Wait and see how the Palin haters spin this one.

“the fire of caustic rhetoric and appear as nothing more than mean-spirited religious intolerance.”

Sounds exactly what leftist swine say about those who oppose the GZ mosque. Palin certainly does know “whereof she speaks.”

I love how libs like Glynnie now think what Palin says is worth mentioning and not ridiculing. The liberal loons are lucky to you have you on their side, Glynnie!

Book burning is antithetical to American ideals. People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – much like building a mosque at Ground Zero.

Wow! Does this women read my mind or what???

Sarah, you are right on this one….
… Glynnis – you are missing the mark…again!

“Accordingly, I shall not seek, and I will not accept,
the nomination of my party for another term
as your President.” Barack Obama, March 31, 2012

Palin is right on this one, first time ever. Well better late than never i suppose.

This is proof that no matter what she says, people are going to find ways put a bull’s-eye on Palin’s chest.

Discrimination is anti-American, and that is precisely why we need to discriminate against the Muslims in this case and oppose the mosque. In the past we have discriminated against blacks in slavery and land grabs of the Native Americans. We’ve discriminated against the Latinos. We have discriminated against women in both pay and suffrage. We have discriminated against the Chinese building our railroads, and the Japanese in our internment camps. We have discriminated against the Irish and the Italian, heck, we’ve discriminated against all Catholics in general. We’ve even managed to discriminate against both Jew and German at the same time. If we choose to not discriminate against Muslims now, that would be treating them differently than everyone else. And discrimination is anti-American.

I don’t give a rats ass what she thinks. This idiot, the pastor, has a right to freedom of speech and expression, just as the an individual that purchased land in lower Manhattan has a right to build a mosque. You anti-liberty people always amaze me.

When are the right-wing flakes going to stop calling a proposed culture center with a prayer room a “mosque?”
When are the right-wing flakes going to stop calling a building that is to be built over two blocks away from and out of view of Ground Zero a Ground Zero building?

I won’t hold my breath, but I’ll add that Glenn Beck should keep his mouth shut toward Pastor Jones.
http://www.sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com/2010/09/beck-blogs-from-theblaze-and-compares.html

GlennBeckReview said:
When are the right-wing flakes going to stop calling a proposed culture center with a prayer room a “mosque?

You are truly just ignorant of Islam aren’t you. Mosques are the center of the Muslim community. People wake, sleep, prey and eat by the sounds of the minaret in the middle-east. By it’s very nature, all mosques are considered community centers.
Now I don’t have a problem with the mosque in lower Manhattan. A private individual should be able to build whatever they want on their private property. I also don’t have a problem with the pastor. If he wants to burn a flag or a Quran on his private property that is his right. I also support the peoples right to protest.

GBR, you’re just as much of a hater as the RW people you supposedly denounce.

Gail Collin wrote:

“Muslims building a community center in their neighborhood on one hand. Deliberate attempt to insult a religion that is dear to about 1.5 billion souls around the globe on the other”.
______________

Hmmmm. Seems to me that could just as easily have read…

“Muslims building a mosque in shouting distance of the worst terrorist attack in US history (perpetrated by Muslims) deliberately ignoring the objections of millions of souls around the globe on the one hand. Burning some books in their neighborhood on the other.”

Whaddayathink?
____________________

BTW…. this is just the type of shit that drives me up the wall………

Glynnis (sarcastically) wrote:

“Yes it is EXACTLY like building a mosque in Lower Manhattan.”

Nobody said anything about ‘EXACTLY’…. in fact SP quite clearly said “MUCH like”….

“Book burning is antithetical to American ideals. People have a constitutional right to burn a Koran if they want to, but doing so is insensitive and an unnecessary provocation – MUCH like building a mosque at Ground Zero.”
_________________

Now, if you wanna try to make the case that building that mosque is NOT an ‘insensitive and unnecessary provocation’ then HAVE AT IT….. but don’t try to discredit/ undermine a PERFECTLY VALID parallel.

Good grief, I’ve never seen such hypocrisy and double standards as I’ve seen lately from the left. You can’t have it both ways anymore folks. Not anymore. I know it hurts to be a PROGRESSIVE these days but times have changed.

Perhaps it’ll be easier to swallow if we put a familiar label on it. Let’s call it “PROGRESS”.

Thelonious Funk said:
If we choose to not discriminate against Muslims now, that would be treating them differently than everyone else. And discrimination is anti-American.

Exactly. Reminds me of what my old man said to me when I told him I was getting married….”Good. It’s about time! Why should YOU get to be happy?”

Yep, Caribou Barbie is still a moron.

Only bigots and know-nothings are offended by Park 51.

“Muslims building a community center in their neighborhood on one hand.” Gail Collins

Of course. Because everyone knows that thousands of Muslims live near Ground Zero, and there are no other mosques in NYC.

Question: how do dumb-ass op-ed liberals keep their job when all they do is lie?
Answer: because thousands of other dumb-ass liberals read and believe them.

gordonbloyershow said:
Wait and see how the Palin haters spin this one.

Actually, I am waiting to see how many people on the right from this mediaite blog will try and spin that they agree with her in not doing the burning of that book. I’m sure they will say we never said they should we only said they had the right to. Which would be an incorrect statement for some of them. And not one person on the left stated *they did not have the right to*.

More Liberty said:
I don’t give a rats ass what she thinks. This idiot, the pastor, has a right to freedom of speech and expression, just as the an individual that purchased land in lower Manhattan has a right to build a mosque. You anti-liberty people always amaze me.

Another closed minded person (you) that apparently can’t comprehend that no where did she (Palin) state that they didn’t have the right to.

More Liberty says: “You are truly just ignorant of Islam aren’t you. ”

Let me get this straight. Iman Rauf calls the area a prayer room, but the Islamaphobic right calls it a mosque, so I’m supposed to agree with the wing-nuts?

” I also don’t have a problem with the pastor. If he wants to burn a flag or a Quran on his private property that is his right.”

That’s because you lack wisdom. He does have the right (although there are local ordinances in place against burning toxic chemicals like Koran ink); but if you don’t have a problem with his doing it, then you don’t care about the troops who will die as a consequence.

This stupid and dangerous Islamaphobe needs to be surrounded by fire trucks this Saturday and flooded with water if he so much as lights a match. Presidents always curb liberties for reasons of national security, and doing so here would be Lincolnian.

Adults oppose this; do you?

Wow, to equate the book burning with the Park 51 project is not rational. On the one hand a pastor wants to burn the Koran for whatever reason; he has the right, but it is a negative way to express a view of something. On the other hand a group of Americans who happen to be Muslim want to build a community center that will have a place of worship in it. This is not a negative unless one holds all Muslims responsible for the extremists who attacked our country.

GlennBeckReview said:
That’s because you lack wisdom. He does have the right (although there are local ordinances in place against burning toxic chemicals like Koran ink); but if you don’t have a problem with his doing it, then you don’t care about the troops who will die as a consequence.

Once again you have no idea. I served 3 tours in Iraq dude, and I am not going to give up liberty for more “security.” The NEOCONs used that same BS to pass the Patriot Act, and other anti-liberty legislation. Besides, the extremists don’t need another excuse to attack.

Yes Presidents curb liberties for “security.” I know this, and do not support it. FDR did it against Japanese Americans, and even Lincoln cancel habeas corpus, even though the Supreme Court at the time said it was illegal. It’s rather sad when you fear mongers use “security” to take away people liberties.

“Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
- Ben Franklin

It is insensitive, SP, but after hearing what the Iman said about 9/11, it is obvious that the Iman is an “accessory” to the Koran burning and that he created the Pastor Terry Jones.

Also, why is it that libs ignored the 71% of the American population who were against the building of the mosque, but are so concerned about one nut and his 50 followers?

Typical lib hypocrisy!

gordonbloyershow said:
Wait and see how the Palin haters spin this one.

I for one thank her for comments. As a veteran, this Quran burning can be of no help to our troops overseas, and will probably cause harm.

FearMonger said:
Exactly. Reminds me of what my old man said to me when I told him I was getting married….”Good. It’s about time! Why should YOU get to be happy?”

So…. did marriage make you happier?

As far as Palin is concerned, she and her minions like Newt, Rush, Hannity are the ones responsible for elevating the issue of building the Muslim community center to a toxic level. Not to mention Rep. Peter King, and Luxor- one of the biggest offenders on the local level.
This is what happens when you try to scare people for votes, which the GOP is shamelessly effective at. Now the risk occurs when things get out of control. Protests in CA; arson, gun shots being fired in TN; recent poll shows 24% of Americans think all Mosque building should be halted in the U.S. Sounds like things are out of control!!!!

MiddleRoader said:
Actually, I am waiting to see how many people on the right from this mediaite blog will try and spin that they agree with her in not doing the burning of that book. I’m sure they will say we never said they should we only said they had the right to. Which would be an incorrect statement for some of them.

That is what virtually everyone here has been saying. I don’t know what you’re waiting for, especially when one of the very few people here to endorse burning religious texts was you.

Are you sure you want to be pursuing this line of inquiry? Are you going to tell us how you’ve been against such ideas all along?

GlennBeckReview said:
This stupid and dangerous Islamaphobe needs to be surrounded by fire trucks this Saturday and flooded with water if he so much as lights a match.

Because the First Amendment only matters when you want it to, right? You’re scum, GBR.

“Yes it is EXACTLY like building a mosque in Lower Manhattan.”

Don’t look now.

Rauf said that if he knew how controversial the project would be, he “never would have done this – not have done something that would create more divisiveness.”

However, he said he is convinced he shouldn’t move the center now because “our national security now hinges on how we negotiate this, how we speak about it and what we do.”

Hmmmm…. it seems like we’ve got two insensitive and unnecessary provocations at hand. And yet, they’re not exactly the same thing.

Yes it is exactly like building a mosque in Lower Manhattan.

No, one is a pile of ashes at a tiny church in Florida, and the other is a permanent monument at Islam’s greatest victory.

Azarkhan said:
“Muslims building a community center in their neighborhood on one hand.” Gail Collins

Of course. Because everyone knows that thousands of Muslims live near Ground Zero, and there are no other mosques in NYC.

Question: how do dumb-ass op-ed liberals keep their job when all they do is lie?
Answer: because thousands of other dumb-ass liberals read and believe them.

Well, first off, the debate has nothing to do with one’s intelligence, but with American ideals. Both sides are piecing together thoughtful, intelligent arguments, so calling them dumb-ass is that attack the messenger fallacy. Second, isn’t it also possible to take that question and answer thing you wrote and replace the word liberal with conservative and it’s still accurate? Don’t know how this gets us any further along in the debate. Quite a few Muslims live and work around the area. One of the first examples of tolerance for Muslims was a church located near Ground Zero which led to many people going there and worshipping there and actually helped build a nice community down there. There are plenty of Islamic shops and restaurants (by the way, I live in New York and have been down there, so yes, this is true. There is a community down there). Also, and you called this a lie, but it is actually true, there is a history of Islamic communities in that area of New York, it was one of the first places that Muslims went to when immigrating to this city. Now, I don’t know if there are thousands living there, but there is a good chance that there are. Of course, you have to question what is the definition of lower Manhattan. It’s a pretty big area, some believe it starts below Canal Street. There’s also a lot of churches in NYC, does that mean that no one can build any more churches?

Jim Treacher said:
No, one is a pile of ashes at a tiny church in Florida, and the other is a permanent monument at Islam’s greatest victory.

The Mosque is not a permanent monument to Islam’s greatest victory. Islam was not responsible for 9/11. Terrorists who happen to be Islamic are responsible. What you say is like equating the KKK who profess to be Christians to all Christians. And you know that isn’t so.

I’m glad Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are speaking out against this. My respect for them has increased.

Sure, this is insensitive to Muslims around the world, but the biggest reason I detest this pastor and his plans are what consequences are likely to come about as a result. The radicals are already using this as a recruitment tool. We’ve made good strides to weaken the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but this might strengthen them. As if they need another reason to hate us.

The bottom line is that this shouldn’t have been reported on in the first place. The church doing this has, what, 50 members in its congregation? My church has around that many people and we can’t even get the local news to report on our huge clothing drives we put on twice a year for low to no-income families in the community! But since it’s news and people around the world know it, I’m glad that people like President Obama, Sec. Clinton, Mrs. Palin and Mr. Beck are denouncing it.

Sweet, sensitive, sublime. saintly Sarah Palin is the spiritual high priestess of USA. The pyromaniac preacher must stand down.

More Liberty said:
You are truly just ignorant of Islam aren’t you. Mosques are the center of the Muslim community. People wake, sleep, prey and eat by the sounds of the minaret in the middle-east. By it’s very nature, all mosques are considered community centers.

Still not a mosque. The 92nd Street Y isn’t a synagogue. This isn’t a mosque.

Jim Treacher said:
No, one is a pile of ashes at a tiny church in Florida, and the other is a permanent monument at Islam’s greatest victory.

Only if that is your illogical, irrational, nonsensical interpretation. Are all Catholic priests pedophiles?

Pablo said:
Don’t look now.

Hmmmm…. it seems like we’ve got two insensitive and unnecessary provocations at hand. And yet, they’re not exactly the same thing.

My question is this, as far as how we are viewed by the world, and it is why I feel that there is a difference. Again, we are looking at an insular viewing of the events, but let’s go outside (which is what Patreus did). What is the bigger recruiting tool for the Islamic radicals? The burning of the Koran or not allowing Muslims to build a community center? Now, what’s the bigger recruiting tool here: Not allowing Muslims to build their community center or allowing Muslims to build their community center and embracing them, showing tolerance? Of course, the truth is (and this has really been put into perspective yet, I think) that the reason why they can even be used as recruiting tools at all is that these areas of the world cannot wrap their heads around the idea that a few people don’t represent the whole. I’m against the burning of the Koran, you’re against the burning of the Koran, most Americans are. But this limited few have the right to do it, and it DOES NOT represent us. That is the amazing thing about our country. And what makes it more amazing is how unique and wonderful that idea is. The actions of the government does not equal the nation. The actions of radicals does not equal America. But then, it seems we have the same problem wrapping our heads around that concept (i.e. Radical Islam does not equal all Islam). But the truth of the matter is that for some reason, we as a nation, need a national enemy. From the British in the start of the country, to the hatred of Irish and Germans during the time of rampant immigration, to the Germans/Japanese of WWII to the Soviets (our best) during the Cold War. I’m rambling now.

What is the bigger recruiting tool for the Islamic radicals? The burning of the Koran or not allowing Muslims to build a community center?

Or could it be the video of KSM beheadding Danny Pearl? Or, maybe it would be a huge mosque overlooking Ground Zero, because you know that’s how they’ll spin that. Who knows? They’ll use anything they can spin to their advantage to convince people that dying at the hands of the US Armed Forces is a great idea. They’re always going to have a list of great reasons to die for Allah and whatever we do is going to land on it, one way or another.

Of course, the truth is (and this has really been put into perspective yet, I think) that the reason why they can even be used as recruiting tools at all is that these areas of the world cannot wrap their heads around the idea that a few people don’t represent the whole.

Do you really think that we’ve been in Iraq and Afghanistan spending untold blood and treasure instead of just turning it all to glass because we’re incapable of differentiating between various sorts of Muslims? We’re fighting side by side with Muslims, lots of them. Some of them are us, and they perform very honorably.

Others, not so much.

m against the burning of the Koran, you’re against the burning of the Koran, most Americans are. But this limited few have the right to do it, and it DOES NOT represent us.

Right, and that needs to be pointed out to those who seem unable to grasp that. We make those distinctions constantly, and we shouldn’t be alone in doing it.

But then, it seems we have the same problem wrapping our heads around that concept (i.e. Radical Islam does not equal all Islam).

Again, our 4000 + dead and the fact that Iraq and Afghanistan still have native populations is evidence that we understand that quite well, as are the 2M or so Muslims living freely and peacefully here in the US.

But the truth of the matter is that for some reason, we as a nation, need a national enemy. From the British in the start of the country, to the hatred of Irish and Germans during the time of rampant immigration, to the Germans/Japanese of WWII to the Soviets (our best) during the Cold War.

Are you suggesting that radical Muslims are an invented enemy, because we need to have one?

“Still not a mosque. The 92nd Street Y isn’t a synagogue. This isn’t a mosque.” So the Imam is a liar then? He says it is. The NYT says it is. There’s a kitchen at my church, doesn’t make it a restaurant.

Hate Takes Center Stage (from the Progress Report)

Hate pastor Terry Jones and his small Dove World congregation are planning an event to burn the Quran in Gainesville, FL on the anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks. His plan — dubbed “International Burn a Quran Day” — has now become a global story that, according to top American commander in Afghanistan Gen. David Petraeus, could endanger the lives of American forces and American foreign policy goals. While similar acts from Jones and others went widely ignored in the past — in 2008 the incendiary Kansas-based Westboro church burned a Quran on a Washington D.C. street — today they are front-page n ews. So what changed? Jones’ event comes at the end of a hate-filled summer in which the right wing fostered anti-Muslim vitriol has risen to unprecedented levels. This has led to a growing sense both in the U.S. and around the world that perhaps Jones’ hateful plan is not just an isolated incident, but is reflective of an increasingly intolerant America. If Jones follows through, it will inevitably further endanger our troops and increase animosity toward the United States. But this act of hate — just like the burning of a cross, or painting of a swastika — is also about the response it elicits. The response in the form of public statements and counterprotests will likely demonstrate the strengths, not the weaknesses, of American values: a country that not just protects the freedom to demonstrate, while showing that hate-filled individuals such as Jones in no way represent America.

ENDANGERING TROOPS: Jones’ Quran burning could lead to tremendous blowback against U.S. forces fighting in Afghanistan. President Obama, Secretaries Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates, and American military commanders all fear that images of Americans burning the Quran will put U.S. troops in heightened danger and will hand al-Qaeda a propaganda victory. The counter-insurgency mission in Afghanistan is based on convincing the local Muslim population to side with U.S. and Afghan government forces in their fight against the Taliban, and inflammatory images that make the U.S. look intolerant of Islam will undercut these efforts. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Petraeus said the Quran burning “is precisely the kind of action the Taliban uses and could cause significant problems. Not just here [in Afghanistan], but everywhere in the world we are engaged with the Islamic community.” Gen. William Caldwell, the head of the Afghan training mission noted, “What I will tell you is that their very actions will in fact jeopardize the safety of the young men and women who are serving in uniform over here and also undermine the very mission that we’re trying to accomplish.” Large anti-American rallies have already taken place in Afghanistan and Indonesia.” Several hundred Afghans rallied outside a Kabul mosque, burning American flags and an effigy of Dove World’s pastor and chanting ‘death to America.’ Members of the crowd briefly pelted a passing U.S. military convoy with stones, but were ordered to stop by rally organizers.” On Saturday, 3,000 Muslims marched through Indonesia’s capital and five other cities to protest in front of the U.S. embassy, carrying signs reading, ” Jihad to protect Koran” and “You burn Qu’ran you burn in hell.”

SUMMER OF HATE: Jones’ plan comes on the heels of a summer in which Islamophobia ginned-up by the right wing took center stage. The paranoid hysteria over the plan for a Muslim community center in lower Manhattan was followed by protests against mosques around the country and in some cases violence. In New York City this Saturday, the radical right-wing group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) plans to channel the prevalent paranoid hysteria into a rally against the proposed Islamic community center. The Wonk Room’s Matt Duss notes that the anti-Muslim vitriol “doesn’t come out of nowhere– it’s exactly what conservative elites have been telling their base for years. Whether it’s Newt Gingrich cribbing Andrew McCarthy’s doctor ed anecdotes about ‘creeping sharia’… or Bill Kristol and Liz Cheney claiming, without any evidence, that Cordoba Initiative leader Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has ‘terror-related connections,’ it’s clear that there’s a well-funded and organized network of conservatives who see political profit in stoking Americans’ fear of Islam. And Americans are responding to that, some of them in extreme fashion, such as the Quran burners.” While conservative leaders were quick to fan the flames of hysteria against the community center, these same leaders stayed largely silent in response to the proposed burning of the Quran. Fred Kaplan of Slate notes the muted response from many prominent conservatives: “Republicans are usually eager to trumpet thei r support for the troops and the war against terror. So why aren’t they condemning the Florida pastor who plans to lead his congregation in a Quran-burning bonfire on Sept. 11? … With the exception of Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah… elected Republicans — and, to be fair, most elected Democrats as well — have ducked and run.” Now, just a few days before the planned burning, some prominent conservatives, such as Mitt Romney have spoken out against burning the Quran. But others like Sarah Palin and John Boehner, while now condemning the act, claim that it is the same as building a Muslim community center near Ground Zero in Manhattan.

Tony the fist; Park 51 would have a prayer room, not a mosque.

alamo2 said: Islam was not responsible for 9/11. Terrorists who happen to be Islamic are responsible.

No true Scotsman…

Joe4more said:
Are all Catholic priests pedophiles?

Are all analogies inapt?

Pablo said:
Or could it be the video of KSM beheadding Danny Pearl? Or, maybe it would be a huge mosque overlooking Ground Zero, because you know that’s how they’ll spin that. Who knows? They’ll use anything they can spin to their advantage to convince people that dying at the hands of the US Armed Forces is a great idea. They’re always going to have a list of great reasons to die for Allah and whatever we do is going to land on it, one way or another.

Yes. And those are the radicals doing it. We need to be smart with our rhetoric. (For the record, the community center looking down on Ground Zero won’t be a picture, because a) not only not a mosque it doesn’t look like a mosque, no dome and minarets and b) it won’t be overlooking Ground Zero, building in the way.) We aren’t going to keep the guy from burning the Korans (crazy is as crazy does) but we need to make sure we separate ourselves from the act, at the same time saying, it’s their freedom, let them do it. Of course, we aren’t saying that so much with the Ground Zero community center, since the thinking is, it’s their freedom, don’t let them do it. That’s the primary difference between the two. It’s easy to say it’s similar on broad terms, but tearing it apart it’s more complicated a comparison, and it can be argued that they aren’t the same at all.

Pablo said: Do you really think that we’ve been in Iraq and Afghanistan spending untold blood and treasure instead of just turning it all to glass because we’re incapable of differentiating between various sorts of Muslims? We’re fighting side by side with Muslims, lots of them. Some of them are us, and they perform very honorably.

Agreed on that. But is that the same thinking going on outside the military, i.e. here in this country.

Pablo said: Right, and that needs to be pointed out to those who seem unable to grasp that. We make those distinctions constantly, and we shouldn’t be alone in doing it.

Again, our 4000 + dead and the fact that Iraq and Afghanistan still have native populations is evidence that we understand that quite well, as are the 2M or so Muslims living freely and peacefully here in the US.

Well, the living freely (good bye community center you wanted to build, problem in Tennessee) and peacefully (cab driver, Tennessee) is debatable now. But of course, if the rhetoric can be more anti-extremism and less anti-Islamic then we could help turn those feelings around.

Are you suggesting that radical Muslims are an invented enemy, because we need to have one?

Where did you get that? Other than the immigration thing, were any of our enemies invented enemies? I’m saying that radical Islam is small potatoes. Those who are making them our enemy know that it is too small. Thus, we get that Islam is the Evil Empire (we always need an Evil Empire for some reason) It’s the idea of making a huge enemy. Were we really in that much danger from the “communist” threat during the McCarthy era? We are at war with radical Islams, and it makes it more difficult because it’s not one country, and thus, people who don’t fall into the lines of radical Islam suffer in this country because they are Muslims (see Tennessee, California, and other stories where violence and discrimination is becoming rampant. See my friend of Indian descent who gets hounded by people just because he looks Muslim, he had quite the time here in NYC after 9/11). I think that is the danger of the rhetoric that is coming out of politicians. It really is just something new my friends and I have been discussing, probably doesn’t amount to much in the long run and probably wrong place to open that discussion.

Tony the Fist said:
“Still not a mosque. The 92nd Street Y isn’t a synagogue. This isn’t a mosque.” So the Imam is a liar then? He says it is. The NYT says it is. There’s a kitchen at my church, doesn’t make it a restaurant.

Examine your own thought process before you start casting aspersions on anyone’s honesty.

In what article, New York Times or otherwise, Rauf call the Park51 center a mosque? It’s been painfully clear from the start of this ridiculous debate that the proposed center was never intended to function as a mosque. Rauf is already the imam at Masjid al-Farah; there’s no credible media report that Park51 is meant to replace or even augment that congregation, especially since its facility is already in downtown Manhattan.

There’s a might be a bible at your house, doesn’t make it a church. Again, this is not a mosque.

blurgh. said:
Again, this is not a mosque.

Is that what they’re telling the IRS?

By the way, you might want to tell Imam Rauf that Islam isn’t responsible for violence. He just went on national TV and linked the two.

So, finally Palin makes a statement. This coming from a woman that could be Pastor Terry Jones twin!! That’s funny!!!! So has been just as hateful as this man, but all of a sudden she is respecting rights? This is laughable, and all for publicity for her & Becks rally, which will cost people to attend. When will the media quit giving this quitter publicity?

“Examine your own thought process before you start casting aspersions on anyone’s honesty.” Forgive, me sir, but it seems like you’re casting apersions on Rauf’s honesty. IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE, IT’S A MOSQUE. If Rauf was building a Yemeni restaurant no one would give a crap. Also, there’s this facinating site, called Goople, or Gogle or some such. You can find all kind of information on the Old Gray Lady and the articles they provide. Cheers.

Pablo said:
That is what virtually everyone here has been saying. I don’t know what you’re waiting for, especially when one of the very few people here to endorse burning religious texts was you.

Are you sure you want to be pursuing this line of inquiry? Are you going to tell us how you’ve been against such ideas all along?

Congratulations there is the spin. So why all those posts on the other thread which righties and lefties arguing? Over what if both parties understood the *constitutional right* to burn them. Then there should have been no debate. And I didn’t say *all* on the right here, I said some.

And please, that was sarcasm (or how I perceived it) by the poster and my sarcasm back. Further down on that thread I said I would oppose burning of the bible as well.

Permatiltx said:
That’s the primary difference between the two. It’s easy to say it’s similar on broad terms, but tearing it apart it’s more complicated a comparison, and it can be argued that they aren’t the same at all.

None of that matters. Again, as far as the radicals are concerned, whatever we do will be wrong and a good reason to fight us. America can do no right. Plus, we keep blowing their jihadi assess up and if that doesn’t piss them off, I don’t know what will.

Agreed on that. But is that the same thinking going on outside the military, i.e. here in this country.

Yes, I’d say so.

Well, the living freely (good bye community center you wanted to build, problem in Tennessee) and peacefully (cab driver, Tennessee) is debatable now.

Not really. All things considered, you’re talking about a couple of incidents in a community of millions. Statistically, it’s noise, and the looney tunes that stabbed the cabbie is evidence of that.

But of course, if the rhetoric can be more anti-extremism and less anti-Islamic then we could help turn those feelings around.

Sure, and the more fervent anti-extremism rhetoric we can get out of the Muslim community, the better.

Where did you get that? Other than the immigration thing, were any of our enemies invented enemies?

I got that from you saying this:

But the truth of the matter is that for some reason, we as a nation, need a national enemy.

I was looking for clarification of that comment, as it seems to imply that we’ll just make an enemy up if we have to because we need to have one. That’s why I asked.

Enough is enough. Palin is about as smart as rainbow trout. Thanks to her and Rip Van McCain, we have Barry Soetoro for another 2 years. You are not a celebrity, your are not of Presidential caliber. Do the GOP a favor and challenge them to find two qualified candidates for 2012 and shut up about the Koran burning. Have you forgotten they flew hijacked planes into the World Trade Center nine years ago or where you busy waving the pom poms in the air and yelling, “Fight Team Fight”?

Tony the Fist said:
“Examine your own thought process before you start casting aspersions on anyone’s honesty.” Forgive, me sir, but it seems like you’re casting apersions on Rauf’s honesty. IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE, IT’S A MOSQUE. If Rauf was building a Yemeni restaurant no one would give a crap. Also, there’s this facinating site, called Goople, or Gogle or some such. You can find all kind of information on the Old Gray Lady and the articles they provide. Cheers.

If you can’t find the articles, you should just say so.

And it’s not a mosque.

Tony the Fist says: “IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE IT’S A MOSQUE, IT’S A MOSQUE.”

Technically it’s a proposal, and no matter how loudly you scream doesn’t make it real.

What is planned is a cultural center with the tops two floors being set aside as prayer rooms. That is what the grown ups are saying, but Tony the Fist is clearly not qualified to be considered “grown up.”

How about coming back as “Tony the Mind” and stop your childish yelling? Only then can this opinion be reconsidered.

To paraphrase Jon Stewart.

Evidently Christians are insensitive when they want to burn a Koran and Muslims are insensitive when they want to read one.

I’m confused. Is there going to still be a gay bar?

Palin and Beck are wrong (again). Beck is stupid to even speak out about this issue, but that’s never stopped him before. This time, it’s especially arrogant of him.
http://www.sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com/2010/09/beck-blogs-from-theblaze-and-compares.html

Beck, Palin and Limbaugh are zombies:
http://www.truth-out.org/revenge-zombies-palin-beck-limbaugh-and-return-dark-times59952

Thelonious Funk said:
I’m confused. Is there going to still be a gay bar?

Doesn’t matter. I’m sure you can find one you like somewhere in NYC.

“How about coming back as “Tony the Mind” and stop your childish yelling? Only then can this opinion be reconsidered.” Please forgive my all caps, but if it’s not a mosque what’s all the fuss is about? The fact that it’s a place where Muslims go to pray makes it a mosque. The fact that it may have a swimming pool (no women allowed) doesn’t change that. You don’t understand that what Mulims value is Islam, above all else. Countless millions of dollars and all this hoopla doesn’t go on because someone wants to build a YMCA.

“If you can’t find the articles, you should just say so.” Go to NYT and in the search section enter “Ground Zero Mosque.”

Tony the Fist said:
“If you can’t find the articles, you should just say so.” Go to NYT and in the search section enter “Ground Zero Mosque.”

No. You cite Rauf as stating that the center is a mosque. Prove it.

Tony the Fist said:
“How about coming back as “Tony the Mind” and stop your childish yelling? Only then can this opinion be reconsidered.” Please forgive my all caps, but if it’s not a mosque what’s all the fuss is about? The fact that it’s a place where Muslims go to pray makes it a mosque. The fact that it may have a swimming pool (no women allowed) doesn’t change that. You don’t understand that what Mulims value is Islam, above all else. Countless millions of dollars and all this hoopla doesn’t go on because someone wants to build a YMCA.

The fuss is because they’re Muslims who are trying to buy and develop a property two blocks from Ground Zero. Just because the media calls it a mosque does not mean it is a mosque. I assume that are willing to be skeptical of the media otherwise, so why you rest so much of your argument on media coverage is amusing.

These are American Muslims. They’ve lived peacefully in our communities for years before now. Are there exceptions? Yes, one or two, as there are with any faith. Does Scott Roeder represent Christianity? Should he? Of course not. Nor do terrorists represent Islam. At least not to rational people.

blurgh. said:
There’s a might be a bible at your house, doesn’t make it a church. Again, this is not a mosque.

It’s cool. No mas…. I mean ‘mosque. ;o)

And I say the dude in Florida is just a pyromaniac who likes to watch things burn and he just happens to believe that Korans put off a particularly lovely shade of laveneder.

i swear the hypocrisy is so damned thick. Dude can burn the books is he wants as long as he complies with the law. And he should not be threatened with violence (too late for that). He SHOULD HAVE been ignored completely but…. obviously THAT’S not gonna happen. Anybody know why?

By the same token, dude can build the mosque if he wants as long as he complies with the law.

IMO they are both WRONG but but but…. this is America and we have the right to be as wrong as we wanna be as long as we don’t break the law.

However, I’ve only seen threats of violence come from one side. Anybody know why?

“Nor do terrorists represent Islam. At least not to rational people.” I completely agree, blurgh, but people aren’t worried about moderate Muslims, they’re worried about radical Muslims. I have several Muslim friends serving in the Army and I know they are good people. But the “bad apples” as some call them keep leading the discussion it seems, and moderate Muslims are terrified of them.

More brilliant words from this Republiscum, folksy, semi-coherent peep. That moose-chasin’ anti-choice anti-feminist destroyer of linear grammar & all things intelligent. Appealing to the unwashed GOP masses that are just as uninformed & generally ignorant of global & social complexity as she. Licking serpent skins while watching NASCAR. Go, Sarah, go!!! Yup.

Tony the Fist says: “The fact that it’s a place where Muslims go to pray makes it a mosque.”

I appreciate that you’re not yelling. I have to ask, what are your credentials for making such an assertion? Is Mecca a mosque? Muslims often pray where they are. Is the world a mosque?

Let’s turn this around: if Christians get together at someone’s house for a Bible reading and they pray first, is that a church?

Rauf is not calling the upper floors of Park 51 a mosque, how can you arrogate your claim without facts, documentation, links to back it up?

FearMonger said:
It’s cool. No mas…. I mean ‘mosque. ;o)

And I say the dude in Florida is just a pyromaniac who likes to watch things burn and he just happens to believe that Korans put off a particularly lovely shade of laveneder.

i swear the hypocrisy is so damned thick. Dude can burn the books is he wants as long as he complies with the law. And he should not be threatened with violence (too late for that). He SHOULD HAVE been ignored completely but…. obviously THAT’S not gonna happen. Anybody know why?

By the same token, dude can build the mosque if he wants as long as he complies with the law.

IMO they are both WRONG but but but…. this is America and we have the right to be as wrong as we wanna be as long as we don’t break the law.

However, I’ve only seen threats of violence come from one side. Anybody know why?

You’re equating Muslims abroad to American Muslims. Right?

Tony the Fist said:
“Nor do terrorists represent Islam. At least not to rational people.” I completely agree, blurgh, but people aren’t worried about moderate Muslims, they’re worried about radical Muslims. I have several Muslim friends serving in the Army and I know they are good people. But the “bad apples” as some call them keep leading the discussion it seems, and moderate Muslims are terrified of them.

But we define those terrifying individual as terrorists. They’re extremists. For them to be extreme, there has to be a spectrum of Islam. The great majority of Muslims have proven that they are not terrorists. American Muslims have proven that, as a whole, they’re not terrorists. This pastor cannot tell the difference between an American Muslim and a Muslim terrorist because he’s concluded, as have many people on this comment board, that Islam preaches violence. They forget that these terrorists are from a theopolitical climate that regularly blurs the line between faith and politics, that these few zealots don’t speak to what we as a nation gain by having American Muslims among us, just as we gain from Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, African, Latino, etc., etc.

Islam is not the threat; terrorists who use religion to excuse their crimes are the threat.

CosmosDan said:
To paraphrase Jon Stewart.

Evidently Christians are insensitive when they want to burn a Koran and Muslims are insensitive when they want to read one.

Who’s stopping them from reading whatever they want?

blurgh. said:
Just because the media calls it a mosque does not mean it is a mosque.

What will the IRS be calling it?

Okay, Blurgh (if I may call you that). If that one is too tough, how about this: If it’s not a mosque, how does opposing its construction infringe on anybody’s religious freedoms?

Nachi said:
More brilliant words from this Republiscum, folksy, semi-coherent peep. That moose-chasin’ anti-choice anti-feminist destroyer of linear grammar & all things intelligent. Appealing to the unwashed GOP masses that are just as uninformed & generally ignorant of global & social complexity as she.

Wrong, most likely, Guilt-Riddled, Liberal White Boy. Because This member of the unwashed, uninformed GOP masses, Knows All About HIS, Ancient Greek, had toilets that flushed with water into a sewer system under the street) Ancestry, and All ABOUT Islam, and all About how Alexander only made to Afghanistan, which is why They Still wipe their Asses with their Hands, and all About why Some of These Uslama-oFascists are only about Killing every last One of us. So I’m a long, Long way, from being Uninformed, Jack. In fact, I’m Immmensely Proud of My Ancestry. Have No Shame about it WhatsoEver. Primarily because of the Fact, that it’s an Ancestry of National Republican Greek Leaguers who Cut PLENTY of Communist, Fascist and Socialist (aka “Progressive”) Throats, so that the Birthplace Of The Free, Democratic, REPUBLIC Could and WOULD Survive, and Maintain Her Freedom and Independence from Just the sort of “peeps” that I’m Talking about here Now.

i.e, Those who’d ally themselves with Any Group or Organization, no Matter How antithetical to its Own *ahem* morals, values and standards Theirs are, if it meant that They’d maintain Power And Control over The American.. err Greek Peoples Lives. In short, They were Soulless Whores who might One day, have to be Dealt With. Like These Two – who are Really Reaching Now. LOL!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/arianna-discusses-quran-b_b_710321.html

Yup. Just Like the “Your Christian Faith” Dwarf, And Ms. Gabor, who only votes Her ‘Tzekbook’. Not by Partee AfilleeAcion, Nor by Polytikal beelifs, Tzorg. Jesus Christ! Learn To Speak Engrish Already, Μορη Πουτάνα!

Licking serpent skins while watching NASCAR. Go, Sarah, go!!! Yup.

Wrong Yet again, il Duce’bag. Because except for the Big Ovals and Road course races, I, “who is a fellow destroyer of linear grammar”, No Likey NASCAR much. I Do However, Love F1 Racing, and Have Loved it since was a kid Because, You See, NASCAR’s short oval races Suck. As they run Too many damn cars, And Because they’ve overcomplicated their scoring system in General, for the Networks. For the Cash. I Used to Love Nascar though. But That was back in days of The Intimidator, and David Pearson and, Of COURSE, King Richard and His 426 Hemi Superbird, Who had the Baby-Boomer, Acid-Trippin’ Hippie Fucks saying, OMG! It’s That Planet-Killer that’s gonna bring on a Second ICE AGE, Man! So let’s go Start A Riot, Or blow some Up Innocent People, or Spit On Some Vietnam Vets.. or Something! Dig it! etc., etc, etc.

Jim Treacher said:
What will the IRS be calling it?

ouchie

TCinAZ you might like the isle of Man TT its an amazing motorcycle race, or the world rally championships both on Discovery HD theater.My motor sport is ROCK CRAWLING

Tony the Fist said:
“How about coming back as “Tony the Mind” and stop your childish yelling? Only then can this opinion be reconsidered.” Please forgive my all caps, but if it’s not a mosque what’s all the fuss is about? The fact that it’s a place where Muslims go to pray makes it a mosque. The fact that it may have a swimming pool (no women allowed) doesn’t change that. You don’t understand that what Mulims value is Islam, above all else. Countless millions of dollars and all this hoopla doesn’t go on because someone wants to build a YMCA.

Tony, read the linked article on mediate that includes Iman Rauf’s NYT article. It says
“At Cordoba House, we envision shared space for community activities, like a swimming pool, classrooms and a play space for children. There will be separate prayer spaces for Muslims, Christians, Jews and men and women of other faiths. The center will also include a multifaith memorial dedicated to victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.”
so is it also a church and a Synagogue?

Jim Treacher said:
Who’s stopping them from reading whatever they want?

protests in the area they want to read in.

Jim Treacher said:
What will the IRS be calling it?

Jim Treacher said:
Okay, Blurgh (if I may call you that). If that one is too tough, how about this: If it’s not a mosque, how does opposing its construction infringe on anybody’s religious freedoms?

It’ll probably fall under some sort of nonprofit auspice, like the 92nd Street Y.

And the second question’s not tough at all. It’s called religious discrimination. All the commotion is a result of the center’s founders being Muslim. The problem isn’t that you won’t let them pray, it’s that you don’t want Muslims to build and own a community center in lower Manhattan because it’s too close to an area that was devastated by attacks perpetrated by religious zealots who happen to be Muslim. Easy.

Tony the Fist said:
“Nor do terrorists represent Islam. At least not to rational people.” I completely agree, blurgh, but people aren’t worried about moderate Muslims, they’re worried about radical Muslims. I have several Muslim friends serving in the Army and I know they are good people. But the “bad apples” as some call them keep leading the discussion it seems, and moderate Muslims are terrified of them.

Glad to hear you say this Tony. I hope when you hear people lumping all Muslims together you correct them.

The Imam in NYC is trying to speak for peace and he’s being painted as a bad guy. I understand average citizens being scared of the brutal radicals , but at some point Muslims have to take a stronger stand in speaking out against terrorism and the teaching of hatred. Otherwise the fight keeps going on. IN the meantime we need to defend and live by the principles of our constitution and promote religious tolerance.

Jim Treacher said:
Okay, Blurgh (if I may call you that). If that one is too tough, how about this: If it’s not a mosque, how does opposing its construction infringe on anybody’s religious freedoms?

Interesting. How about because it’s being built by a religious organization and the protests against it are based on religion.

“That’s because you lack wisdom. He does have the right (although there are local ordinances in place against burning toxic chemicals like Koran ink); but if you don’t have a problem with his doing it, then you don’t care about the troops who will die as a consequence.

This stupid and dangerous Islamaphobe needs to be surrounded by fire trucks this Saturday and flooded with water if he so much as lights a match. Presidents always curb liberties for reasons of national security, and doing so here would be Lincolnian.”

Amazing – in one breath he admits the large number of Muslims around the world whoa re going to commit murder and untold violence because their book is burned – then uses the word Islamaphobe as if, assuming the violence is true, it would be a bad thing.

Under this same idea is Naziphobe a bad thing?

CosmosDan said:
protests in the area they want to read in.

Oh, so the Koran isn’t being banned? Funny, because that’s what it sounded like you were saying.

blurgh. said:
And the second question’s not tough at all. It’s called religious discrimination.

So: It’s not a mosque, but opposing it is religious discrimination. You are a deep thinker.

CosmosDan said:
Interesting. How about because it’s being built by a religious organization and the protests against it are based on religion.

How about playing more semantic games about whether or not it’s a mosque.

Jim Treacher said:
So: It’s not a mosque, but opposing it is religious discrimination. You are a deep thinker.

Telling a group of individuals that they should not use a building because their religion is the same one that extremists manipulated to a political end? Yeah, that’s called religious discrimination. Textbook, even.

blurgh. said:
Telling a group of individuals that they should not use a building because their religion is the same one that extremists manipulated to a political end? Yeah, that’s called religious discrimination. Textbook, even.

…but it’s not a mosque.

It doesn’t have to be a mosque. The mosque is not a mosque. Get over the mosque.

Telling one religious group that they can’t do business or buy property because of their religious orientation is religious discrimination.

Seriously, though. If you’re the same Jim Treacher I think you are, you’re sincerely disappointing me.

Whereas if you’re the same blurgh I think you are, you’re not really affecting me emotionally whatsoever.

Zing.

Now address the substance of this discussion.

You first.

Disappointment increasing. I think I’ll have to cry myself to sleep.

Sigh. Well, like I wrote in response to your questions, it’s religious discrimination to tell a group they can’t own property because of their religious affiliation.

And the Park51 center is still not a mosque.

There is no comparison to building a mosque and burning the Quoran. Churches can be built anywhere, why not mosques. Islam did not fly planes into the twin towers. It was done by some crazy people that just happened to be Muslims. Why blame a whole religion. The people who want to burn the quoran are crazy people who happen to be Christians. Do you blame all Christians? Muslims have lived peacefully in America for generations Sarah Palin lumped both incidents together as if they are the same. I know for some of you she can do or say no wrong. Actually the only person that fits as a perfect human being is Jesus. We need to be reasonable and search for the truth instead of taking a person”s word as gospel. People who follow imperfect men/women without question are doomed to repeat disaster. Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are out for money. Why would you charge for an event on 9/11 when supposedly the day is very sacred to you. Also at a time when people are crying about jobs, and the economy. They profess to be “Christians” and to love you so much. Christ never charged for anything, and to be a Christian is to be a footstep follower of Jesus Christ. You deserve to get what you ask for. The only thing is if the Tea Party/Repubs win, reasonable people get what you deserve also. Try doing some research people before you drink the kool Aide. SOBBING as I write this.

blurgh. said:
Well, like I wrote in response to your questions, it’s religious discrimination to tell a group they can’t own property because of their religious affiliation.

And the Park51 center is still not a mosque.

And you see no contradiction between the two. It’s the only interesting thing about you, really.

Jim Treacher said:
Oh, so the Koran isn’t being banned? Funny, because that’s what it sounded like you were saying.

No. Palin and others have come out against the Koran burning and equated it with the Park 51 building, claiming they are both insensitive. So, Evidently Christians are insensitive for wanting to burn the Koran, Muslims are insensitive for wanting to read it.

Jim Treacher said:
And you see no contradiction between the two. It’s the only interesting thing about you, really.

It’s not a contradiction.

Nondiscrimination policies, dude. They exist in anticipation of accusations of unfair hiring and housing practices. The idea is to assure people that the organization “prohibits discrimination against current or prospective users and employees on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation or any other legally protected characteristics.”

Legally protected characteristics because the spirit of the Civil Rights Act ensures that any given characteristic that divides us culturally, ethnically, religiously, racially, etc. isn’t reason enough to treat anybody exhibiting those characteristics differently from someone who doesn’t. Telling Muslims they can’t do something because they’re Muslim is religious discrimination.

Fin.

Jim Treacher said:
How about playing more semantic games about whether or not it’s a mosque.

It seems like you’re the one playing semantic games. You’re implying it has to be a mosque because of a possible tax free status and the accusation of religious discrimination. You’ve been given viable explanations that you evidently reject , but you’ve offered no reasonable counter argument. I could care less about semantics. They have a right to build it there and should not be intimidated by an unreasonable connection to 9/11 on the basis of their religion. The point of calling it a the ground zero Mosque was to conjure a false image and fan the fires of religious intolerance.

Imam Rauf in his NYT op-ed explained that it will have a swimming pool, and a place for Christians, Jews, and Muslims to pray so I guess it’s a Churchsynagoguemosquegym and the protests are practicing triple religious and aquatic discrimination. Man, semantics are challenging.

blurgh. said:
It’s not a contradiction.

kinda like this….

blurgh. said:
The mosque is not a mosque

LMAO!!

Mosque/ NO mas… umm…mosque. Does it really matter? Would your argument be any different if it WAS called a ‘mosque’ by the Imam himself?

Speaking of ‘the Imam himself’….

CosmosDan said:
“At Cordoba House, we envision

Hmmmmm. Interesting huh? The Imam calls it ‘The Cordoba House’ but…. I guess YOU know better what the Imam wants to call than the Imam himself.

blurgh. said:
And the Park51 center is still not a mosque.

Of course I know you all are fully aware of this but I thought I would post the link anyway, just cuz I enjoy connecting crazy random dots like this for the sake of nutty obscure conspiracy-type shit….

“Great Mosque of Córdoba”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mosque_of_C%C3%B3rdoba

It took a lot of ‘googling’ to come up with that link. You can thank me later.

Anyway, its’ all bullshit anyway. Dude can build the thing if he wants and dude can burn the books if he wants… as long as they BOTH comply with the law.

Much ado about nothing IMO except for one thing…. the hypocrisy on display is EPIC. Those who would have their cake and eat it too are hatin’ life these days.

That’s why I’ve been in such a good mood!

FearMonger said:
kinda like this….

LMAO!!

Mosque/ NO mas… umm…mosque. Does it really matter? Would your argument be any different if it WAS called a ‘mosque’ by the Imam himself?

Speaking of ‘the Imam himself’….

Hmmmmm. Interesting huh? The Imam calls it ‘The Cordoba House’ but…. I guess YOU know better what the Imam wants to call than the Imam himself.

Of course I know you all are fully aware of this but I thought I would post the link anyway, just cuz I enjoy connecting crazy random dots like this for the sake of nutty obscure conspiracy-type shit….

“Great Mosque of Córdoba”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mosque_of_C%C3%B3rdoba

It took a lot of ‘googling’ to come up with that link. You can thank me later.

Anyway, its’ all bullshit anyway. Dude can build the thing if he wants and dude can burn the books if he wants… as long as they BOTH comply with the law.

Much ado about nothing IMO except for one thing…. the hypocrisy on display is EPIC. Those who would have their cake and eat it too are hatin’ life these days.

That’s why I’ve been in such a good mood!

What’s the hypocrisy? Seriously. The pastor was threatening to burn a holy book because American Muslims want to build a community center in downtown Manhattan. I have yet to come across any credible stories about American Muslims threatening violence against against the pastor or his congregation. You can compare the two but equating them is silly and logically false.

If anything, the hypocrisy lies in Palin and Boeher’s conclusion that the Qu’ran shouldn’t be set ablaze because it’s un-American and then extending that premise to basically conclude that a Muslim-founded community center by Ground Zero is equally un-American.

our website: http://www.fashionshoppong.us

BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!

The hateful Koran burning by a far right extremist pastor of a tiny church does not compare to the bridge-building cultural center at Park 51. They are different, unrelated and opposite matters.

Linking them together as Beck and Palin have is deceitful, sleazy and divisive. Neither of these two have any shame, subtlety of mind or cultural sophistication.

http://www.sharethisurlaboutglennbeck.com/2010/09/beck-blogs-from-theblaze-and-compares.html

Geez ‘you people’ are thick…..

blurgh. said:
What’s the hypocrisy? Seriously

The hypocrisy is in the selective outrage…. seriously. Some of the same people who defend the mosque/ cordoba house/ ymca/ studio 54 on the basis that “it may be wrong but but but it’s legal and the costitution protects blah blah blah” are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO “outraged” by book-burner preacher man.

What he planned to do was legal and constitutionally protected (and wrong) too. Defend one you defend them both. Period.

Is that REALLY so hard to understand? If you want to make the argument that nobody on the left said preacher man shouldn’t be allowed to follow through with his plan then make it. Otherwise comprehend the validity of the parallel and stop making it about something it’s NOT.

And btw…. before you start accusing me of ‘lumping together’ everyone on the left…. take a look around. Leftwingers wrote the book on LUMPING….I’m just learning to embrace it myself.

You know what they say…. IF YOU CAN’T BEAT ‘EM, JOIN ‘EM!

CosmosDan said:
So, Evidently Christians are insensitive for wanting to burn the Koran, Muslims are insensitive for wanting to read it.

They can’t read it outside of a mosque.

blurgh. said:
Telling Muslims they can’t do something because they’re Muslim is religious discrimination.

And asking them to build somewhere else is “telling them they can’t do something because they’re Muslim.” Plus, it’s not a mosque. So they have Internet access on Bizarro World, huh?

CosmosDan said:
You’re implying it has to be a mosque because of a possible tax free status and the accusation of religious discrimination.

Is the IRS in the habit of granting tax-free status to everybody and anybody?

CosmosDan said:
Imam Rauf in his NYT op-ed explained that it will have a swimming pool, and a place for Christians, Jews, and Muslims to pray so I guess it’s a Churchsynagoguemosquegym and the protests are practicing triple religious and aquatic discrimination.

My church had a basketball court. Guess it wasn’t really a church.

FearMonger said:
Geez ‘you people’ are thick…..

The hypocrisy is in the selective outrage…. seriously. Some of the same people who defend the mosque/ cordoba house/ ymca/ studio 54 on the basis that “it may be wrong but but but it’s legal and the costitution protects blah blah blah” are SOOOOOOOOOOOOO “outraged” by book-burner preacher man.

What he planned to do was legal and constitutionally protected (and wrong) too. Defend one you defend them both. Period.

Is that REALLY so hard to understand? If you want to make the argument that nobody on the left said preacher man shouldn’t be allowed to follow through with his plan then make it. Otherwise comprehend the validity of the parallel and stop making it about something it’s NOT.

And btw…. before you start accusing me of ‘lumping together’ everyone on the left…. take a look around. Leftwingers wrote the book on LUMPING….I’m just learning to embrace it myself.

You know what they say…. IF YOU CAN’T BEAT ‘EM, JOIN ‘EM!

Selective outrage isn’t hypocrisy. Jesus Christ. It’d be hypocritical if they were anything alike, but they’re not. Case A: Muslims want to build a community center in downtown New York accessible to any person of any faith with the stated intent of diffusing tension between Muslims and non-Muslims. Outrage in Case A is because they are being told that they should not establish a center because they are Muslims and extremists who militarized Islam attacked an area two blocks away from the proposed site.

Case B: A pastor of a small congregation in Florida announced that he would lead a burning of Qu’rans, which is obviously in retaliation to the American Muslim’s proposed community center. Outrage in Case B is because its a disproportional and symbolic attack at a faith that is being misrepresented and a group of American Muslims who are being unfairly painted as being in collusion with religious extremists.

One is a response to another, but the intent behind either case is disparate from the other. Both Allahpundit and Tom Maguire at least posit that if Rauf’s words are to be given any credence, these are two very different stories that aren’t necessarily comparable, at least if we’re not trying to ignore context.

Jim Treacher said:
And asking them to build somewhere else is “telling them they can’t do something because they’re Muslim.” Plus, it’s not a mosque. So they have Internet access on Bizarro World, huh?

Now you’re just being contrarian. They’re being told by critics that they should not use that particular building because they are Muslim and the 9/11 attackers were Muslim. You’re telling them that they should not use that particular building because of the faith that they follow. That’s religious discrimination.

It’s gorgeous outside right now, though, so I’m going to take a stroll and live life well. Hope you’re getting plenty of sun yourself.

blurgh. said:
Now you’re just being contrarian.

You could be right.

blurgh. said: They’re being told by critics that they should not use that particular building because they are Muslim and the 9/11 attackers were Muslim. You’re telling them that they should not use that particular building because of the faith that they follow. That’s religious discrimination.

So merely expressing an opinion now carries the weight of actual intervention. What power these people you don’t like must have.

Well, if it were merely expressing an opinion, that’d be one thing. Aiming prop missiles at the proposed space, calling Rauf a terrorist sympathizer, creating unfathomable boundaries for Ground Zero, that kind of stuff necessitates a response, albeit a similarly rhetorical one. Which is what supporters of the center are doing.

And I don’t dislike many people. I don’t dislike you, or FearMonger, or Pablo or Tony the Fist. I just thought we were disagreeing.

blurgh. said:
Well, if it were merely expressing an opinion, that’d be one thing. Aiming prop missiles at the proposed space, calling Rauf a terrorist sympathizer, creating unfathomable boundaries for Ground Zero, that kind of stuff necessitates a response, albeit a similarly rhetorical one.

Those are opinions, dear.

Jim Treacher said:
Those are opinions, dear.

You seem to lack a sense of degree, Jim. I can call you Jim, right?

An opinion is fine. Disagreeing with Islam, disagreeing with Rauf, those are opinions. Pretending to play war with Islam and manipulating quotes to fit a narrative, damn the context, those aren’t opinions. Well, if you’re reducing this to a semantics game, sure, they’re opinions. You can pat your inner middle school Lincoln-Douglass debater on his back.

But for an adult to be perfectly fine with the manipulation of facts as the foundation for a supposed reasonable response to a pretty nuanced situation, well that’s kind of embarrassing. You, Palin, Boeher, whoever are perfectly entitled to do so. But yeah, it’s a little embarrassing.

I do appreciate the civil tone. Snarky is one thing but calling each other STOOOPID is just juvenile. I find myself in the position of defending two things I find equally reprehensible. I was in a similar position in the TILLER THE KILLER debate. That dirty birdy was a baby-killing monster but but but it was WRONG to kill him. By the same token I understood why Roeder did what he did but it was still WRONG. If we could go around killing people who MAY … in our opinions… deserve to die, then I probably would have been murdered a long time ago.

And YES…. I DO believe that building that mosque on that site is wrong. I’ve said it here many times. Especially now that the opposition is so overwhelming and clearly expressed, to stubbornly insist on pushing forward against this much objection IMO casts doubt on the original intent. In other words, I’m starting to think that maybe it WAS intended to be a thumb in our eye after all.

Some of my Jewish friends have said “That’s what they DO. They build mosques on sites of (perceived)victories as constant salt in the wound.” I didn’t want to believe it but…. some of what I have read has led me to second guess my first instinct to give them the benefit of the doubt. I’m sure by now everyone has read the Imam’s comments that sound an awful lot like extortion….. warning of the repercussions from “the muslim world” if they DON’T build the damned thing. Seems he’s a LOT more worried about what MUSLIMS will do if it’s NOT built than he is about what the Studio 54 OPPONENTS will do if it IS built. Hmmm….

In case you don’t recognize it ….. those are BULLY TACTICS…. aka blackmail. “I get what I want or YOU get a black eye.”

btw BLURGH…. that thinly veiled threat of violence includes the book-burner and his flock. So YES …. they HAVE been threatened. And YES…. by AMERICAN MUSLIMS. Unless you think there are no radical muslims in America…

That being said…. the biggest problem I have is with a different set or remarks than those that got the most attention… and THIS goes more to the heart of what we are discussing here…..

“As I mentioned, because if we move, that means the radicals have shaped the discourse. The radicals will shape the discourse on both sides. And those of us who are moderates on both sides — you see Soledad, the battle front is not between Muslims and non-Muslims. The real battle front is between moderates on all sides of all the faith traditions and the radicals on all sides. The radicals actually feed off each other. And in some kind of existential way, need each other. And the more that the radicals are able to control the discourse on one side, it strengthens the radicals on the other side and vice versa. We have to turn this around. ”

Keeping in mind that the ‘radicals’ he refers to on the muslim side are the ones who blew up Danish Embassies over the Mohammed cartoons and murdered the artist (in fact he warned that this ‘crisis’ could be MUCH BIGGER)… and keeping in mind that the Studio 54 opponents he refers to as ‘radical’ are peaceful and, in fact, have acknowledged that they HAVE THE RIGHT to build the damned thing….

HOW THE FUCK DOES HE GET AWAY WITH EQUATING THOSE TWO GROUPS? Dudes got a lotta nerve.

THAT’S why I’m glad that the book-burner pointed out the hypocrisy and YES….. it’s hypocrisy. You may not want to acknowledge the similarities but that doesn’t change the fact that they exist.

I know that the crux of your argument is that you discount that an overwhelming majority of Americans who feel that it is wrong to put Studio 54 at that site. A piece of one of the planes landed there and maybe that makes people feel it’s too damned close for a muslim prayer room. Like maybe the ‘imaginary boundary’ should be where ACTUAL SHRAPNEL stopped. Hell, there may be some who want the boundary to go all the way to where the dust cloud dissipated.

Whatever their reasons the FACT is that MOST people don’t like the idea. Just like MOST people thought it was a bad idea to burn those books. But but but this is America and they can do what they want. By the same token WE THE PEOPLE have the right to call them assholes for doing it. People can oppose the damned thing for whatever reason they choose on any particular day depending on their mood and NOBODY gets to ASSUME that they did it for some racist reason.

If that’s how they feel then, dammit…. that’s how they feel. They earned it. Nobody has perpetrated violence on random American muslims simply because they are muslim. In fact VIRTUALLY ALL AMERICANS have bent over backwards NOT to condemn the whole religion, starting with Dubya. Which is ANOTHER reason why it chaps my ass that the esteemed Imam feels justified in equating the two opposing groups of ‘radicals’.
ANYBODY who compares peaceful dissenters to murdering scum is FULL OF SHIT. Period.

You guys really should remember that you are talking about tens of millions of Americans who have every right to have their own opinion. It doesn’t make them stupid or ignorant but if you want to call them that then go ahead. Like I said, this is America.. you have the right to do as you wish within the law.

Which brings me to the last thing (sorry for the long rambling post). Americans feel passionately about this but they would never threaten to blow the place up or hold the construction hostage with threats of violence. IMO… THAT’S THE REAL DIFFERENCE we are talking about here ….

ONE DUDE threatened that some BOOKS will get burned…. THE OTHER DUDE threatened that some PEOPLE will get burned.

Get it? Maybe it’s just me….

blurgh. said:
Well, if you’re reducing this to a semantics game, sure, they’re opinions.

If a mosque isn’t a mosque, why would an opinion be an opinion? Illuminating as ever, friend blurgh.

I’m a fan, they hit both ways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWfktZQKL48&feature=player_embedded

No, it’s obviously not just you. But even standing arm in arm with millions of Americans who disagree with Park51 or Rauf’s efforts to build on that particular site, telling Muslims that they should not build on a specific site near Ground Zero not because what they’re doing is a bad idea, but because they are Muslim, that’s inherently un-American. What Boehner and Palin did, by declaring the burning of Qu’rans un-American and then equating the building of a community center founded by American Muslims to the suddenly un-American act of burning Qu’rans, that’s hypocrisy.

And I realize that the written word doesn’t translate very well when the reader has preconceived notions, but where you read a threat of violence in what Rauf wrote, most everyone else understands what it really is: a statement of fact. Extremists will use anything even slightly offensive about American’s attitudes towards Islam to motivate other extremists to join their crusade against the very American values and tenets that we use to celebrate diversity of thought and opinion. What Rauf wrote isn’t an invitation for extremists to attack; we’ve always known that the extremists will attack us regardless of what we do. What Rauf wrote was a reminder to all of us that every time that we jab and poke at Islam, we give extremists a new invitation to other extremists who are actually a threat to us. If the pastor is willing to have that on his conscience, then he should go on with his burning, rationality be damned.

Like I’ve said before in other posts and in other threads, we each have a right to our opinion. That’s great. But what separates us from other countries is that we each are able to express that opinion, and as a result, we are responsible for the impact that those opinions have. The majority of New Yorkers and the majority of Americans have spoken. Awesome. But majorities have been wrong before, and they’ll be wrong again. I’d venture to say that it’s wrong today. I assume you think it was wrong on Nov. 2 of 2008.

Opinions change, but the actions we take based on those opinions don’t, nor do the reactions we get from those opinions. Basically personal responsibility, not only the good results but also the results we aren’t as happy about.

Jim Treacher said:
If a mosque isn’t a mosque, why would an opinion be an opinion? Illuminating as ever, friend blurgh.

Park51′s center would not function as a mosque. Therefore, it isn’t a mosque.

An opinion is great and fine, but one stoked in logical fallacies and inaccuracies is more prone to being wrong and not based on fact. Opinions are conclusions based on facts, so a fact-deficient opinion isn’t much of an opinion.

I await your reduction of my opinion with baited breath.

blurgh. said:
Park51’s center would not function as a mosque.

Except for the mosque.

blurgh. said:
An opinion is great and fine, but one stoked in logical fallacies and inaccuracies is more prone to being wrong and not based on fact.

Congratulations. One step at a time.

Jim Treacher said:
Except for the mosque.

Okay. So you think it’s a mosque. I get it. Now prove it. Not to me, though. Prove it for the sake establishing it as fact and not your personal interpretation and conclusion of either Islam or Rauf as an individual and/or imam.

Or not.

Jim Treacher said:
Congratulations. One step at a time.

I get that you’re just goading me into something to either upset me or into writing something I’ll regret, either by insulting my intelligence or my grasp of reality, but you’re really doing yourself a disservice when the best you can come up with are veiled ad hominem attacks at my responses to your posts and questions.

blurgh. said:
Okay. So you think it’s a mosque. I get it. Now prove it.

So you don’t think there will be a mosque at that location, as announced by the developers. Upon what do you base this opinion?

I get that you’re just goading me into something to either upset me or into writing something I’ll regret, either by insulting my intelligence or my grasp of reality, but you’re really doing yourself a disservice when the best you can come up with are veiled ad hominem attacks at my responses to your posts and questions.

Merely acknowledging your slow, halting steps toward some semblance of self-awareness. Geez, ya try to be nice…

Jim Treacher said:
So you don’t think there will be a mosque at that location, as announced by the developers. Upon what do you base this opinion?

I base it on what little actual information we have on the development, which has been provided by the actual developers. Despite acknowledging prayer spaces, no media account has reported the establishment or the relocation of a congregation for this center, meaning that based on the admittedly little information available because of the project’s nascency, its primary purpose is its stated intent. Calling it a mosque at this point is, if not incorrect, premature.

Jim Treacher said:
Merely acknowledging your slow, halting steps toward some semblance of self-awareness. Geez, ya try to be nice…

It’s condescending. It’s fine though. I’m comfortable with both my education level and understand that there’s plenty new information and situations out there for me to digest and attempt to understand. I don’t assume to understand that which I don’t have much exposure to, and that there’s a diversity of opinion on everything. I don’t think you’re dumber than me, much less that I’m smarter than you. But you keep coming off like a condescending jerk. Almost elitist, if you will.

So maybe I shouldn’t have just had that tequila shot, but life’s too short to waste a Friday night on an Internet board with people who don’t have the grace and humility to accept that none of us live in a vacuum and that at the end of the day we’re all the same, despite different opinions and convictions.

Salud, Jim.

blurgh. said:
What Rauf wrote was a reminder to all of us that every time that we jab and poke at Islam, we give extremists a new invitation to other extremists who are actually a threat to us.

Right. So no poking…. ‘or else’…

You spoke of what is ‘un-American’. Well, “no poking” is un-American.

And being blackmailed with a ‘crisis that threatens out national security’ (paraphrasing), simply due to a failure to build a ‘community center’ in a sensitive location is, MOST DEFINITELY, un-American.

That’s the problem. They talk of ‘tolerance’ but they are intolerant and unwilling to compromise to the point that now, NO MATTER WHAT, they’re going to build the fucking thing. Period.

Right? I mean, that’s what the man said. “If we don’t build it there will be serious consequences” (paraphrasing again).

“Un-American” indeed.

FearMonger said:
Right? I mean, that’s what the man said. “If we don’t build it there will be serious consequences”

btw… that’s BULLYING 101.

http://therealrevo.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/ground_zero_map090251-505×591.jpg

Hey, everybody, I’m opening a prayer space. It’ll have an altar with a big crucifix, and people will sit in pews and listen to a guy in a robe talk about Jesus, and there’ll be organ music and songs about Jesus, and generally it’ll be oriented around worshipping Jesus. But it’s not a church, so don’t call it a church because it’s not one and I will get upset if you say it is.

Jim Treacher said:
Hey, everybody, I’m opening a prayer space. It’ll have an altar with a big crucifix, and people will sit in pews and listen to a guy in a robe talk about Jesus, and there’ll be organ music and songs about Jesus, and generally it’ll be oriented around worshipping Jesus. But it’s not a church, so don’t call it a church because it’s not one and I will get upset if you say it is.

Is it too inconvenient if I reiterate my request for you to prove that the function of the center is to primarily serve as a space for a Muslim congregation to pray? I mean, I know that it’s contradicts everything Rauf and the developers have said in the last week, but some evidence would be nice.

In the meantime, I have to finish cleaning house. Want to be sure I get a good spot to watch Breitbart and Wilders fan the flames of misinformation today. Should give you plenty of time.

blurgh. said:
Is it too inconvenient if I reiterate my request for you to prove that the function of the center is to primarily serve as a space for a Muslim congregation to pray?

Ah, primarily. Look at those goalposts go.

Jim Treacher said:
September 11, 2010 at 2:19 pm Jim Treacher(Q

So, no.

I’ve never said that there weren’t prayer rooms. Neither did Rauf.

Sigh.

Jim Treacher said:
Ah, primarily. Look at those goalposts go.

It must be fun to not have to stand by your talking points with facts.

blurgh. said:
Park51’s center would not function as a mosque. Therefore, it isn’t a mosque.

blurgh. said:
So you think it’s a mosque. I get it. Now prove it. Not to me, though.

LOL!

blurgh. said:
Still not a mosque. The 92nd Street Y isn’t a synagogue. This isn’t a mosque.

blurgh. said:
Again, this is not a mosque.

blurgh. said:
And it’s not a mosque.

blurgh. said:
The mosque is not a mosque. Get over the mosque.

blurgh.

said:
Calling it a mosque at this point is, if not incorrect, premature.

blurgh.

said:
I’ve never said that there weren’t prayer rooms.

LOL!

blurgh. said:
It must be fun to not have to stand by your talking points with facts.

You tell me.

So prayer rooms apparently equal mosques.

I wish this was still amusing. If you want to take context out of each post I’ve made, you can. But it’s not a mosque. I never say it is a mosque. I never say there aren’t prayer rooms. The thing about the written word and language at large is that there’s nuance and rhetorical devices that we use in conversation to move thoughts along. You seem to be stuck somewhere between the concrete and formal operation stages. I hope you can get out of that rut.

I hope Tucker knows about your apparent learning disability. Good night, Jim.

blurgh. said:
So prayer rooms apparently equal mosques.

Of course not!

blurgh. said:
I never say it is a mosque. I never say there aren’t prayer rooms.

You are hilarious.

blurgh. said:
I hope Tucker knows about your apparent learning disability. Good night, Jim.

Kisses!

Well, my visitors aren’t here yet, so I guess I’ll keep talking to myself a little longer.

If prayer spaces are sufficient definition for a mosque, then you better start protesting the corner of 17th and Fifth Avenue. I see a man lay out a mat and start praying there every day. Is there a way to retroactively protest the 17th floor of the south tower? And the Pentagon chapel has prayer service for Muslims from Monday through Thursdays and even offer a service on Fridays.

Holy crap.

Get busy.

Welcome back!

Gone again. Sorry.

Come up with other jackass responses while I’m out. See you tomorrow.

blurgh. said:
Come up with other jackass responses while I’m out.

My goodness.