... because he is NOT proud of his grades. (and his actions have proved the total opposite, he doesn't even grasp economics 101).


After all... Bush was held to every word that came out of his mouth, Literally... then the Smartest man to ever grace the Whitehouse (Democrats unsubstantiated claim) WILL be held to the very same standard.


You can't Hold Bush to one standard... then totally ignore it when Obama puts his foot in his mouth. Not if you want any resemblance of credibility.

Anyone with a BRAIN knows that...

....isn't he the smartest man to ever walk the earth....................

Smart, you mean the guy can actually put two words together without a script. After eight years of listening to dumbo anyone would appear smart.

I think it is actually smart not to rush to hasty decisions but it is not smart to involve yourself in a debate where you opinion adds nothing

I believe Ingrahm made the comments on December 21, 2009.Hello T:

Good job. Thanks.

excon

Smart, you mean the guy can actually put two words together without a script. After eight years of listening to dumbo anyone would appear smart.

I think it is actually smart not to rush to hasty decisions but it is not smart to involve yourself in a debate where you opinion adds nothing

So... and that ammounts to everyone else's opinions too, including your own.

Any Proof YOU are any smarter than Bush? I haven't seen evidence...

And Proof the REAL Dumbo... Obama... or more Correctly Dumbo Ears... has actually graduated much less got more than a minimally passing grade? No, you can't prove it because he is hiding it... the only reason for him to sopend millions in legal fees to hide something is if he is afraid someone will see it... because they are even WORSE than John Kerrys grades... who we all know had LOWER grades than Bush had.


But then... like any lefty journalist... you never let the facts get in the way of your agenda.

I haven't seen any evidence YOU are able to string two words together and come up with anything that can be proven with actual evidence.

Rather than appologize for every damn time Obama puts his fat foot in his big mouth (and it has happened a LOT)... call it like it is. The man is a OAF... Smart people don't repeatedly say stupid stuff like that. Or is Obama really as stupid as you like to like to think Bush was.

BUt then... why would you base these claims on any reality.

I bet you think he was a super Lawyer too... can you quote cases he has won... how about a list of cases he actually fought on either side in front of an actual judge.


Don't worry... the list is really, really short. You don't have to edit it to fit the post limits.


Another thing... smart guys can remember speaches... particularly smart Lawyers... teleprompters aren't allowed in the courtrooms.

And Proof the the REAL Dumbo...Obama...or more Correctly Dumbo Ears...I quite certain one cannot take someone seriously with post like these.

You mean freedom of speech isn't as sanscrosanct as freedom of religion?

This needs to be watched and put into context...I believe Ingrahm made the comments on December 21, 2009.

Thanks my friend. She appears to be referring to what she said at about the 2 minute mark, applauding the group for their moderate approach to Americanizing and assimilating people.

I quite certain one cannot take someone seriously with post like these.

Oh, but you CAN take posts from people seriously if it's a wisecrack against Bush or Sarah Palin... or any conservative.


What does that have to say about you then? Give that a bit of thought.

You mean freedom of speech isn't as sanscrosanct as freedom of religion??Hello again, smear.

Nobody is saying smoothy doesn't have a right to hate, and to tell you why. I don't want to shut him up. Far from it. He makes MY case for me with every post.

excon

You mean freedom of speech isn't as sanscrosanct as freedom of religion??

Only the Muslims are entitled to freedom of religion... the people defending Islam have spent the last 40 years fighting against anything Christian that might be seen in public.

Only the Muslims are entitled to freedom of religion..Are you Muslim?

You mean freedom of speech isn't as sanscrosanct as freedom of religion??

It doesn't matter which one it is, it's not sacrosanct if it's a conservative trying to exercise the right. I've been arguing this very point here, at Huffpo and my newspaper for weeks and they just gloss right over it. I don't think some of them even realize the freedom of religion they're defending is in the same amendment that guarantees my right to object.

I wonder if everyone's opinion of this issue would've been the same if this was proposed within a year of the actually attack on our country.
Somehow I kind of doubt it.

Hello again, smear.

Nobody is saying smoothy doesn't have a right to hate, and to tell you why. I don't want to shut him up. Far from it. He makes MY case for me with every post.

excon

Well, how about the right of you and the left hating anything Christian... how about you all hating anything Conservative...


Because News flash... Obama ISN'T the Messiah... and Mohammed was nothing more than a Murderer and a child molestor... all of which history proves. Some people chose to whorsip a pedophile... you don't prcreate with a prepubescent girl. Much less call her a wife.

Know what... YOU make my case about the bigotry of the left.

Defend Foreign Islamic Extremeists RIGHT (an uproven one) to put up a Mohammed Attah Meorial Mosque... then Fight tooth and nail every time there is a mention of CHrist or Christianity as has been done the last 40 years roughly.


Funny how you can so easily flip from Aetheism being your goal to Supporting Islam at the flip of a switch.

When did you convert to worshiping the moon god?

We all know the Left HATES christians... everything the left has done has been anti Christian. IN fact... when was the last time the left has defended Christianity?

In case you didn't know... Islam isn't a big fan of abortion, or women's rights... or even civil rights.

That's in line with the Lefts goal of socialism... but it flys in the face of everything else they have been ranting over for more years than I can remember.

how about you all hating anything Conservative..
Other than your nonsensical fanatical rap haven't you noticed that the Current Events forum is pretty focused on hating everything that's remotely liberal?

Other than your nonsensical fanatical rap haven't you noticed that the Current Events forum is pretty focused on hating everything that's remotely liberal?

Really... where? Certainly NOT this thread. Read the first post again.

Really.....where? https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/

Keep going back page by page.

I see a lot of griping about the left not getting their way or complainintg.

And sorry... the left being the party of gripes and complaints for longer than I have walked the earth... deserves a bit of what they have been so generous dishing out in return.

I see a lot of griping about the left not getting their way or complainintg.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Hello again,

So, tom and Steve, how far out should the Muslim free zone extend? Smoothy already told us he believes it should run from sea to shining sea.

excon

PS> Didn't mean to leave you out, smear. Or anybody else who has a number, assuming 2 blocks is too close.

So, tom and Steve, how far out should the Muslim free zone extend? Smoothy already told us he believes it should run from sea to shining sea.

I never called for a Muslim free zone anywhere.

Hello again, Steve:

Come on. You're going to make me pull teeth? I don't know why. Look. You think, the mosque is TOO close to ground zero. How far is NOT too close?

Yes, I'm going to call THE area that you're going to tell me is TOO CLOSE, a Muslim free zone. You're free to choose some other politically correct phrase, but it IS, what it IS.

excon

So...and that ammounts to everyone elses opinions too, including your own.

Any Proof YOU are any smarter than Bush? I haven't seen evidence...

Is this the pot and the kettle?



And Proof the the REAL Dumbo...Obama...or more Correctly Dumbo Ears...has actually graduated much less got more than a minimally passing grade? No, you can't prove it because he is hiding it...the only reason for him to sopend millions in legal fees to hide something is if he is afraid someone will see it...because they are even WORSE than John Kerrys grades...who we all know had LOWER grades than Bush had.

FERPA law protects student records. There is absolutely NO reason why you have to see his transcripts. None. Or would you like to set the precendence that any "public interest" person's personal documents are no longer protected? And by "public interest", I would want to know the grades of every single person in the US Military, every Judge, every City Council member, every police officer, every sewer digger--anyone that works for the public, essentially. If they're not smart enough (read that as "got good grades", we shouldn't pay them with taxpayer money, according to your argument.

I know PLENTY of people who are intelligent that did not get good grades in college--myself included. You have no idea what may or may not contribute to someone's bad grades, either. In my case, it was working too many hours to effectively study, along with pretty much starving because I wasn't poor enough to get food stamps. Add to that a case of depression and several years of counseling to get over my daughter's adoption, and you have 6 quarters of straight F's and a college dismissal. That has NOTHING to do with my intelligence.

And some of the smartest people I know don't have a college degree.



I haven't seen any evidence YOU are able to string two words together and come up with anything that can be proven with actual evidence.

Again with the pot and kettle.


Rather than appologize for every damn time Obama puts his fat foot in his big mouth (and it has happened a LOT)....call it like it is. The man is a OAF.... Smart people don't repeatedly say stupid stuff like that. Or is Obama really as stupid as you like to like to think Bush was.

Please show me an intelligent president in the last 40 years that wrote his own speeches and had thoughts in his head that weren't part of the party agenda.


Another thing....smart guys can remember speaches....particularly smart Lawyers....teleprompters aren't allowed in the courtrooms.

I can't remember a speech to save my life. I really can't. If I don't have note cards, I cannot make it through a speech for longer than 2 minutes.

I guess I'm just not very smart.

Only the Muslims are entitled to freedom of religion.....the people defending Islam have spent the last 40 years fighting against anything Christian that might be seen in public.

No--the people who are NOT CHRISTIAN (which means they support the Muslims because they're in the same boat) have spent the last 50 years trying to reach a separation of church and state.

You can display any damned thing you want on your own front yard (which is in public). But damned if I want a Christian display ONLY at the courthouse or City Hall.

If you represent ONE religion, you have to represent them ALL---and the only time Christians get p!ssy about it is at Christmas, when all the REST of us have major holidays too.

Same with prayer in school--I don't care if Christians pray SILENTLY to themselves in school. But if a Christian prayer (or Muslim prayer, for that matter, or Jewish, or whatever you want) is said OUT LOUD, with the SANCTION of the school, then EVERY religion needs to be represented.

We aren't fighting to get rid of Christianity, you know. We're fighting to get Christians to recognize that they're not the national religion.

It doesn't matter which one it is, it's not sacrosanct if it's a conservative trying to exercise the right. I've been arguing this very point here, at Huffpo and my newspaper for weeks and they just gloss right over it. I don't think some of them even realize the freedom of religion they're defending is in the same amendment that guarantees my right to object.

And I've said over and over that you have EVERY right to object. Object away!

What I've said is that I think you're WRONG to object--which is ALSO within MY freedom of opinion.

What the point is, though, is that regardless how many Americans object--it's still probably going to be built, because NO laws are being broken in the building of it.

I wonder if everyone's opinion of this issue would've been the same if this was proposed within a year of the actually attack on our country.
Somehow I kinda doubt it.

Mine would be.

I'm just worried now about what the real haters will do to the mosque after being riled by the conservative media. :(

What the point is, though, is that regardless how many Americans object--it's still probably going to be built, because NO laws are being broken in the building of it.Hello again, Synn:

This brings me back to my other question of the opposition... They SAY they support the RIGHT of this citizen to build. Consequently, their objections are nothing more than opinion, as you point out...

UNLESS, that is, they'd REALLY like some government agency to STOP it somehow. Tom mentioned some local bureaucrat who had a plan to take the mosque via eminent domain. Tom didn't object. In fact, he kind of LIKED it.

So, my question for the Constitution loving conservatives here, is this: IF the local zoning board changed their position, and ruled against the mosque, would you support the GOVERNMENT, or the victims of religious repression?

Since that question still lingers, my confusion about their STAUNCH support for the First Amendment, does too.

excon

Because News flash.....Obama ISN'T the Messiah......and Mohammed was nothing more than a Murderer and a child molestor....all of which history proves. Some people chose to whorsip a pedophile....you don't prcreate with a prepubescent girl. Much less call her a wife.

When did you convert to worshiping the moon god?

We all know the Left HATES christians....everything the left has done has been anti Christian. IN fact...when was the last time the left has defended Christianity?

In case you didn't know....Islam isn't a big fan of abortion, or womens rights....or even civil rights.

Thats in line with the Lefts goal of socialism....but it flys in the face of everything else they have been ranting over for more years than I can remember.


I'm really an Independent, Smoothy. I'm not Left OR Right--because I think they're BOTH too extreme.

But... to answer the points in your post above---YOUR Messiah was descended from people who thought incest was okay (Lot and his daughters), who had multiple wives (Abraham and Jacob come immediately to mind), who held slaves, who were willing to cast a woman and child into the desert because the first wife was jealous (Sarah casting out Hagar and Ishmael), who have revered people like the misogynist St. Paul, who punished people for adultery by stoning them to death, who sent men into battle to die so that they could get their wives (David sent Uriah to die so that he could have Bathsheba)---and you want me to take seriously that someone ELSE'S gods/messiahs might not be good people? Okey-dokey, then.

I converted to the moon GODDESS when I was 18--so nearly half my life ago.

Christians aren't exactly big fans of abortion or women's rights either. Zero points for you for bringing that up. And 60 years ago, the MAJORITY of Christians weren't exactly standing up and saying "Hey! It's wrong that we treat blacks as lesser people! Let's invite them to our churches, schools, and neighborhoods". Again--some of that has changed, but you're not convincing me that Christianity is better than Islam with THAT argument.

I don't support Islam any more or any less than I support Christianity. I'm frankly JUST as outraged that they won't let the Greek Orthodox Church destroyed on 9/11 rebuild as I am that people think that the mosque shouldn't be built. Build them BOTH, in my opinion.

I'm just worried now about what the real haters will do to the mosque after being riled by the conservative media. :(

Has there been any incident with the mosque 4 blocks away ? I think it's speculation like yours that puts thoughts like that in the minds of "real haters".

I'm just worried now about what the real haters will do to the mosque after being riled by the conservative media. :(

I already asked once, should we follow the example of those who stole the Mojave desert cross after it was ruled constitutional? Or the union thugs that reacted to tea parties with violence?

I think it's interesting that the very people who not only mock and protest Christianity in this country but spent 8 years wringing their hands over the prospect of a Bush theocracy, are wholeheartedly defending this mosque and their effort to spread Islam, the religion behind 9/11.

Come on. You're gonna make me pull teeth??

Yes.

And I've said over and over that you have EVERY right to object. Object away!

Then can we say we're both on the same page on that count?


What I've said is that I think you're WRONG to object--which is ALSO within MY freedom of opinion.

And I think you're wrong to think I'm wrong, so there.


What the point is, though, is that regardless how many Americans object--it's still probably going to be built, because NO laws are being broken in the building of it.

I've said it many times on various forums that they have the right and already have the green light, so that's another are of agreement. I'm sure it will be built, but I won't guarantee it will be built there. The public has the right to pressure them otherwise - as has happened with countless projects all across this country - and that's what's happening here. We're all just exercising our rights.

Hello again, Synn:

This brings me back to my other question of the opposition... They SAY they support the RIGHT of this citizen to build. Consequently, their objections are nothing more than opinion, as you point out....

UNLESS, that is, they'd REALLY like some government agency to STOP it somehow. Tom mentioned some local bureaucrat who had a plan to take the mosque via eminent domain. Tom didn't object. In fact, he kinda LIKED it.
So, my question for the Constitution loving conservatives here, is this: IF the local zoning board changed their position, and ruled against the mosque, would you support the GOVERNMENT, or the victims of religious repression?

Since that question still lingers, my confusion about their STAUNCH support for the First Amendment, does too.

excon

You are correct that I voiced no opinion about it . But you are wrong to assume that means I support his idea . Given the position I've already taken on issues of imminent domain I would think you know I oppose it. Now I've made it clear I hope.

As to your question about how far away ;well there is one that is 4 blocks away that no one is paying any attention to at all. But maybe that is because it wasn't built as a victory mosque with a name referring to political Islamic conquest.

By the way ;the politician I mentioned is a primary candidate for Governor and I don't support him over his opponent.

Hello again, tom:

I got it about eminent domain. You STILL dodged the question. IF the ZONING board reversed it's decision in light of the overwhelming opposition to the mosque, WHO'S side will you support?

Perhaps you're evading, because even YOU don't like your own answer?

excon

I would support the zoning board of course. I think the opposition is a legitimate form of political expression just like I think boycotts and demonstrations against enterprises and individuals also exercising their Constitutional rights are legitimate .

Oh goodness.

Speechlesstx and I agreed on something.

Oh goodness.

Speechlesstx and I agreed on something.

Think back, it's certainly not the first time.

Think back, it's certainly not the first time.

Oh I know---it's just usually rare :D

I would support the zoning board of course. I think the opposition is a legitimate form of political expressionHello again, tom:

I agree. Opposition IS a legitimate form of protest and political expression. It's reserved for YOU to do, a citizen. It's YOUR right.

Government, on the other hand, must obey the law. You, yourself SAID, the First Amendment IS the law. You, yourself, SAID he has the RIGHT to build. You, yourself SAID that you staunchly SUPPORT the Constitution...

But, as soon as a local zoning board denies a citizen a Constitutional RIGHT, that you SAY he HAS, you CAVE and immediately jump BEHIND the government in OPPOSING the citizen seeking his Constitutional rights.

The above is overwhelming evidence that you, INDEED, do NOT support his right to build, and do NOT support the First Amendment, no matter how many times you say it...

excon

Oh I know---it's just usually rare :D

Ok, now that may be so. Oops, we agreed again. :D

Ex , if the Cordoba initiative felt aggrieved by the boards decision I have no doubt they would let the courts determine if the board was wrong.
You ;like the President are doing academic exercises.
If you want to see where your scenario goes then watch the case in Obama's Chi-town where local officials have turned down an attempt to open a Mosque in a former hotdog restaurant .

If you were to ask me about it in that case then I would probably agree with you .
But the locating the victory Mosque where Imam Rauf wants to build it is a greater matter than his Constitutional rights. I equate it to the nonsense of that idiot pastor who protests funerals of fallen heroes .
He has that right to protest ,but I think accomdations should be made for the grieving family . I think their right to hold a funeral in peace without his vitriolic ranting outweighs his right to protest.
Likewise ,so long as one family member of the 9-11 vicitims objects to the placing of a victory mosque near what the President agrees is sacred ground... I stand with them.

Why do you keep saying "victory" mosque?

Why do you keep saying "victory" mosque?

1,300 years of History proves it is... Why do you choose to pretend its not?

Well I guess that settles it then - kill them all?

Why do you keep saying "victory" mosque?

That is what it is... and it has already been explained on this posting. (#12 and #393)

So it records its domination over you?

But the locating the victory Mosque where Imam Rauf wants to build it is a greater matter than his Constitutional rights.Hello again, tom:

Let's be CLEAR. According to you, he has this supposed "right" according to the Constitution... But, the government has a GREATER right to STOP him if ____ (fill in the blank).

Whatever document you're reading from, that gives the government THAT right, ISN'T the Constitution of these United States. I've read it. I don't see ANY mention of those rights. Perhaps you're making them up out of whole cloth. I don't know. What I DO know, is that you don't SUPPORT our beloved Constitution, DESPITE your protestations otherwise.

excon

Ex, With all due respect and I do respect all religions whether you believe it or not-----

A suitable distance would be beyond the call to worship music so visitors to the memorial can mourn in peace, well at least without that insensitivity in that area.

I know about church bells. It's not the same and we all know it.

Let's be clear .

There is a difference between the right and if it should be built.to answer your question... yes... The very reason he has the right to build it where it is planned is because the government already said he could.

That is what Madame Mimi meant when she called it a local zoning issue ;and even the thick headed President understands the distinction. That is why he made his clarification before he went on his excellent vacation.

That is what it is ...and it has already been explained on this posting. (#12 and #393)Hello again, tom:

You know that Constitution you SAY your support? I read the First Amendment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about being free from government interference in the practice of your religion UNLESS what you're building is a VICTORY to something. Nope. It doesn't say that at all. Still making stuff up about it, huh? You call that staunch support? Dude!

I googled Victory Church (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2499889). I got 7 million hits. They're certainly declaring victory over something. Maybe we should ban them too. Whadya think?

excon

'Victory mosque' yields 16+ million hits and explains why they are called victory mosques.

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1)

Where does it give the right to a Muslim Terrorits Victory Memorial? And how is that any different than the KKK having Cross burnings in sight of a black community?

Where does it give the right to a Muslim Terrorits Victory Memorial? Hello again, smoothy:

It's right there next to the one that gives gays the right to marry. You can't see it? Oh, well. I've tried to teach you Constitutional stuff before. You ain't interested, so I'm not going to bother. But, it's THERE.

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

It's right there next to the one that gives gays the right to marry. You can't see it? Oh, well. I've tried to teach you Constitutional stuff before. You ain't interested, so I'm not gonna bother. But, it's THERE.

excon

Really, there is over 40 years of court cases and precidence for the left FIGHTING against any religious component to a Memorial of any type... Now you want to change that because it is inconvieniently getting in the way of the lefts support of a Mohammed Attah Memorial Mosque?


So... the Muslims have double secret rights that the US public can't see... but You assure us are there...

Sorry, you got to prove it.

Sorry, you gotta prove it.Hello smoothy:

If you can't read simple English, I can't help you.

excon

I'm quite fluent in Englishn and at least as fluent as you... nowhere in the Bill of rights are the Muslims guaranteed the right to build a Memorial to terrorists, or anyone else.

After all, the Left argued in MANY cases preventing any mention of Religion in memorials. Specifically fought Christians on everything ever step of the way... Now you aregue Muslims have the right to do anything they want in the name of Islam, and real Americans aren't allowed to say or do anything?

And Obama could not secretly grant his Muslim Brothers (his words, not mine) rights because
That requires ratification by the states... and that hasn't happened in my lifetime or HIS because we are only months apart in age..

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1)

Where does it give the right to a Muslim Terrorits Victory Memorial? And how is that any different than the KKK having Cross burnings in sight of a black community?

See bolded areas.

And let's go back to that church thing if you're going to bring that up. How is it ANY different to have a church in the town of Salem, MA, in site of the areas of witch burnings, either?

And I'm starting to second Excon's question: How far away would it be OKAY for the KKK to burn their cross from the black community? More than 2 blocks, obviously. How about 4 blocks? Would 4 blocks do you?

Last I heard, building a religious building and community center wasn't a hate crime.

Really, there is over 40 years of court cases and precidence for the left FIGHTING against any religious component to a Memorial of any type....Now you want to change that because it is inconvieniently getting in the way of the lefts support of a Mohammed Attah Memorial Mosque?


So...the Muslims have double secret rights that the US public can't see....but You assure us are there....

Sorry, you gotta prove it.

It's not a PUBLIC memorial (if it is even a memorial at all)--it's a private one. You can put any kind of religious crap on a PRIVATE memorial you want. Please see any gravestone for proof of this.

It's ALSO not on public land, nor is it on the actual site of the WTC buildings.

I really don't get you, Smoothy. They're not exercising ANY right that anyone else in American can't exercise. They're ALSO not doing anything that a Christian church hasn't done before.

Where's the problem? Is the problem REALLY just that they're Muslims?

I googled Victory Church. I got 7 million hits. They're certainly declaring victory over something. Maybe we should ban them too. Whadya think?

Do some more Googling and show me where these churches with the name 'Victory' in their name are sited on the place where a 'victory' took place in the name of that religion . I mentioned 3 famous ones and could've named others like :
(this one Synn will appreaciate )Muhammad the prophet conqueror led jihdists into Mecca and turned the pagans' worship spot, the Ka'aba, into the Masjid al-Haram Mosque.

1387, jihadists conquered Thessaloniki .They turned the historic Church of Aghia Sophia, which housed the relics of Saint Gregorios Palamas, into a mosque.

Perhaps the most famous incident besides the Mosque on Temple Mount (which the Muslims in Jerusalem today are doing everything possible to destroy the historic record that there ever was a Jewish Temple there ) is the sacking of Constantinople and the conversion of the Byzantine church of Hagia Sophia, into the Ayasofya Mosque. The Sophia was the most important Christian church of it's time for over a millennium before the jihadist conquest.
Like they did more recently to the Buddhas of Bamyan Afghanistan ,they set about destroying and defacing the beautiful mossaics of the church.

This has been a pattern repeated throughout history to modern days. A more recent example occurred in April 2002 when jihadists broke into the Church of the Nativity in Jerusalem.

They took priests and nuns hostage and used them as human shields against the IDF .
In the 2 weeks they occupied the church they trashed it.

I know these are inconvenient facts ,but they are true. The naming the project the Cordoba initiative conjurs up images of a pattern repeated throughout history.
At a minimum the Imam Rauf ,if he is true to his word of a desire to build bridges should accept the generous offer of Governor Patterson and relocate to a site less controversial.

You know that Constitution you SAY your support? I read the First Amendment. It doesn't say ANYTHING about being free from government interference in the practice of your religion UNLESS what you're building is a VICTORY to something. Nope. It doesn't say that at all. Still making stuff up about it, huh? You call that staunch support? Dude!


As I said in one of my 1st replies . The decision of the local boards would pass the 'compelling interest test '( Oregon v. Smith) .

As a supporter of Roe abortion case ,and the recent gay marriage decision you should apprectiate the' compelling interest test as it was used to advance those causes.

As I said in one of my 1st replies . The decision of the local boards would pass the 'compelling interest test '( Oregon v. Smith) Hello again, tom:

I understand your argument. I just don't agree with your conclusion. I do not think that someone who believes a states compelling interest trumps a citizens Constitutional rights, has a good grasp of WHAT the Constitution is all about, no matter what he says. The two ideas are in conflict with each other. They're NOT compatible. They're skitzoid. You CAN'T believe both.

But... I KNOW you understand your rights in the context of the Second Amendment. You'll never convince me that you'd lay down for ANY state who outlaw guns because of a compelling state interest... If you WOULD, then for SURE you don't understand what our rights are all about.

excon

EX the 2nd amendment is already limited due to compelling state and local interests .That is why registration has been ruled Constitutional . The courts have set limits to how much a state or locality can regulate guns.

The courts and Congress have also under the same philosophy already set parameters on the states right to regulate where houses of worship can be built. Actually you can thank Republicans and conservatives for the movement towards limiting local regulations in that regard . However the courts still hold a locality has a right to regulate where a house of worship can be built and if one can be built.

As I noted already municipalities have the authority to limit houses of worship ranging in size from mega churches ,to individual prayer meetings conducted in private homes.

As I noted already municipalities have the authority to limit houses of worship ranging in size from mega churches ,to individual prayer meetings conducted in private homes.Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree with the above... However, in THIS instance, should the local zoning board change its mind due to the local pressure, the ONLY reason this house of worship would being denied, is the religion of the congregation.

That, is just plain unconstitutional.

excon

So long as the zoning rules chanages affect all religions it is nondescriminatory.
They could change the zoning to make any new occupancy in the area commercial .
The problem that comes back to bite conservatives was the Republican introducing and getting passed the 'Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000',which suddenly transferred to the federal government local land use control.That constitutes an obvious violation of the Constitution's federalism. If land use is not an inherent local concern, then virtually nothing is. Also the law itself is a violation of the establishment clause by Congress.It systematically favors religious organizations over their secular neighbors.
Thereare plenty of real valid reasons for localities to prevent the placement of houses of worship for many reasons beyond the assumption of religious discrimination.But now ,that argument becomes the 1st line of attack whenever placement of houses of worship is contested.
It will be a hard case for anyone to prove NYC discriminates against Muslims . Since 9-11 there have been in excess of 140 new mosques built within the city limits.

Again, I urge them to consider Governor Patterson's reasonable solution.

Hello again, tom:

You've said the state CAN interject itself because it HAS a "compelling interest" in the outcome. WHAT interest would that be?

You mentioned that it was used in the recent gay marriage decision in California, so the cases are similar. However, in California, the compelling state interest was spreading FREEDOM. To me, that IS a state interest... The case in NY looks to be the OPPOSITE.

What possible state interest does NY have in BLOCKING the mosque??

excon

For starters ;The same one that makes it a bad idea to have the trial of KSM in downtown Manhattan .

How about some facts EX?
Twice as many hits for victory mosques as victory churches and clear understanding of what a victory mosque means.
You aked how far away--i gave you reasonable criteria.
I told you your question had generated 68% against, similar to national poll.
I told you that founding fathers voted by majority to determine what rights would be (in so many words).
But you like to play "shade tree lawyer" instead. Do you have credentials to analyze complex legal precedent(s)?
Are you just blowing smoke?

Do you have credentials to analyze complex legal precedent(s)?Hello smear:

I'm a high school dropout.

excon

How about some facts EX?
(1) Twice as many hits for victory mosques as victory churches and clear understanding of what a victory mosque means.
(2) You aked how far away--i gave you reasonable criteria.
(3) I told you your question had generated 68% against, similar to national poll.
(4) I told you that founding fathers voted by majority to determine what rights would be (in so many words).
(5) But you like to play "shade tree lawyer" instead. Do you have credentials to analyze complex legal precedent(s)?
(6) Are you just blowing smoke?Hello again, smear:

I guess you deserve an answer.

(1) The NAME of the congregation, or the INTENT of a citizen has NO bearing on his RIGHTS under the Constitution. Even Christian pastors who want to replace our law with biblical law, can start a church...

(2) In THIS country, we enjoy our rights EVERYWHERE we go. Your Muslim free zone is an anathema to that idea.

(3) It's true, the majority of Americans don't want it there. However, our rights aren't based upon what the majority want.

(4) Yes, they did. You're not saying, are you, that because they voted them in, we can vote them out? That's true. But, not like you're saying. We CAN change the Constitution by amending it, and having 2/3 of the states ratify it.

(5) I DO like to play shade tree lawyer. How could you tell? I'm STILL a high school dropout.

(6) Yes, I've been known to blow smoke.

excon

I appreciate your comments. I could give you a few analogies (like guns) but I detest analogies.
The facts at hand about each issue are the only ones that really matter. I don't think the present day and circumstances can wait years for amendments to be processed. It could be done differently but it would take 50 years to get that settled. I believe the citizens will force decisions on this matter like they did with Dubai port takeover plan. Yes, that will be good enough for me. There is too much at stake. I'll stop here. Thanks and I think you do a good job of spurring on discussion. If you really are a high school dropout, I think you have certainly earned your G.E.D. and more right here at AMHD! But my vote is still in the No column.

I appreciate your comments. I could give you a few analogies (like guns) but I detest analogies.Hello again, smear:

I'm remarkably consistent in my support for the Bill of Rights. I'll go to my grave supporting YOUR right to own a gun, just like I will for this Muslim to open his mosque, or for gay people who only want to get married..

excon

NYC comptroller John Liu said yesterday he is willing to consider approving a public subsidy in the form of tax-exempt bonds to help finance the victory Mosque. There is a possibility here that the people of the city ;who overwhelmingly oppose the construction where it is being considered ,will be forced to finance it's construction through their taxes.

Is this a violation of the establishment clause ? Or would it be considered some kind of discrimination against the 14th amendment because the city helps finance other non-profit construction under the New York City's Industrial Development Authority ?

Maybe it would qualify as a stimulus project. It has certainly had a stimulating effect here. There is about $ 282 billion left if I read recovery.gov correctly. Take that Iran! Or maybe a good old fashioned Bash the Debunkers program.

Is this a violation of the establishment clause ?Hello again, tom:

Uhhhh, yeah!

excon

Hello again,

In honor of Martin Luther King, I'm going to repeat some of what he said 47 years ago today. It STILL chokes me up.

"I have a dream today...

This will be the day, when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country, 'tis of thee , sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my father's died, land of the pilgrim's pride,
From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.
And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. But not only that: Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom [to] ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last."

excon

I decided to do some research on the people who are behind the building of the mosque. The guy who is paying for it is VERY fishy. For one, five years ago he was a waiter at a restaurant! He then ALL of a sudden became a real state buyer/seller? He has bought several buildings. One for around $280 million, and guess what: He paid for it with cash that he got from A LOAN! Do you still trust this guy? I don't. He also bought the building that will be the mosque for $4.8 million, and guess what: He bought it with cash from ANOTHER LOAN. So he is buying real estate with SOMEONE ELSE'S money! The person who is providing him with the loans is clearly not someone you can trust. Nor is the guy building the mosque. MOST Americans don't support the building of the mosque, but no one seems to care what they think. If you ask me, I think Obama is a traitor to the western world, he is bowing down and sucking up to the demands of the Muslim world. The funny thing is, if the Muslims were the ones running America, and the Christians wanted to build a church near ground zero, IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

Hello again,

In honor of Martin Luther King, I'm going to repeat some of what he said 47 years ago today. It STILL chokes me up.

"I have a dream today......

This will be the day, when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:

My country, 'tis of thee , sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.

Land where my father's died, land of the pilgrim's pride,
From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.
And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. But not only that: Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.

From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom [to] ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old spiritual:

Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last."

excon

Not a bad post at all!
Especially from an Atheist.
Methinks ye may be closer to realization of truth than you admit.

PS: I KNOW it's a quote, but, hey, you posted it.

guess what: He payed for it with cash that he got from A LOAN! Do you still trust this guy? I don't. He also bought the building that will be the mosque for $4.8 million, and guess what: He bought it with cash from ANOTHER LOAN. So he is buying real estate with SOMEONE ELSE'S money! Hello I:

It may come as a shock to you, but, in this country, MOST real estate is bought with someone else's money.

excon

Hello I:

It may come as a shock to you, but, in this country, MOST real estate is bought with someone else's money.

excon

Yep that's why we have the Atlantic Financial Crisis about to go into the double dip

I decided to do some research on the people who are behind the building of the mosque. The guy who is paying for it is VERY fishy. For one, five years ago he was a waiter at a restaurant! He then ALL of a sudden became a real state buyer/seller? He has bought several buildings. One for around $280 million, and guess what: He payed for it with cash that he got from A LOAN! Do you still trust this guy? I don't. He also bought the building that will be the mosque for $4.8 million, and guess what: He bought it with cash from ANOTHER LOAN. So he is buying real estate with SOMEONE ELSE'S money! The person who is providing him with the loans is clearly not someone you can trust. Nor is the guy building the mosque. MOST Americans don't support the building of the mosque, but no one seems to care what they think. If you ask me, I think Obama is a traitor to the western world, he is bowing down and sucking up to the demands of the Muslim world. The funny thing is, if the Muslims were the ones running America, and the Christians wanted to build a church near ground zero, IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN.

And MOST Americans are WRONG.

Let me tell you something. In 1942, MOST Americans were all for deporting anyone of Japanese descent, regardless how long their family had lived in the United States--and some of those families had been here longer than MY family had at the time.

In 1948, MOST Americans were okay with "Separate but Equal" schools, and did not want their children going to school with black children.

In 1917, MOST Americans were against the manufacture, sale or transportation of alcohol. It resulted in the 18th Amendment to the Constitution. Thankfully, it only took them 16 years to realize they were wrong and overturn the Amendment.

In 1852, MOST Americans didn't think that women were equal to men, and they could not vote to change that themselves.

In 1831, MOST Americans were for the Indian Removal Act that resulted 46,000 American Indians (you know--those people we stole this country from to begin with?) were removed from 25 million acres of land. Approximately 10,000 of these American Indians died on the way to their new lands, a result of lack of food, exposure to elements, and incompetent (U.S. Government provided) guides.

So just because MOST Americans want or don't want something doesn't make MOST Americans right.

Why do people persist in thinking that this country is a straight democracy?

So just because MOST Americans want or don't want something doesn't make MOST Americans right.

Like the MOST Americans who voted for Obama?

Democrats (and I am still one but hanging by a thread because of issues like these) are already in deep "stuff". The Dems who are members of the majority that you say are wrong on this issue, will not support candidates who are in favor of "unwise" (per the president as I read what he said)
Do you know where all your reps and potential reps stand on this issue? I sure don't--Mine aren't talking. I wonder why?

No threat. I am in no position to make threats. I feel instead like I am threatened---My party (sorta) is handing long term control of America over to the other side on a silver platter.

Ex's constitutional stand may be best for American values but many of us will suffer for it for the rest of our lives, on many different fronts. It looked wrong at first glance and it and I haven't noticed one convert after all the discussions here. Maybe I missed it. I am tracking for and against numbers but after 84 pages I am getting buried I must admit.

As regards consideration of minority opinions, Jefferson said ""Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."
Thomas Jefferson

So even the bill of rights could support the tyrants will.

We like to listen to the people who earn their living taking their best guess at what the founders intended to say. Maybe we should study what they said at the same time they were developing our constitution.

Be careful what you wish for, Boehner may give it to you. He's not my guy but he might be if Dems accept nonsense and ignore wisdom like the top dem recently did.

So just because MOST Americans want or don't want something doesn't make MOST Americans right. Hello again, smear:

The Constitution acts as a buffer against reactionary thought. That's because we don't make very good decisions when we're scared... I don't want to change THAT at all...

But, the founders didn't leave YOU out. IF MOST Americans want to change their Constitution, they CAN.

excon

Ex,

Thanks for the soundbites.

I look forward to your upcoming comments on Speaker Boehner's management of congress.

Maybe we will be able go to the mosque(s) for some sympathy but don't count on it.

When considering Jefferson we should all be thankful that he was on assignment in Paris at the time of the Constitutional debate. He clearly was anti-Federalist . Had he been at the Convention ;I don't believe we would have formed the government that we did.

Hello again, smear:

Didja read about the arson at the building site of the new mosque in Murfreesboro, Tn??

THOSE are the kinds of decisions we make when we're scared... Hmmm... I wonder if those arsonists grasped that THEY were the terrorists?? Nahh, they didn't.

I wonder if YOU grasp that THIS act of terrorism IS a result of the controversy in NY. Nahhh. You don't.

excon

I feel instead like I am threatened---My party (sorta) is handing long term control of America over to the other side on a silver platter.
Close but I feel the problem started when your government started handing your country over to the corporations (both sides are guilty). The citizens has lost control, big biz is in charge whether you like it or not.

Hello again, smear:

The Constitution acts as a buffer against reactionary thought. That's because we don't make very good decisions when we're scared... I don't wanna change THAT at all...

But, the founders didn't leave YOU out. IF MOST Americans want to change their Constitution, they CAN.

excon

Excon,

**greenie**

Xoxoxox

Synn

Close but I feel the problem started when your government started handing your country over to the corporations (both sides are guilty). The citizens has lost control, big biz is in charge whether you like it or not.

NK,

This is getting bad. That's TWO of these I've given out today!

**Greenie**

Xoxoxox

Synn

Karm, if I knew how I would give you a greenie too.

The outrages come so fast I can't keep up. But if I were to dwell on the corp. free speech issue I would have to throw in the towel.

We all know about the 1% controlling a majority of the wealth. Some say 20% control more than 90% of wealth, along with controlling all the pols they can buy.

I'll keep trying. There is no other choice.

These issues have one thing ( a lot more if I was smarter) in common. They both look wrong at (my) first glance and they don't improve with age.

These issues have one thing ( a lot more if I was smarter) in common. They both look wrong at (my) first glance and they don't improve with age.Hello again, smear:

We're no different. My knee jerks too. I have FIRST glances. I'm reactionary. I'm small-minded.

Then, after my knee STOPS jerking, and I have time to look at these issues through the prism of our Constitution, and our American ideas of tolerance, and acceptance, the issues DO IMPROVE with age for me. Sorry it doesn't happen that way for you.

By the way, it ALSO helps that I don't believe we're at war with Islam.

excon

Hello again, smear:

Didja read about the arson at the building site of the new mosque in Murfreesboro, Tn???

THOSE are the kinds of decisions we make when we're scared... Hmmm... I wonder if those arsonists grasped that THEY were the terrorists???? Nahh, they didn't.

I wonder if YOU grasp that THIS act of terrorism IS a result of the controversy in NY. Nahhh. You don't.

excon

First off lets get this straight. We don't know what really went on at the site of the new mosque. The only thing we know is that some equiptment was set on fire and only 1 of 4 was actually set on fire. For all we know it was done for insurance. So lets not start with the terrorism bandwagon just yet.


Ref:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/08/29/national/a100408D93.DTL&tsp=1

For all of those who call me a racist, let me point out to you that I'm not. I have friends of all ethnic groups, white, black, I don't care about skin color, I'm a generally nice person. The thing that angers me is that Islam is taking over THE WHOLE WORLD. Now, I don't care what religion people believe in, there's a thing called freedom of religion which is a good thing. BUT the problem is, the Muslims who are taking over Europe are not just practicing their religion, they pushing to get their way, which they are. They want Sharia law in the whole world, and we all know how brutal Sharia law is. Ever hear about women being stoned to death? Ever hear about non-muslims having their heads cut off? Yes, I'm well aware of the Crusades, and how millions of Muslims were killed, which is wrong. But, for the past 400 years or so, MOST Christians have softened. And Islam? It hasn't softened. It has only become more brutal. Today, Islam is taking over the whole world. It is the fastest growing religion and grows by about 280% every year. Europe is a going to be "Europai" in about 50 years. The Muslim leaders in Europe are abusing the laws in Europe. They are taking pork off school menus, etc.. AND they want ALL of Europe to have Sharia law. Do you see Christians and Jews forcing their laws on the Muslims living in Europe? No you don't. The European politicians silence anyone who talks trash about Islam, but they encourage all negative talk about Christianity and Jewdaism. European politicians all say that "Islam is such a peaceful religion and it's an honor to have them living in our great countries". How is it great? They attack police, make threats, burn your flags, and cause violent riots yelling "Allah Akabar" Sure, that is SO peaceful.

SfYAhQ4I4Uk
This happens EVERY DAY in Sweden. 75% of crime in Sweden is committed by non-ethnic Swedes, mainly Muslims.

DO STILL THINK ISLAM IS SO PEACEFUL?

dkKGCLeJXEc
WATCH THE WHOLE VIDEO. They clearly say that they are going to take over all of Belgium and make it an Islamic state. Which will probably happen sadly, because over 60% of new babies born in Belgium are Muslim. Where is this world going? For christ sake! The western world needs to wake up from their dream world and start fighting the spread of radical Islam. Islam is about world domination, it's not about Peace.

Close but I feel the problem started when your government started handing your country over to the corporations (both sides are guilty). The citizens has lost control, big biz is in charge whether you like it or not.

Not corporations... the 38% of the population that pay no federal taxes... yet freeload off the rest of us who DO pay them, and then sit there and whine they aren't getting enough free stuff they aren't paying for.

Sorry, but the percentages of lazy bums with Entitlement mentalities that think they are owed something they didn't earn and the so called "Rich" should be forced to pay for it... will how we say... "Be sh*t out of luck" when the people who are being sucked dry get fed up and refuse to contribute anything.

Or like so many jobs that are being shifted overseas... move their assets out of reach of the greedy leeches. And yeah... it can be done.

Between them, the Illegals that the left argues have a RIGHT to be here at the expense of those who actually pay taxes... or the Muslims who alone have a RIGHT to dictate what they will and won't do, while Christians don't have those rights... or the gun grabbers to don't believe in the 2nd amendment rights but think their 1st are infintate at the same time... doesn't lead to another Civil war in our lifetime. Because its rapidly approaching that point.

Muslims make a Claim its " to help smooth things over with the non-muslims" which is total Bulls*t because if they gave a damn at all, they would cater to everyone else's sensitivirties.

There is NO difference between a Mohammed Attah Memorial mosque... smoothing over tensions with non-muslims victims, friends, families etc of 9/11 and the Ku Klux Klan erecting a enternal Fire Burning Cross next to the Martin Luther King Memorial to smooth over racial tensions with the blacks who hate them. After all, the blacks have no more right to oject to that than us mere non-muslims do to the Victory Mosque.

For all of those who call me a racist, let me point out to you that I'm not.The thing that angers me is that Islam is taking over THE WHOLE WORLD.Hello again, I:

I have no idea if you're a racist, or not. What I DO wonder about is your absolute belief that this country is going to fall to Muslim demands... The ONLY way that is going to happen is if we DESTROY our own Constitution from whithin. That's what YOU want us to do...

That'll make Osama Bin Laden happy.

excon

Didja read about the arson at the building site of the new mosque in Murfreesboro, Tn??

THOSE are the kinds of decisions we make when we're scared... Hmmm... I wonder if those arsonists grasped that THEY were the terrorists?? Nahh, they didn't.

No, THOSE are the lone wolfs as I believe Obama likes to call them. For the most part the rest of us have behaved quite well, both sides in this case seem to concur on that.


"No threats, not at all," since the fire, Ayash told The Associated Press. "We've had a tremendous amount of calls of support (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/08/29/national/a100408D93.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0y7dF12MZ)." ...

"We in this community believe strongly in the rule of law, and choose to settle our disagreements through peaceful deliberations and discussion, not vigilantism.. . We who stand in opposition to this mosque have made our concerns known through proper legal channels and have conducted ourselves with dignity, respect and out of a spirit of love for our community, and we will continue to do so."

WE aren't acting scared, WE are just exercising our rights, too, and I refuse to be lumped in with the terrorists.

No, THOSE are the lone wolfs as I believe Obama likes to call them.Hello again, Steve:

So, they have to be ORGANIZED in order for us to call what they did TERRORISM?? Really?

excon

What about the Christian non-profit worker who stabbed the Muslim cab driver in NYC last week?

Smoothy--again, you go on about how Muslims have rights that Christians don't.

I don't see it. At all.

I still see "In God We Trust" on our money. Surely that's a CHRISTIAN right that no other religion has. I still hear "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Isn't THAT a purely Christian thing?

I think it is as much sour grapes with Christians that the Moslims have as MUCH power as the Christians--not that they're trying to take everythign over any more than the Christians are.

Smoothy--again, you go on about how Muslims have rights that Christians don't.

I don't see it. At all.

I still see "In God We Trust" on our money. Surely that's a CHRISTIAN right that no other religion has. I still hear "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. Isn't THAT a purely Christian thing?

I think it is as much sour grapes with Christians that the Moslims have as MUCH power as the Christians--not that they're trying to take everythign over any more than the Christians are.

Points are off a bit. God belongs to everyone. Its jesus that's co opted by the christians. Also they did remove the break during winter as far as the name goes from Christmas to Winter Break. Now the Muslims are / were trying to push their holiday in New York but it didn't fly too well.

So, they have to be ORGANIZED in order for us to call what they did TERRORISM?? Really?

Did I say that? I don't recall saying that or anything close. Sometimes I wonder if you need to have your vision checked, you are a pretty old guy now aren't you?

The point you can take from that is the left is mighty quick to jump on some isolated incident, i.e. the 'murder' of a Kentucky 'fed' (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/24/kentucky.census.worker.death/index.html) because of those hatred fueled by all those right-wing terrorists, while downplaying terrorism fueled by Islam with ties to jihadists as that of an '"isolated extremist," as in the Ft Hood shooter and the 253 guy e.g.

They have it all backwards, as apparently you do as well.


What about the Christian non-profit worker who stabbed the Muslim cab driver in NYC last week?

What "Christian non-profit worker would that be? This one (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2010/08/28/2010-08-28_hackslash_susp_in_psych_ward.html#ixzz0y7wFPwar )?


Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said investigators have six of Enright's notebooks, which chronicle his recent 35-day stay in Afghanistan where he was filming a friend in the Marines.

The notes do not include anti-Muslim rhetoric, but Enright does write about having a drinking problem and being a member of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Don't portray this is some Christian hate crime, Wondergirl.

Now the Muslims are / were trying to push thier holiday in New York but it didnt fly too well.Hello again, dad:

If THAT didn't fly, who thinks they could install Sharia law??

excon

Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
So, they have to be ORGANIZED in order for us to call what they did TERRORISM???? Really?

Speechless, please correct your post. I did NOT say that and I am not a guy, even an old one.

Hello again, dad:

If THAT didn't fly, who thinks they could install Sharia law???

excon

Its already been tried once in England. And people fear it will happen here as well. It's a matter of who's rights superceed what. It's a give and take situation.

Example.

Muslim law says that prayer is suppose to happen in certain ways at certain times.

In this case it would be wrongful if it were a student to punish them for practice of faith so long as it was done quietly.


Muslim law says you can beat your wife senseless.

In this case the rights of local law would overstep the individual boundary of expression of faith.


I think you see where its going.

It's a matter of balance.

Did I say that? I don't recall saying that or anything close. Sometimes I wonder if you need to have your vision checked, you are a pretty old guy now aren't you?Hello steve:

And, you call ME old?? Dude!

Yes, you DID say something close... I said the arsonists were terrorists. You said, no, they're what Obama calls lone wolves... I assume the term lone wolf, means they're NOT associated or organized with any other group. They operate "alone". Therefore, I assumed that you meant they can't be called terrorists unless they're organized, and that's why I said what I said.

excon

Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
So, they have to be ORGANIZED in order for us to call what they did TERRORISM???? Really?

speechless, please correct your post. I did NOT say that and I am not a guy, even an old one.

Better? I knew I was quoting ex on that one, I just answered you both in one post. My points remain.

Hello steve:

And, you call ME old??? Dude!

Yes, you DID say something close... I said the arsonists were terrorists. You said, no, they're what Obama calls lone wolves... I assume the term lone wolf, means they're NOT associated or organized with any other group. They operate "alone". Therefore, I assumed that you meant they can't be called terrorists unless they're organized, and that's why I said what I said.

I know what you said, I quoted it and THIS is the point I addressed, THOSE are the kinds of decisions we make when we're scared.

WE aren't making that kind of decision, WE are just talking it over.

Don't portray this is some Christian hate crime, Wondergirl.
Had the Muslim cab driver stabbed the Christian non-profit worker, what would you have called it?

Points are off a bit. God belongs to everyone. Its jesus thats co opted by the christians. Also they did remove the break during winter as far as the name goes from Christmas to Winter Break. Now the Muslims are / were trying to push thier holiday in New York but it didnt fly too well.

But I worship a GODDESS, and my government is using GOD.

Christians say God
Jews say YHWH, or Yahweh
Muslims say Allah
Hindus refer to Vishnu
Pagans refer to the god aspect in many ways, but wiccans generally use Lord or Horned One


To turn it around, since "god" is supposedly interchangeable, would you be okay with changing our money to say "In the Horned One We Trust"? How about "In the Lady We Trust"?

We're not talking about the differing aspects of the religions--Jesus, Mohammed, Cernunnos, whatever. We're talking about the basic word for "god", specifically for the god that is worshipped as the head of a religion. The NAME of a god, if you will.

And yes, it should be Winter Holiday. At least six different religions have high holy days that time of year--and the Christians deliberately placed theirs at the traditional pagan holiday and co-opted their traditions. I know the Christians want it called Christmas Break again--but *I* want it called Winter Solstice Celebration Break. I think Winter Break or Winter holiday is a good compromise.

Now if only BOTH the Muslims and the Christians would compromise with good grace about making it so that their religions are equal with everyone else's.

And frankly--for all the talk of taking over the world and making it Muslim, I can't take it seriously. The Christians have been saying the same thing for at least a thousand years.

Had the Muslim cab driver stabbed the Christian non-profit worker, what would you have called it?

I see nothing that refers to a "Christian non-profit worker' except your claim, citation needed.

As for the incident, I call it a stabbing, I'd even dare to call it a hate crime. No different if it were reversed. If the evidence doesn't lead to religious based terrorism I see no need to go there, do you?

Unlike the left I don't filter everything through the prism of race, religion, nationality, gender, etc. I don't see a need for any Congressional Black Caucus, La Raza, NAACP, African-American themed dorms and all that nonsense. I believe in true integration, not self-righteous self-segregation. YOU guys are the ones that bring up race and religion, etc. in everything, not us.

First off lets get this straight. We don't know what really went on at the site of the new mosque. The only thing we know is that some equiptment was set on fire and only 1 of 4 was actually set on fire. For all we know it was done for insurance. So lets not start with the terrorism bandwagon just yet.

I think it was those enviro nuts from Earth Liberation Front who torch buildings


What about the Christian non-profit worker who stabbed the Muslim cab driver in NYC last week?


What about him ? He was working for an organization that was pro-mosque and had embedded many times doing charitable work in Muslim nations.Was he.. what do they call it?. oh yeah.. Islamophobic ;carefully infiltrating a pro-Muslim charity so he could make his move... attack a Muslim cabbie in a drunken rage ?
Or maybe he was a deranged pro-Muslim who decided to do a false flag attack so people who oppose the mosque could be blamed for stoking the flames ?

I see nothing that refers to a "Christian non-profit worker' except your claim, citation needed.
I read it first, an early report, on Yahoo News. Many sites say that Michael Enright is a senior at the School of Visual Arts and does volunteer work for Intersections International, a Christian non-profit group that promotes peace and tolerance. Michael had been allowed to be embedded with troops for two months this spring in Afghanistan. His friends said he came back a different person. He was drunk when he stabbed the cab driver after questioning him about Ramadan.

I read it first, an early report, on Yahoo News. Many sites say that Michael Enright is a senior at the School of Visual Arts and does volunteer work for Intersections International, a Christian non-profit group that promotes peace and tolerance. Michael had been allowed to be embedded with troops for two months this spring in Afghanistan. His friends said he came back a different person. He was drunk when he stabbed the cab driver after questioning him about Ramadan.

Citation still needed. Intersections International, according to their 'about us' page (http://www.intersectionsinternational.org/about-us), is exactly the kind of religious group you should cheer.


Intersections International is a New York-based global initiative dedicated to promoting justice, reconciliation and peace across lines of faith, culture, ideology, race, class, national borders and other boundaries that divide humanity.

Sounds positively progressive to me, not like any of that "Taliban wing of the Republican party" type you're referring to.

Hello again, I:

I have no idea if you're a racist, or not. What I DO wonder about is your absolute belief that this country is going to fall to Muslim demands.... The ONLY way that is gonna happen is if we DESTROY our own Constitution from whithin. That's what YOU want us to do...

That'll make Osama Bin Laden happy.

excon

I guess your unaware that the Muslims are USING the CONSTITUTION to suit their ways. Muslims are starting to take control of the Media, they have removed all anti-Islam banners from Taxis, but they sure as hell didn't remove any anti-Christian banners. Obama is a traitor to the west for bowing down to Muslim demands. I'm disgusted how he's handing the US over to Muslims.

I guess your unaware that the Muslims are USING the CONSTITUTION to suit their ways. Hello again, I:

I AM unaware of that. Please educate me.

excon

Hello again,

There is ANOTHER aspect of this issue that needs discussing. You guys won't, though. You just pretend it isn't so.. But, it IS so, and I ain't going to let you get away with it...

I'm talking about HOME GROWN terrorists, like the failed Times Square bomber...

In the plainest language I can muster, you MOUTH the words about supporting the First Amendment, but you have SHOWN by your deeds, that you do NOT. You MOUTH the words about NOT being at war with Islam, but YOU have SHOWN, by your own WORDS in THIS thread, and your deeds on the ground, that you ARE!

I LOVE this country. I FOUGHT for this country. I spilled my BLOOD for this country. And, I'd DO it AGAIN. If I observed the current upswelling of hatred and violence against my people, brewing in MY VERY OWN COUNTRY, if somebody didn't DO something to stop it, I WOULD. I'm a Jew. I KNOW about stuff like this.

You do too. If Christianity were in the minority, and was being attacked like Islam is today, YOU would DO something about it. Yes, you would - and you SHOULD!

So, why is it, that you don't think any American Muslim would do the same?? Why are you unable to connect the current Islamaphobia with a rise in popularity for Al Quaida, and a rise in terrorist attacks upon ourselves? What is it, that you don't get about this? To me, it's pretty damn simple.

excon

Why are you unable to connect the current Islamaphobia with a rise in popularity for Al Quaida, and a rise in terrorist attacks upon ourselves? What is it, that you don't get about this?? To me, it's pretty damn simple.

Because it's a myth manufactured by the left because they're losing the argument. There is no epidemic of Islamophobia in this country, you guys are crying wolf. That's why. It is YOU who are playing on fears, not us.

There is no epidemic of Islamophobia in this country, you guys are crying wolf. Hello again, steve:

If you are unwilling to see, that which is going on all around you, I can't help. But, there may be others who are not so blinded by the right wing Kool Aid... Maybe, with a little help, I can save them still.

excon

See what, ex? I'm not one of those dumbed-down Americans you were talking about, I see what's going on around me because I am the recipient of what's going on around me.

I and all of my fellow conservatives plus millions of moderates are being systematically labeled racists, homophobes, Islamophobes, "Republithugs," the "Taliban wing of the Republican party" and my personal favorite insult, "conservative ignorant dooshcopter"

Tell me exactly what I've done to deserve that? These people can't tell me what I've done, they can't point to my racist, Islamophobic, homophobic, thuggish, Taliban, dooshcopter-like behavior, can you? No, you can't, you just make sh*t up just like they do, and the more you insist that we're all those things the more you're going to pi$$ people off until there really IS a backlash of your own doing, because I for one am about ready to make some liberals swallow a few teeth if they don't shut the heck up with their ignorant, bigoted, hypocritical, hateful talk. I'm quite certain I'm not alone in that.

I hope you can see what's happening now.

The facts reveal a steady decline in crimes classified as anti-Muslim "hate crimes "since 9-11.
After the attacks that killed 3,000 Americans hate crimes against Muslims in this country peaked at 500 .
The most recent government provided data shows 115 in 2007 . Compare that to the anti-Jewish hate crimes for the same year. Those peaked at 969 in 2007.

So one would think then that the nation is Hebrew-phobic .
Somehow there have not been a rash of terrorist attacks against the country by home grown Jewish terrorists. Why is that ? When it comes to religious persecution it appears that Jews have a bigger grievience against the country based on your logic.

In addition to those statistics, I'd be willing to bet there is a much more serious problem of black on black crime.

The most recent goverment provided data shows 115 in 2007...Hello again, tom:

Yeah, yeah, yeah... What do you think government polling data would show NOW, since this mosque controversy has galvanized the nation?? IF the nation WAS tolerant of Muslims BEFORE a month or so ago, they switched.

Of course, you didn't notice.

excon

This isn't polling . It is raw data .Maybe I should find a reliable source .Maybe Time Magazine ?

Don't you think the way Jews are treated that they should strap cell phones to their Pepto Bismol ?

You see ; back in 2000 the Palestinians went into an orchestrated rage called the 'Al Aqsa Intifida' because the Prime Minister of Israel went to visit the Temple Mount ,a site revered as sacred by both Muslim and Jew ;and for years the press have said that it was Ariel Sharon's actions that were provocative.

Here , we oppose a symbol of triumphalism towering over sacred ground less than a decade after 3000 of our fellow Americans were slaughtered ;and we peacefully assemble . I think we have already proven what our country is about.

Hello again,

Hmmm.. Me and Orin Hatch. Who would have thunk that? Of course, he, like me, KNOWS religious persecution first hand... Here's (http://www.salon.com/news/ground_zero_mosque/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/08/31/orrin_hatch_supports_park51) what he told a local TV station.

excon

I don't know about government polling data, but opinion polling I believe shows Americans overwhelmingly against this mosque - at the proposed location. So what? You can't make the distinction between lawful peaceful dissent and hate? I can, that's why I'm not worked up over it. That, and the fact that I KNOW I'm not all those evil things I keep getting called (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/mosque-ground-zero-488247-88.html#post2506466). I don't have some inexplicable desire to hate and attack my fellow Americans of whatever stripe just because they don't think like I do and cower at my demands.

I for one am about ready to make some liberals swallow a few teeth if they don't shut the heck up with their ignorant, bigoted, hypocritical, hateful talk. Wow, resorting to violence? Thank god you aren't bigoted. :rolleyes:

Doesn't surprise me. He was the author (along with the swimmer) of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) which restricted local governments rights to land use zoning .The incident that prompted that was the religiously tolerant people of predominantly Democratic Boston were opposed to a massive Mormon temple being built where it was proposed. Hatch on face would look hypocritical if he now opposed the mosque. [Of course there weren't people killing thousands of Americans in the name of Joe Smith then either . ]

The people of Boston had a legitimate gripe about the placement . It is a huge structure in a mostly residential area. They also were called bigotted for opposing it.

Wow, resorting to violence? Thank god you aren't bigoted. :rolleyes:

NK, I've held my peace over this long enough. If the liberal bigots want to keep throwing their hateful insults around I'm more than willing to defend my honor by making them swallow a few teeth. If they'd like to be civil instead, I'm all for that, too. Would you like to be first to come down here and test me?

Hehe... internet tough guys, they're a dime a dozen.

Hey, peace!

Be easy--this is just a discussion.

No reason to get catty and mean and get the thread closed.

Watch it or he'll slap you silly!

Watch it or he'll slap you silly!

Slapping Syn...

I'd rather slap her fundament.

Hehe...internet tough guys, they're a dime a dozen.

Yep, that's why I invited you for a face to face. :D

NK, it doesn't matter what I say, you evade the point entirely in favor of personal attacks. You're just reinforcing my point... attacking others for no good reason is what's going to eventually lead to you swallowing a few teeth. But as you said, internet tough guys are a dime a dozen, I doubt you have the courage to say in person the things you say here.

Yep, that's why I invited you for a face to face. :D

NK, it doesn't matter what I say, you evade the point entirely in favor of personal attacks. You're just reinforcing my point ... attacking others for no good reason is what's going to eventually lead to you swallowing a few teeth. But as you said, internet tough guys are a dime a dozen, I doubt you have the courage to say in person the things you say here.
I believe that you're the one who physically threatened people. I have never done such a thing. It's funny because you're talking about yourself.

You must be new to the internet - people on anonymous boards who know they live far away from the other people have been threatening to "beat them up" (as you have done) since the dawn of IRC.

liberal bigots
Are there conservative bigots?

Are there conservative bigots?No, they are wonderful people.

Hey, peace!

Be easy--this is just a discussion.

No reason to get catty and mean and get the thread closed.

If that's what it takes so be it, I'm fed up with being portrayed as some bigoted Islamophobe which was the point of my post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/mosque-ground-zero-488247-88.html#post2506466). Don't expect me to play nice when I'm insulted daily for no reason whatsoever.

If the only thing coming out of this thread is just one more attempt to smear good Americans then close the thread.

Doesn't pressuring the Muslims to move their community center to a different, farther-away location give the Taliban the right to say, "Americans are bigots"?

According to Taliban operative Zabihullah, "By preventing this mosque from being built, America is doing us a big favor. It's providing us with more recruits, donations, and popular support."

I believe that you're the one who physically threatened people. I have never done such a thing. It's funny because you're talking about yourself.

You must be new to the internet - people on anonymous boards who know they live far away from the other people have been threatening to "beat them up" (as you have done) since the dawn of IRC.

You lecture from the safety of the internet yourself, NK. :rolleyes:

I didn't threaten anyone, I expressed a sentiment that I'm not alone in to make a point. We're fed up with being insulted and IF it doesn't stop you shouldn't be surprised IF someone smacks you in the face for it. You can only poke the bear so much before he pokes back. Got it? That wasn't a threat, it was advice. I also said, "If they'd like to be civil instead, I'm all for that, too."

It's simple advice, be civil which I prefer, or continue poking the bear and risk losing your teeth. If someone smacks you in the face for insulting them it's your own fault, you were warned.

Doesn't pressuring the Muslims to move their community center to a different, farther-away location give the Taliban the right to say, "Americans are bigots"?

According to Taliban operative Zabihullah, "By preventing this mosque from being built, America is doing us a big favor. It's providing us with more recruits, donations, and popular support."

NY's Democratic governor has called for a compromise, that's what we've all asked for, a compromise. That's not so evil is it?

Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate Majority Leader called on them to build it somewhere else. Does that make HIM a bigot?

A majority of Democrats, 54 percent (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/08/even_democrats_oppose_ground_z_1.html), are against building the mosque.

So Democrats are bigots for opposing the mosque and responsible for recruiting terrorists, too.

even_democrats_oppose 54 percent[/URL], are against building the mosque.
Fifty-four percent against building the mosque or against building the mosque THERE?

And the Taliban is gleeful no matter which it is.

And the Taliban is gleeful no matter which it is.

And you apparently buy into their propaganda, no matter what it is. Is that it?

I think this thread should be closed. You guys are getting out of hand and accusing long time members, Wondergirl of issues I don't think is approriate.

I think this thread should be closed. You guys are getting out of hand and accusing long time members, Wondergirl of issues I dont think is approriate.

Accusing her of what, asking if she buys into Taliban propaganda? It's called a question.

ENOUGH is ENOUGH

http://mvny.org/images/closed.gif