Obama throws support behind controversial Islamic center

[Ebow1]

I could go for general anarchy.

[Guest HvyMtl]

How the "ground zero mosque" fear mongering began - War Room - Salon.com

Ms. Geller, a blogger, started this...

FYI: There has been a Mosque within 2 blocks of the World Trade Center long before 9/11... There are a total of 7 Mosques in Lower Manhattan. 56 of the WTC victims of 9/11 were Muslim. (No, not including the hijackers... don't go there...)

Islam has long history downtown: Why the 'Ground Zero mosque' belongs in lower Manhattan

Ms. Geller is the SAME blogger claiming Obama is Malcolm X's Love Child...

Link

Um. Yeah.

Nothing to see here, move along...

Edited August 16, 2010 by HvyMtl

[Smith]

How the "ground zero mosque" fear mongering began - War Room - Salon.com

Ms. Geller, a blogger, started this...

FYI: There has been a Mosque within 2 blocks of the World Trade Center long before 9/11... There are a total of 7 Mosques in Lower Manhattan. 56 of the WTC victims of 9/11 were Muslim. (No, not including the hijackers... don't go there...)

Islam has long history downtown: Why the 'Ground Zero mosque' belongs in lower Manhattan

Ms. Geller is the SAME blogger claiming Obama is Malcolm X's Love Child...

Link

Um. Yeah.

Nothing to see here, move along...

You seem to enjoy finding some crackpot that supports the majority and claiming that makes it all conspiracy and irrelevant irrational fear of something different.

As far as some of the rest of you guys, I'm starting to think Kwik has been able to infiltrate the board with other user names. These slippery slope and letter of the law arguments only hold water in the same liberal activist courts you so correctly malign. INTENT of the law is more important than the letter of the law. Intent is what translates over time and makes laws applicable and relevant to today. If you guys applied you're same letter of the law arguements to 2A, you would be siding with all the liberal socialist who think only "militia members" can have weapons for national defense. Do you not see the inconsistency?

[Guest HvyMtl]

Nah. Not really. just forgot to put the after the "Nothing to see here, move along..." And she seems to be the source of the push against the mosque... instead of those who live there, or victims families, etc... Interesting that a Blogger can stir up so much crap in today's media...

But seriously, as a supporter of the Constitution of the United States, the 1st A supports their right to assemble and their right to worship as they see fit (within the limits of the Amendment.)

As well as the 2nd A supports my right to carry arms.

Property rights also point towards their right to be there... and use the property as they see fit (within the limits of city codes...)

This said, IMHO, it may be unwise to place it at the location, now that the pundits and politicians have made such a stink.

But, seriously, there is a Mosque already 2 blocks away. It was there before 9/11 and held prayer services for the victims.

But, if you believe all Muslims are evil, I won't be able to change your opinion. And, I bet that aids the Imams who preach that we, in turn are evil and their enemy...and should be terrorized...

Edited August 16, 2010 by HvyMtl

[raydog1]

I don't see a way the govt. will be able to stop this and that's fine with me.

I've been hearing this "monument to their conquest" argument for weeks and I'm trying to remember when we were conquered. I may be forgetting something here but I thought they attacked, we retaliated, and they've been on the run ever since. I'm wearing a cross around my neck with no fear. I'm pretty sure I have the same religious freedoms I've had since 9/11. I don't recall ever having to show any Muslim my papers. These "Islamic Conquerors" must not be very bright because they let me carry my gun & eat pork chops last night. . . in public.

It appears to me the only thing this will be a monument to is their utter failure to destroy this nation and our way of life. If radicals are going meet there. I'm fine with that too. There will be so many undercover agents in that building that we might as well call it the CIA Annex Office. I'm sure a satellite or three with all the latest tech is already dialed in on the site. Bring it!

[Smith]

But, if you believe all Muslims are evil, I won't be able to change your opinion. And, I bet that aids the Imams who preach that we, in turn are evil and their enemy...and should be terrorized...

Yeah, I know you like to play devils advocate. BTW - I don't hate Muslims. I do a lot of work with them, but I do hate Islam. Not because I don't understand it, but quite the opposite. I hate it for the same reasons I hate socialism, communism, racism, Nazism, and bullys to name a few. It is a fool who continues to give acceptance and openness to the things that would destroy what is right and decent. I have the same tolerance for those who would enslave me as i do for the rapist who breaks into my daughters room. Tolerance is the tool of fools and slaves. I have studied and read their information and talked with countless Muslims from and in different parts of the world. From Africa, America, England, UAE, and even Brazil for example

BTW- I have the same intolernace as a Pastor for those who would misuse and abuse the scritpures in the same way. I see no difference in application, only relevance and scope.

Again this is not a freedom of religion issue. Anyone who thinks it is will be sorely mistaken. Islam has done a great job of putting on the sheep cloth to get the wolves in the pen.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Also, Pamela Geller isn't the "one" who gave this the push, but she is hard in the fight.

The widows of the victims are the ones pushing and she is aiding them.

That link to Atlas Shrugs also explains that she isn't the one who started that quote.

Read it again. That is her website.

This isn't the only thing she fights against. There is this matter of "honor killing"

muslims enjoy. There are more. She is square on the side of conservative causes

and muslim wrongs. She puts her money where her mouth is.

I'll take her side anytime you wish to criticize her, HvyMtl. Read her complete blog

sometimes. You might be surprized how much you might agree with her. She loves

her fellow Jews and Christians more than most.

[JayC]

Smith,

You loose the argument when you have to resort to calling the opposition crackpot nut-jobs.

We're not talking about some silly local ordinance... We're talking about the first amendment in the Bill of Rights... Something our founding fathers required in order to form the government we have today. So yeah the devil is in the detail... This is a simple question.

Do you really want the GOVERNMENT to dictate where you can go to worship? That is exactly what you are advocating here... there is no slippery slope, you're at the bottom of the hill with this argument. If the government can block the building of this mosque they can block the building of any religious building.

The INTENT of the 1st Amendment is pretty clear... have you read it recently? For the government to block this mosque it would violate at least 2 parts of the 1st Amendment.

Nobody is suggesting that is a good thing, only that stopping it is out of the realm of the Government.

You seem to enjoy finding some crackpot that supports the majority and claiming that makes it all conspiracy and irrelevant irrational fear of something different.

As far as some of the rest of you guys, I'm starting to think Kwik has been able to infiltrate the board with other user names. These slippery slope and letter of the law arguments only hold water in the same liberal activist courts you so correctly malign. INTENT of the law is more important than the letter of the law. Intent is what translates over time and makes laws applicable and relevant to today. If you guys applied you're same letter of the law arguements to 2A, you would be siding with all the liberal socialist who think only "militia members" can have weapons for national defense. Do you not see the inconsistency?

[JayC]

I don't see a way the govt. will be able to stop this and that's fine with me.

I've been hearing this "monument to their conquest" argument for weeks and I'm trying to remember when we were conquered. I may be forgetting something here but I thought they attacked, we retaliated, and they've been on the run ever since. I'm wearing a cross around my neck with no fear. I'm pretty sure I have the same religious freedoms I've had since 9/11. I don't recall ever having to show any Muslim my papers. These "Islamic Conquerors" must not be very bright because they let me carry my gun & eat pork chops last night. . . in public.

It appears to me the only thing this will be a monument to is their utter failure to destroy this nation and our way of life. If radicals are going meet there. I'm fine with that too. There will be so many undercover agents in that building that we might as well call it the CIA Annex Office. I'm sure a satellite or three with all the latest tech is already dialed in on the site. Bring it!

I'm in agreement on everything else you said... but I think the terrorists have won... they managed to destroy our way of life... the country has been in irrational fear mode for 9+ years now, and it shows no sign of stopping... This is the second worse time for the trashing of the Constitution by the Federal government in the history of this country.

I almost shed a tear when I think about all the liberties we've loss in the last 9 years for the sake of some limited 'security'. Freedoms my children will never enjoy because of the knee-jerk reaction we had as a country to that attack. If they're able to tear up religious freedom as well, then stick a fork in us, we're done.

Edited August 17, 2010 by JayC

[Smith]

JayC, you win arguments based on truth and logic, not semantics. However semantics keeps them swirling in the toilet bowl far too long. But since you have trouble with context and smilies, my comment you referenced was a tongue in cheek jab at HvyMtl.

[Oh Shoot]

....

Nobody is suggesting that is a good thing, only that stopping it is out of the realm of the Government.

Of course that's correct.

My previous post was to say that exactly.

It's a terrible and polarizing PR move on the part of Islam in America, but it would be even more terrible for America itself to piss on the 1st amendment.

Remember that Islam is about 1500 years old, and at about that same age Catholicism (which WAS Christianity) wasn't all that dissimilar in the sense of being a political entity as much as a religious one. It determined heads of state in Europe, and sent armies out to conquer the heathen. Fortunately, it modified itself over time by sects breaking away from Mother Church and the whole of Christendom becoming less political and non-bellicose.

Hopefully, just as evidenced by the small mosque there disavowing itself from this endeavor, Islam will also naturally do the same. If not, well...as I said, no rainbows in sight.

- OS

[JayC]

JayC, you win arguments based on truth and logic, not semantics. However semantics keeps them swirling in the toilet bowl far too long. But since you have trouble with context and smilies, my comment you referenced was a tongue in cheek jab at HvyMtl.

My bad smith, I missed them... been a long day The talking head progressives have my blood pressure up, and I'm taking it out on you guys since screaming at the TV doesn't seem to work

[JayC]

OhShoot,

I think on this one you and I are in complete sync

Of course that's correct.

My previous post was to say that exactly.

It's a terrible and polarizing PR move on the part of Islam in America, but it would be even more terrible for America itself to piss on the 1st amendment.

Remember that Islam is about 1500 years old, and at about that same age Catholicism (which WAS Christianity) wasn't all that dissimilar in the sense of being a political entity as much as a religious one. It determined heads of state in Europe, and sent armies out to conquer the heathen. Fortunately, it modified itself over time by sects breaking away from Mother Church and the whole of Christendom becoming less political and non-bellicose.

Hopefully, just as evidenced by the small mosque there disavowing itself from this endeavor, Islam will also naturally do the same. If not, well...as I said, no rainbows in sight.

- OS

[JG55]

Take a moment and listen to this interview with Zuhdi Jasser

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Take a moment and listen to this interview with Zuhdi Jasser

Finally, some clarity with Mark Levin's link. If it were a 1st Amendment issue, why would Obama

pick his audience so well to deliver that speech. Nothing mainstream about it. Thanks for the link!

Somehow, it seems to take a while to get to the bottom of some stories. I knew this 1st Amendment

garbage was just a distraction for people to fight over.

Probably more of "Watch the right hand when the left hand moves" stuff.

[Tim Nunan]

One has to wonder why there is opposition to the rebuilding of a Greek Orthodox church that was destroyed in September 11th attack:

Greek Orthodox Church or Mosque: Ground Zero - WorldWideGreeks.com

Mayor Bloomberg: Deal To Rebuild Greek Orthodox Church Near Ground Zero May Be Near

Then there was this:

Bieganski the Blog: Ground Zero Mosque. Auschwitz Convent.

In the 1980s, a controversy raged about Carmelite nuns establishing a convent near, not in, the former Auschwitz concentration camp. After much debate and international press attention, the convent was moved.

[Guest Keinengel]

I think i'm probably the only person in the country who thinks we should just rebuild the twin towers. I mean what better way to stick it to hadji and say that we as Americans will not bow down or be intimidated by anyone than rebuilding the WTC? We let them win by leaving it as a pile of rubble or by building some memorial. Their ultimate goal was to strike us at our heart that day and that is exactly what they did. But we need to move on because every day we sit here arguing amongst each other about what to put there we just let them win. I'm not saying that we should forget about all of those poor people that died there but we really need to move on at this point.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think i'm probably the only person in the country who thinks we should just rebuild the twin towers. I mean what better way to stick it to hadji and say that we as Americans will not bow down or be intimidated by anyone than rebuilding the WTC? We let them win by leaving it as a pile of rubble or by building some memorial. Their ultimate goal was to strike us at our heart that day and that is exactly what they did. But we need to move on because every day we sit here arguing amongst each other about what to put there we just let them win. I'm not saying that we should forget about all of those poor people that died there but we really need to move on at this point.

No, you're not. I agree with you about rebuilding, the same damned buildings that were there.

Then give the muslims a "Teeth of the Tiger" moment. Book by Clancy. Solved a few problems along similar lines.

[setsdw]

This puts some of this fear mongering into perspective. Not all Muslims are terrorists the same as not all Christians side with Eric Rudolph and Westboro Baptist

By allowing the mosque to be built it would actually be a bigger plus for us and adversely a blow to the extremist line of thinking. If we allow it to continue it takes some of the power out of the rhetoric that they spew to recruit new members. They can't say "Look how America treats Muslims! Join our side!" anymore.

More food for thought Matthew Alexander: Build the Mosque; Help Defeat al Qaeda

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Al Queda can spin the mosque thing any way they wish. That bunch just

needs to die, by our actions and Israel's. The author was off base by

thinking the Cordoba Group, or whatever they call themselves, would do any

good by building that mosque. If that mosque is built, it will be nothing

more than a trophy memorializing a conquest.

I almost choked when I opened that link, but that's okay. I'm better now.

I look there, sometimes, but I have to prepare myself for it.

[mcurrier]

I think i'm probably the only person in the country who thinks we should just rebuild the twin towers. I mean what better way to stick it to hadji and say that we as Americans will not bow down or be intimidated by anyone than rebuilding the WTC? We let them win by leaving it as a pile of rubble or by building some memorial. Their ultimate goal was to strike us at our heart that day and that is exactly what they did. But we need to move on because every day we sit here arguing amongst each other about what to put there we just let them win. I'm not saying that we should forget about all of those poor people that died there but we really need to move on at this point.

+1

[mcurrier]

This puts some of this fear mongering into perspective. Not all Muslims are terrorists the same as not all Christians side with Eric Rudolph and Westboro Baptist

By allowing the mosque to be built it would actually be a bigger plus for us and adversely a blow to the extremist line of thinking. If we allow it to continue it takes some of the power out of the rhetoric that they spew to recruit new members. They can't say "Look how America treats Muslims! Join our side!" anymore.

More food for thought Matthew Alexander: Build the Mosque; Help Defeat al Qaeda

B-plop. That's the same mentality that Obama tries to scam us into believing that he supposedly believes. "if we show them that we don't hate them, then they will like us and stop killing us." B-plop! Double reverse psychological ploy (aimed at people with weak/guilty emotions). Only a show of strength deters these people, not a show of weakness (especially disguised as tolerance or acceptance), no matter how sincerely offered. Using these tactics, the wussies will die and the John Waynes will survive.

Strength deters, weakness invites attack. Weakness says, "I am submissive to you and want to be your bitch."

[Guest 6.8 AR]

B-plop. That's the same mentality that Obama tries to scam us into believing that he supposedly believes. "if we show them that we don't hate them, then they will like us and stop killing us." B-plop! Double reverse psychological ploy (aimed at people with weak/guilty emotions). Only a show of strength deters these people, not a show of weakness (especially disguised as tolerance or acceptance), no matter how sincerely offered. Using these tactics, the wussies will die and the John Waynes will survive.

Strength deters, weakness invites attack. Weakness says, "I am submissive to you and want to be your bitch."

So true

[setsdw]

B-plop. That's the same mentality that Obama tries to scam us into believing that he supposedly believes. "if we show them that we don't hate them, then they will like us and stop killing us." B-plop! Double reverse psychological ploy (aimed at people with weak/guilty emotions). Only a show of strength deters these people, not a show of weakness (especially disguised as tolerance or acceptance), no matter how sincerely offered. Using these tactics, the wussies will die and the John Waynes will survive.

Strength deters, weakness invites attack. Weakness says, "I am submissive to you and want to be your bitch."

How is showing them we aren't afraid of to put a mosque in downtown NYC a sign of weakness? To me thats a sign of our strength and resolve that they didn't win with 9/11. It would be weak to tell them that they have us so scared that we won't let them anywhere near us.

[Smith]

How is showing them we aren't afraid of to put a mosque in downtown NYC a sign of weakness? To me thats a sign of our strength and resolve that they didn't win with 9/11. It would be weak to tell them that they have us so scared that we won't let them anywhere near us.

If you really think that is the message that is received, your communication skills and understanding of the human race is gonna get you in a LOT of trouble. I would suggest if you are not married .... don't. It will not last long.