Thanks Glynnis!

Funny thing is, on FOX, all they show are pictures of the WTC construction…hmmm, wonder why that is? They haven’t shown any pictures of the actual building, and the location, that is so hotly contested these days.

I wonder why that is? Maybe someone could put on their tin-foil hat and elaborate?

This is a great presentation, Glynnis. Most of the bleaters, moaners and whiners have no idea what this looks like. Now they have no excuse for not knowing. Thanks!

WITH LIES & DISTORTIONS
FOX NEWS IS REPLETE
BUT BECK EARNS THE TITLE:
MASTER OF DECEIT!

Em….Glynnis. Everyone is reporting that it is two blocks away from the WTC site. This is not news fella. You are not dropping some new point onto the subject…..you’re about three months too late.

More Liberty said:
Em….Glynnis. Everyone is reporting that it is two blocks away from the WTC site. This is not news fella. You are not dropping some new point onto the subject…..you’re about three months too late.

And that would make your comment superfluous.

WITH LIES & DISTORTIONS
FOX NEWS IS REPLETE
BUT BECK EARNS THE TITLE:
MASTER OF DECEIT!

Glynnis, Glynnis….are you not aware that most New Yorkers oppose the mosque as well. 6 in 10 oppose it dude. it is their right to oppose it. It is their right to have an opinion on the subject. Personally, I’m not saying that the government should tell a private land owner what to do with her/his property but people are allowed to disagree. This mosque is not bringing tolerance; in fact the whole idea is upsetting many people. It is having the opposite effect. It is not only the 70% of Americans that oppose this site that should be tolerance, but the owners of the mosque should also be tolerant and sensitive.

The Real Royal King said:
And that would make your comment superfluous.

I’m simply pointing out a fact. This piece points out the obvious.

As Treacher notes, in the interest of impeccable accuracy, we should refer to it as the 9/11 Debris Field Mosque.

“It used to be a Burlington Coat Factory.”

It was one of their stores not the factory.

I won’t beheading to that location any time soon . Which of the 13 floors will have the Women’s Rights Center ?The Lying to the Infidels classes ? The Bomb Backpack Assembly Room ?

“there is a “Amish Market’ begging the question: has anyone thought to ask the Amish how they feel about this proposed center?”\

I doubt the Amish own the market.

@More Liberty, “Everyone is reporting that it is two blocks away from the WTC site.”

I agree, the location of the proposed “mosque” has been reported everywhere.

“.are you not aware that most New Yorkers oppose the mosque as well. 6 in 10 oppose it dude.”

Right again. Most New Yorkers and 9/11 victims’ families are against it. Their opinion is more important than anyone else’s.

Maybe MacNicol should spent some time investigating why the Port Authority is standing in the way of the rebuilding of St. Nicholas Orthodox Church. Since it was one of the structures damaged in the Muslim terrorist attack no one, esp. not the government, should be standing in its way.

The Amish don’t make good terrorists. Riding a horse into the side of a building doesn’t do much.

Glynnis, what’s the food situation like over there–any good restaurants, diners?

Azarkhan said:
Glynnis, what’s the food situation like over there–any good restaurants, diners?

I haven’t seen any diners, but there are some good food stands.

Great! That’s one of the good things about NYC-food joints everywhere and you don’t have to be rich to eat well.

But it helps to have some dough if you want to live there.

Azarkhan said:
Great! That’s one of the good things about NYC-food joints everywhere and you don’t have to be rich to eat well.

So true. Plenty of delis offering delicious sandwiches for $5-$6.

Spine, You must be watching some other channel, the front of that building has been shown on Fox endlessly. Or maybe you are just blind.

Libs have a hard time grasping this issue. So maybe this will help.

In Illinois many years ago, 8 people were killed in a fast food restaurant. The owners had the right to reopen his restaurant after the police were through with it. They owned the property and the building and yet they never reopened that location again. In fact they tore it down. They knew the people that lived there did not want the restaurant to remind them of the killings.
Does anything sound familiar here?

The clerk at a gas staion and convience store located near my house was shot and killed. I saw no reason not to open that station again yet the owner never reopened and the building has been torn down.
Some people are sensitive to what the local people think even though they have the RIGHT to do whatever they want.

If the Muslims that own that site in N.Y. want to open a Mosque, they can anytime they want, it is just not going to happen at that location.

That Mosque will NEVER open. The RIGHT of the people to express themselves will be upheld.

It doesn’t matter how the place looks. What matters is how close it is to Ground Zero and it is too close.

It would be interesting to see if the place was 5-6 blocks away if the mosque people would sour on the location because it has less impact.

mikepower said:
It doesn’t matter how the place looks. What matters is how close it is to Ground Zero and it is too close.

It would be interesting to see if the place was 5-6 blocks away if the mosque people would sour on the location because it has less impact.

There is a mosque 4 blocks away. Is that too close?

I wonder how many Wal-Marts have been built around the country in communities that oppose them with a 6 in 10 majority.

It would be nice if the people with the mosque were tolerant and sensitive to New Yorkers. Tolerance works both ways.

Great article on this:

Obama’s Mosque Meandering

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/08/17/obamas_mosque_meandering_106779.html

Azarkhan said:
But it helps to have some dough if you want to live there.

You can do what everybody else does that can’t afford to live down there, jump on the PATH and live in Hoboken.

Thelonious Funk said:
I wonder how many Wal-Marts have been built around the country in communities that oppose them with a 6 in 10 majority.

Actually, funny that you bring that up, but many cities in New York, that would be the government, refused to give Wal-Mart the needed permits. Where was the out cry about property rights there? In these cases, the local governments are telling a private property owners what they can’t do with their property.

I’m sure that the Mosque owners would be very tolerant if bordering buildings hung huge pictures of cartoon caricatures of Muhammad and Allah. It would be my 1st Amendment right to stand on the public side walk, and hold a sign with a funny ass picture of Allah and Muhammad. Now, that is obviously insensitive, but legal.

More Liberty said:
Actually, funny that you bring that up, but many cities in New York, that would be the government, refused to give Wal-Mart the needed permits. Where was the out cry about property rights there? In these cases, the local governments are telling a private property owners what they can’t do with their property.

Places like New York & Chicago will give permits for Target to build stores in their cities with no problem yet Target pays less & gives less benefits than Wal-Mart.

MichelleF said:
Great article on this:

Obama’s Mosque Meandering

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/08/17/obamas_mosque_meandering_106779.html

Great article.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2010/08/islam-bashing_undermines_us_do.html

SpineCrusher said:
Thanks Glynnis! Funny thing is, on FOX, all they show are pictures of the WTC construction…hmmm, wonder why that is? They haven’t shown any pictures of the actual building, and the location, that is so hotly contested these days. I wonder why that is? Maybe someone could put on their tin-foil hat and elaborate?

This is completely untrue. I watch Fox News and I was well aware it was being constructed in the old Burlington Coat Factory two blocks from Ground Zero. I also am aware that the landing gear from one of the planes hit this building.

Liberals and the Cordoba initiative don’t seem to care about the “sensibilities” of the 9/11 victem’s families.

Did anyone here read the article in the Ottawan Citizen written by two members of the Muslem Canadian Congress? The authors called this project a provocation. And they aren’t even “racist bigots” or “islamophobes” like the rest of us. They said that Bloomberg and the rest don’t understand the battle that moderate muslems face with the radicals in their faith. They said that Bloomberg is just showing his white liberal guilt. And they encourage us to look into the funding of the GZM. They also contend that although the Imam has a moderate reputation that large sums of money can change people.

But I am courious whether this would make a difference to its current supporters and if so why? If the Imam was found to be getting money from people who our govt. says are terrorists or support terrorism wouldn’t they still have the religous “right” to build their community center? I mean if all that matters is the “right” to do something it really wouldn’t change anything would it. Whether the Imam was a “moderate” or a “radical” wouldn’t change the “right” to build on private property anywhere they wanted.

Obama was for the mosque before he was against it.

“You can do what everybody else does that can’t afford to live down there, jump on the PATH and live in Hoboken.” puck30

Hoboken. Just doesn’t have the same ring. BTW, wasn’t there a great Seinfeld episode about having the “right” area code?

paulmdoro said:
Great article.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_guest_blog/2010/08/islam-bashing_undermines_us_do.html

Yes, and if you are against gay marriage, your homophobic- we get the lefts tactics.

Thelonious Funk said:
I wonder how many Wal-Marts have been built around the country in communities that oppose them with a 6 in 10 majority.

I would bet that most of those 6 of 10 people started shopping at the Wal-Mart they opposed, are finding anything they want and saving money, and have had a change of heart. Now that’s real bridge-building. Personally, I don’t shop Wal-Mart, they are on my banned list.
In their defense, they have never been linked to any religious group responsible for murdering Americans. Wal-Mart wouldn’t even want a site that pokes people in the eye on an emotional issue. Why? Money of course…but more importantly it’s not the right thing to do.

gordonbloyershow said:
Spine, You must be watching some other channel, the front of that building has been shown on Fox endlessly. Or maybe you are just blind. Libs have a hard time grasping this issue. So maybe this will help. In Illinois many years ago, 8 people were killed in a fast food restaurant. The owners had the right to reopen his restaurant after the police were through with it. They owned the property and the building and yet they never reopened that location again. In fact they tore it down. They knew the people that lived there did not want the restaurant to remind them of the killings.Does anything sound familiar here? The clerk at a gas staion and convience store located near my house was shot and killed. I saw no reason not to open that station again yet the owner never reopened and the building has been torn down.Some people are sensitive to what the local people think even though they have the RIGHT to do whatever they want. If the Muslims that own that site in N.Y. want to open a Mosque, they can anytime they want, it is just not going to happen at that location. That Mosque will NEVER open. The RIGHT of the people to express themselves will be upheld.

None of this is familiar. American Muslims did not kill anyone at the Burlington Coat Factory. Nice try, but you’re talking apples and oranges.

They are neither building or occupying any space on the WTC site. End of story.

More Liberty said:
I’m sure that the Mosque owners would be very tolerant if bordering buildings hung huge pictures of cartoon caricatures of Muhammad and Allah. It would be my 1st Amendment right to stand on the public side walk, and hold a sign with a funny ass picture of Allah and Muhammad. Now, that is obviously insensitive, but legal.

That’s not a stretch. I predict things like that to happen if the construction begins. If I lived there, that’s probably where you would find me after work.

StandUp said:
Wal-Mart wouldn’t even want a site that pokes people in the eye on an emotional issue. Why? Money of course…but more importantly it’s not the right thing to do.

http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/09/wal-marts-history-of-destroying-sacred-sites.html

magicbeans said:
This is completely untrue. I watch Fox News and I was well aware it was being constructed in the old Burlington Coat Factory two blocks from Ground Zero. I also am aware that the landing gear from one of the planes hit this building. Liberals and the Cordoba initiative don’t seem to care about the “sensibilities” of the 9/11 victem’s families. Did anyone here read the article in the Ottawan Citizen written by two members of the Muslem Canadian Congress? The authors called this project a provocation. And they aren’t even “racist bigots” or “islamophobes” like the rest of us. They said that Bloomberg and the rest don’t understand the battle that moderate muslems face with the radicals in their faith. They said that Bloomberg is just showing his white liberal guilt. And they encourage us to look into the funding of the GZM. They also contend that although the Imam has a moderate reputation that large sums of money can change people. But I am courious whether this would make a difference to its current supporters and if so why? If the Imam was found to be getting money from people who our govt. says are terrorists or support terrorism wouldn’t they still have the religous “right” to build their community center? I mean if all that matters is the “right” to do something it really wouldn’t change anything would it. Whether the Imam was a “moderate” or a “radical” wouldn’t change the “right” to build on private property anywhere they wanted.

If, if, if, if, if….too bad none of your statment hold any water, they are just opinions.

Spine, I am not surprised that being sensitive went over your head.

It appears that the hysteria over the mosque is dying down as more people find out what the real story is. The community center/mosque will be built and it will thrive, partly because of the principled stand taken by credible politicans and public figures like Bloomberg, Obama and, as we’re beginning to see a growing number of relatives and friends of the 9/11 victims. It will become a center where the real and positive qualities of islam will be on full display. There will be sports facilities, lecture halls and films, concerts, and, yes, there will be a place where people can pray. The ignorance and prejudice of so many people, especially on this blog, knows no bounds. It says very little that’s good about the body politic that they can be so easily emotionally swayed by the demagoguery of backward politicians and the propagandists at Fox and other rightwing outlets as well as the most backward American politicians and pundits. However, we are a sensible, compassionate people and eventually we come around to the qualities that have made this country great. I am not a Muslim and not especially religious but recognize that Islam is just another religion with a checkered history like all other religions. The Islamic terrorists do not represent what Islam is about. They are a fringe group of ignorant fanatics similar to the extremist Christian and Jewish groups who still wield a lot of influence in societies that are a lot more advanced than the middle eastern countries. After all, it was Bush who instigated much of this chaos. It is brutally inhuman to put down well over a billion people because if a small handful of crazies.

and where was the outrage before everything was approved? Why is it that the anti crowd waited until everything was approved before they started raging on this issue?

If you want to talk sensitivity, how about the years it took them to GAIN the approval. The meetings, the money, the outreach that they’ve already gone through. Why weren’t you expressing your dissaproval earlier on?

“Everyone’s happy they’re finally all the same…cause everyone’s jumping everybody ele’s train” – Robert Smith

StandUp said:
That’s not a stretch. I predict things like that to happen if the construction begins. If I lived there, that’s probably where you would find me after work.

Remember how liberals were all up in arms about the Muhammad cartoons, and how they “provoked” the Muslims. It was a person’s 1st Amendment right, besides Christians are always be made of of, as well as Jews. Everyone was supposed to be sensitive towards that. I think people should protest the mosque, it’s their right. Let’s see how tolerant they are when you start showing cartoon characters of Allah or Muhammad.

…and a group of Hindu’s to stand outside your home and burn a flag…what’s your point again?

None of the anti’s commenting here seem like particularly sensitive people, you’re just using “sensitivity” to hid your true emotions…which have nothing to do with sensitivity

You were the same people standing behind Anne Colture when she bashed the 9/11 widows…now all of a sudden your concerns about how they feel? Do you honestly expect anybody to buy that bridge?

ganymede said:
After all, it was Bush who instigated much of this chaos. It is brutally inhuman to put down well over a billion people because if a small handful of crazies.

Are you serious? You obviously have no concept of history do you. When was the USS Cole attack? When was the Beruit bombing? When was the attack on the Olympic athletes in Munich? When was the first WTC bombing? When was the Kobi Towers bombing? When was the bombing of US Embassies in Africa? When was the Berlin Disco Tech bombing? When was the Pan Am flight hijacking? When was the TWA 840 bombing? The list goes on and on dude.

SpineCrusher, Ann was right about those particular 9/11 widows. As a widow myself, I thought it was disgusting the way they used the tradgedy as a political football. I lost respect for them when they did that. Of course, that’s just my opinion, just like it’s Ann’s OPINION!

MichelleF said:
SpineCrusher, Ann was right about those particular 9/11 widows. As a widow myself, I thought it was disgusting the way they used the tradgedy as a political football. I lost respect for them when they did that. Of course, that’s just my opinion, just like it’s Ann’s OPINION!

How did they use the tragedy as a political football? I think the comments are remembered more than what generated the comments in the first place.

MichelleF said:
SpineCrusher, Ann was right about those particular 9/11 widows. As a widow myself, I thought it was disgusting the way they used the tradgedy as a political football. I lost respect for them when they did that. Of course, that’s just my opinion, just like it’s Ann’s OPINION!

That was my whole point…Bash em when it fits your political agenda and then scream “we must be sensitive to their needs” when your agenda changes.

I do appreciate your honesty though.

Paul, they traveled around as liberal puppets bashing Bush. It was disgusting, in my view. If they had used the tragedy to try and fix whatever holes in our security occurred on that day, I would’ve been fine with that, but that is not what they did.

More information about the mosque leader:

He proclaims himself a patriotic American, and has harshly condemned violent extremists who cite Islam as their inspiration. September 11, Abdul Rauf says, is “a day that will live in infamy,” noting that “no nation could suffer such an assault without responding in a very robust way.” In the wake of bombing attacks in Great Britian in 2005, he expressed “a sense of deep revulsion,” said that true Muslims “naturally condemn the brutal attacks in London in the most unequivocal terms,” and urged British Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement in identifying and capturing those involved.

Abdul Rauf has also worked tirelessly to promote better relations among the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths. Rabbi David Rosen, who heads the American Jewish Committee’s international interreligious affairs department in Jerusalem, calls him “an important voice of moderation,” and Jewish Week has lauded him as “a key voice of reason among Muslim leaders here.”

Jay Bookman
In some ways, ‘Feisal Abdul Rauf’ is Arabic for ‘Shirley Sherrod’

9:34 am July 21, 2010, by Jay

Feisal Abdul Rauf and Shirley Sherrod have a lot in common.

At first blush, that might seem a strange assertion. Abdul Rauf is a naturalized U.S. citizen and a Muslim imam in New York City; Sherrod is a black woman from the American South. But they have been both selected as targets by a conservative media machine that is so intent on creating useful villains that it pays little or no attention to concepts such as truth or accuracy. The goal is to create “Objects of Hate” that can then be used to inflame the American public.

Abdul Rauf, for example, describes himself as “both a Muslim and an American citizen, as proud of the important and fundamental principles that America stands for as I am the important and fundamental principles for which Islam stands.”

In fact, Abdul Rauf argues, the reason so many Muslims flee their native countries to come here is because the United States is actually more true to Islamic principles of “human equality, human liberty and social justice” than many so-called Islamic societies.

He proclaims himself a patriotic American, and has harshly condemned violent extremists who cite Islam as their inspiration. September 11, Abdul Rauf says, is “a day that will live in infamy,” noting that “no nation could suffer such an assault without responding in a very robust way.” In the wake of bombing attacks in Great Britian in 2005, he expressed “a sense of deep revulsion,” said that true Muslims “naturally condemn the brutal attacks in London in the most unequivocal terms,” and urged British Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement in identifying and capturing those involved.

Abdul Rauf has also worked tirelessly to promote better relations among the Jewish, Christian and Islamic faiths. Rabbi David Rosen, who heads the American Jewish Committee’s international interreligious affairs department in Jerusalem, calls him “an important voice of moderation,” and Jewish Week has lauded him as “a key voice of reason among Muslim leaders here.”

In 2003, Abdul Rauf joined Rabbi Israel Singer, chairman of the World Jewish Congress, along with members of the Israeli Knesset and Palestinian leaders, in an initiative to bring moderate Palestinians and Israelis together to try to find common ground.

The local community board in lower Manhattan, which no doubt includes many who experienced September 11 firsthand, has voted 29-1 to approve the project’s construction, strong testimony to the faith they have in Abdul Rauf’s mission.

“I think they need to establish a place such as this for people of goodwill from mainline Christian, Jewish and Muslim faiths so we can come together to talk,” said Father Kevin Madigan of St. Peter’s Catholic Church, located a block away from the proposed facility.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/07/21/in-some-ways-feisal-abdul-rauf-is-arabic-for-shirley-sherrod/

Glynnis…Harry Reid, Sarah Palin and I really are not interested in your photographic abilities…neither are WE interested in you PUSHING this story!

Please close it out and go on to some story that the majority of people would like to read….I realize we just tied your hand on that one…but please do try!

SpineCrusher said:
Thanks Glynnis!

Funny thing is, on FOX, all they show are pictures of the WTC construction…hmmm, wonder why that is? They haven’t shown any pictures of the actual building, and the location, that is so hotly contested these days.

I wonder why that is? Maybe someone could put on their tin-foil hat and elaborate?

I would love to elaborate my friend, I only watch Fox and I have seen that building on Fox News many many times. Why are you making this about Fox and not about a very very bad idea concerning building a Muslim Mosque which most people in this world know to be a victory building as is their practice.

Amazing how you arrogant elitists just have to put tin-foil hats on everyone that you dont agree with. But please continue to show your total ignorance and just lash out. And because of this you will soon be sitting back wondering what the hell happened as you see Democrat after Democrat thrown out of DC.

MichelleF said:
Paul, they traveled around as liberal puppets bashing Bush. It was disgusting, in my view. If they had used the tragedy to try and fix whatever holes in our security occurred on that day, I would’ve been fine with that, but that is not what they did.

They weren’t entitled to their opinions? Were there no 9/11 widows publicly supporting Bush? If so were they also disgusting, or are political puppets OK when you agree with them?

Paul, as I said to you this morning, I’m not interested in a day long back and forth with you. You know my opinion. I don’t care if you agree or not.

“September 11, Abdul Rauf says, is “a day that will live in infamy,” paulmdoro

So not only is Imam Rauf a radical Muslim extremist, he is also a plagiarist! FDR is rolling over in his grave.

The Real Royal King said:
LIES & DISTORTION

Hey, Royal Dong, does your Mommy know that you’re using her computer for more than just looking at porn pictures of her, from the night that you were conceived?

3 more ounces of Vodka and you would have been consumed, instead of conceived.

MichelleF said:
Paul, as I said to you this morning, I’m not interested in a day long back and forth with you. You know my opinion. I don’t care if you agree or not.

You sure fold easily these days. Can’t handle the heat.

Azarkhan said:
“September 11, Abdul Rauf says, is “a day that will live in infamy,” paulmdoro

So not only is Imam Rauf a radical Muslim extremist, he is also a plagiarist! FDR is rolling over in his grave.

If FDR is rolling it has nothing to do with plagiarism.

You sure fold easily these days. Can’t handle the heat.

No, it’s just that it’s not as much fun to argue with you guys these days. It bores me now. We aren’t going to change each other’s minds, so I don’t feel the need to waste my time.

Cliffy44 said:
Hey, Royal Dong, does your Mommy know that you’re using her computer for more than just looking at porn pictures of her, from the night that you were conceived? 3 more ounces of Vodka and you would have been consumed, instead of conceived.

From those that speak of sensitivity…classic

WOW!

This is a must see video, in my opinion.

A chilling and shockingly honest portrayal of poor immigration policy by CNN. This is a freak act of journalistic integrity aimed squarely upon the crippling policies of arch-tolerance and appeasement. CNN, for perhaps the first time I applaud you. In the light of recent events, let us not be too obtuse to the grasp that these people are taking dead aim at America.

“American Muslims are 10 years behind the struggle.”

– Cleric Anjem Choudary

http://bigjournalism.com/benjohnson/2010/08/17/at-last-cnn-finally-gets-something-right-about-islam/

MichelleF said:
You sure fold easily these days. Can’t handle the heat.

No, it’s just that it’s not as much fun to argue with you guys these days. It bores me now. We aren’t going to change each other’s minds, so I don’t feel the need to waste my time.

Well posting here with the goal of changing minds was probably ill-advised.

Pablo said:
As Treacher notes, in the interest of impeccable accuracy, we should refer to it as the 9/11 Debris Field Mosque.

Sure, and the local YMCA is a church.

gordonbloyershow said:
Spine, You must be watching some other channel, the front of that building has been shown on Fox endlessly. Or maybe you are just blind.

Libs have a hard time grasping this issue. So maybe this will help.

In Illinois many years ago, 8 people were killed in a fast food restaurant. The owners had the right to reopen his restaurant after the police were through with it. They owned the property and the building and yet they never reopened that location again. In fact they tore it down. They knew the people that lived there did not want the restaurant to remind them of the killings.
Does anything sound familiar here?

The clerk at a gas staion and convience store located near my house was shot and killed. I saw no reason not to open that station again yet the owner never reopened and the building has been torn down.
Some people are sensitive to what the local people think even though they have the RIGHT to do whatever they want.

If the Muslims that own that site in N.Y. want to open a Mosque, they can anytime they want, it is just not going to happen at that location.

That Mosque will NEVER open. The RIGHT of the people to express themselves will be upheld.

Community center, try again.

Anyway, Happy Ramadan!

“This is a must see video, in my opinion” Michelle

Thanks Michelle. What Muslims are doing in England, but also in other European countries, is shocking.

The sort of ignoramus who says it can’t happen in the US is the same ignoramus that says keep the border open, no need to worry about Mexican drug cartels setting up shop in America. Leftist ideology makes it impossible for them to recognize the threat. After all, their world view is based on whites being the enemy. Of course, they overlook the irony that they themselves are white.

You’re right Azarkhan, the libs would rather turn the debate into Conservatives being against immigrants and muslims, but that’s not the case. They purposfully do that so they don’t have to have a discussion of the bigger picture. Of course, they do this because they know how short their arguments fall and that most people don’t agree with them. I in no way think all muslims are extremists, but to ignore the STATED goals of a large portion of them is just plain stupid.

“MichelleF says: You’re right Azarkhan, the libs would rather turn the debate into Conservatives being against immigrants and muslims, but that’s not the case. They purposfully do that so they don’t have to have a discussion of the bigger picture. Of course, they do this because they know how short their arguments fall and that most people don’t agree with them. I in no way think all muslims are extremists, but to ignore the STATED goals of a large portion of them is just plain stupid.”

Yes just like any majority making a decision for the rest of us. We should stand by our principles and ideals as a nation and not let majority rule become the law of the land, as in cases like….hmmmm….a certain vote in California recently turned over by another constitutional authority.
You can’t have it both ways MichelleF. Then its not democracy, then its called a theocracy, or tyranny.

Or shall I be afraid of you and your religious beliefs?

OMG I just discovered a Japanese Cultural Center JUST TEN MILES from Pearl Harbor! I’m going to inform Fox News right away! http://jcch.com/ Hummm….

You can’t have it both ways MichelleF. Then its not democracy, then its called a theocracy, or tyranny.

You don’t seem to realize that we do NOT live in a democracy, we live in a Republic. You know the difference, right?

Socrates69 says:
August 17, 2010 at 3:26 pm Socrates69(Quote)
2 1
Or shall I be afraid of you and your religious beliefs?

Sure, if you want to be. Alot of people are scared of the truth.

The Jersey Girls were just shills for the democrats. You have not from them since then. They got their 15 mins. of fame on the lefty news outlets.

The Tolerant Pose
Intolerance is not just part of al-Qaeda, it is part of Islam.

Non-Muslims are barred from entering the cities of Mecca and Medina — not merely barred from building synagogues or churches, but barred, period, because their infidel feet are deemed unfit to touch the ground. This is not an al-Qaeda principle. Nor is it an “Islamist” principle. It is Islam, pure and simple.

“Truly the pagans are unclean,” instructs the Koran’s Sura 9:28, “so let them not . . . approach the Sacred Mosque.” This injunction — and there are plenty of similar ones in Islam’s scriptures — is enforced vigorously not by jihadist terrorists but by the Saudi government. And it is enforced not because of some eccentric sense of Saudi nationalism. The only law of Saudi Arabia is sharia, the law of Islam.

As Sunni scholarly commentary in the version of the Koran officially produced by the Saudi government explains, only Muslims are sufficiently “strict in cleanliness, as well as in purity of mind and heart, so that their word can be relied upon.” Thus, only they may enter the holy cities. Authoritative Shiite teaching is even more bracing. As Iraq’s “moderate” Ayatollah Ali Sistani — probably the world’s most influential Shiite cleric — has explained, the touching of non-Muslims is discouraged, because they are considered to be in the same “unclean” category as “urine, feces, semen, dead bodies, blood, dogs, pigs, alcoholic liquors, and the sweat of an animal who persistently eats [unclean things].”

These teachings are worth bearing in mind as we listen to the staunch defenses of religious liberty that have suddenly become so fashionable among proponents of the Cordoba Initiative, a planned $100 million Islamic center and mosque to be built on the hallowed ground where remains of the nearly 3,000 Americans killed by Muslim terrorists on 9/11 continue to be found. The most prominent proponent of the project, President Obama, was in high fashion Friday night, as one would expect at a White House gala in observance of Ramadan. “This is America,” he intoned, “and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.”

The president’s commitment is to a vacant abstraction, not to actual liberty. If his resolve to defend religious freedom were truly unshakable, the last thing he would endorse is the construction of a gigantic monument to intolerance in a place where bigots devastated a city they have repeatedly targeted because of the pluralism and freedom it symbolizes. You can’t aspire to religious freedom by turning a blind eye to the reality of sharia.

Saudi Arabia, the country from which 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers hailed, abides no pluralism or religious freedom. Sure, the Saudis will tell you they allow Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims to visit their country, which is awfully big of them. Still, the regime prohibits these infidels from polluting the kingdom with their Bibles, crucifixes, and Stars of David.

Mosque proponents like the Manhattan Institute’s Josh Barro scoff at discomfiting comparisons between religious liberty in the United States and in Saudi Arabia. For them, the prospect of a mosque at Ground Zero is our “opportunity to show how we are better than Saudis.” That misses the point in two ways. First, we don’t need to show that we are better than the Saudis. We permit thousands of Muslim houses of worship in our nation, Muslims are celebrated in our public life, and our military has done more to protect and defend Muslims — including in Saudi Arabia — than any fighting force in history. Every objective person already knows that, and anybody who purports to need convincing will never be convinced.

Second and more significant, the comparison of what is permitted in Manhattan and what is permitted in Mecca is not about the Saudis: It is about Islam. Saudi Arabia does not have any law but sharia. Non-Muslims are discriminated against in the kingdom, not because that’s how the Saudis want it. They are discriminated against because that is how the Koran says it must be.

Sura 9:29, the verse of the Koran that immediately follows the commandment to exclude non-Muslims from holy sites, instructs: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the people of the Book [i.e., Jews and Christians], until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

The jizya is a poll-tax imposed on dhimmis. Those are non-Muslims permitted to live in Islamic territories. The concept is that all the world will eventually be under the thumb of sharia authorities, with dhimmis tolerated so long as they accept their subordinate legal and social status (“and feel themselves subdued”). The alternative for dhimmis is war or death.

Nevertheless, Muslims understand that this global mission cannot be completed in a day. In an Islamic country like Saudi Arabia, where they are in a position to impose sharia in full, that is exactly what they do. In other places, the degree of imposition depends on relative Islamic strength, and it increases as that strength increases. Thus, the standard Muslim position on “Palestine,” where Islamic strength is growing but not yet dominant: Muslims are to be permitted to live freely within the Jewish state, but all Jews must be purged from Palestinian territories. Again, that’s not an al-Qaeda position; it’s the mainstream Islamic view. To the extent there is a mainstream dissenting view, it is that the Jewish state should be annihilated immediately — not that the two sides should live in reciprocally tolerant harmony.

In the United States, there is no threat to religious liberty . . . except where there are high concentrations of Muslims. Not high concentrations of al-Qaeda sympathizers — high concentrations of Muslims. As Muslims have flocked to Dearborn, Mich., for example, Henry Ford’s hometown has become infamous for its support of Hezbollah. Recently, four Christian missionaries were arrested by Dearborn police for the crime of handing out copies of St. John’s gospel on a public street outside an Arab festival. The police called it disturbing the peace. But the peace was disturbed only due to the foreboding sense that Muslims might take riotous offense, because sharia forbids the preaching of religions other than Islam.

In Minneapolis, where thousands of Somalis have settled, taxpayers are being forced to support sharia-compliant mortgages and at least one Islamic charter school. Meantime, taxi drivers refuse to ferry passengers suspected of carrying alcohol, and a student in need of a dog’s assistance for medical reasons was driven from school due to threats from Muslim students against him and the animal — because sharia regards canines as unclean.

This aggression is a deliberate strategy, called “voluntary apartheid.” The idea, as explained by influential Sunni cleric Yusuf Qaradawi (the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual guide), counsels that Muslims in the West must push political leaders to indulge what he claims is their “right to live according to our faith — ideologically, legislatively, and ethically.” It is what imam Feisal Rauf means when he urges America to become more sharia-friendly by allowing “religious communities more leeway to judge among themselves, according to their laws.”

This is not the promotion of religious liberty. In America, President Obama observed, religious liberty welcomes “people of all faiths.” Contemporary Islam, by contrast, is counseling supremacism. It rips at our seams, demanding that Americans accept parallel Islamic societies, because Muslims must reject the mores of non-Islamic societies.

This same thinking undergirds Islam’s rejection of freedom of conscience, including the Koran’s prescription, in Sura 4:89, of the death penalty for those who renounce their Islamic faith (“They would have you disbelieve as they themselves have disbelieved, so that you may be all like alike. Do not befriend them. . . . If they desert you seize them and put them to death wherever you find them.”) Again, this is not an al-Qaeda doctrine. As the scholar Ibn Warraq observes, it is the interpretation shared by all classical schools of Muslim jurisprudence.

Moreover, the same theory that considers every Muslim to be a Muslim forever — whether he wants to be one or not — analogously holds that if a given inch of land has ever been under Islamic domain, it is Islam’s property in perpetuity. There is a reason Islamic maps of Palestine do not reflect the existence of Israel and that Spain is called al-Andalus.

There are Muslims who want to change this, Muslims who want to evolve their faith into the light of ecumenical tolerance, Muslims who crave true religious liberty and reject sharia’s repression. These reformist Muslims face a daunting challenge, however. The power and money in the Islamic community is in the grip of the supremacists who pressure Muslims to resist assimilating in America.

It is a challenge that the president — if he actually had an “unshakable” commitment to religious freedom — could help the reformers try to surmount. No one credibly questions the legal right of Muslim landowners to use their property in any lawful fashion. Legality is an irrelevant issue, even if the back-tracking Obama now wants to pretend it is the only one he was really talking about on Friday night. The question here is propriety.

This president, uniquely, could have framed that question in the right way. He could have called on Muslims who claim to be moderate to reject Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda explicitly, by name and without equivocation. He could have called for them to support freedom of conscience, to support the right of Muslims to leave the faith. He could have called for Muslims to reject the second-class citizenship to which sharia condemns women and non-Muslims. He could have demanded that they accept the right of homosexuals to live without fear of persecution. He could have called for a declaration that sharia is a matter of private contemplation that has no place in the formation of public policy.

If the Ground Zero mosque were understood as standing for those values, it would be a monument worth having: A testament to the rise of a uniquely American Islam that stands foursquare against the hate-filled ideology we’re fighting, an Islam for which Americans would be proud to fight. But that’s not in the cards for a president whose idea of a symbolic gesture is a bow to the Saudi king and an open door to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The president may not have noticed, but the commitment of the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood to religious intolerance is utterly unshakable.

— Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, is the author, most recently, of The Grand Jihad: How Islam and the Left Sabotage America.

Evil exists .

Azarkhan said:
Glynnis, what’s the food situation like over there–any good restaurants, diners?

You don’t see a lot of bars around Mosques in New York because they force the bar owners to shut down. So much for tolerance…

More Liberty said:
Glynnis, Glynnis….are you not aware that most New Yorkers oppose the mosque as well. 6 in 10 oppose it dude. it is their right to oppose it. It is their right to have an opinion on the subject. Personally, I’m not saying that the government should tell a private land owner what to do with her/his property but people are allowed to disagree. This mosque is not bringing tolerance; in fact the whole idea is upsetting many people. It is having the opposite effect. It is not only the 70% of Americans that oppose this site that should be tolerance, but the owners of the mosque should also be tolerant and sensitive.

Don’t confuse Glynnis MacNicol and the rest of the Obama’s knee padders with facts. Remember this is Media Matters lite. They just edit or make up crap to smear anybody they disagree…

Azarkhan said:
“This is a must see video, in my opinion” Michelle

Thanks Michelle. What Muslims are doing in England, but also in other European countries, is shocking.

The sort of ignoramus who says it can’t happen in the US is the same ignoramus that says keep the border open, no need to worry about Mexican drug cartels setting up shop in America. Leftist ideology makes it impossible for them to recognize the threat. After all, their world view is based on whites being the enemy. Of course, they overlook the irony that they themselves are white.

The German police just shut down a mosque that had 4 of the 9-11 terrorists…

“You don’t see a lot of bars around Mosques in New York because they force the bar owners to shut down. So much for tolerance…” ZoneDaiatlas

Are you serious?

“The German police just shut down a mosque that had 4 of the 9-11 terrorists…”

A few weeks ago there was this:

The police union for the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) [1] stunned Germans this week when it announced it would bring policemen from Turkey to help patrol the turbulent streets of some immigrant neighbourhoods in NRW cities. With this announcement, the state’s police administration is admitting domestic police forces can no longer handle violent Turkish and other youths of immigrant backgrounds inhabiting these quarters.

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/germanys-surrender-muslim-police-from-turkey

Mosque Imam REFUSES to meet with Patterson on considering moving the mosque!

Remember the 70′s headline?….. Imam to New York (& America) – “DROP DEAD!”

- now, to keep this story going to Nov. 2, exposing the “Democrats = SOFT ON TERROR” Theme!

What was the White House “clarification” today??? LMAO!!!!!

Mosque gets all the press, but area near Ground Zero full of bars, porn, liquor stores, salons

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/16/2010-08-16_a_sea_of_filth_near_ground_zer0_mosque_gets_all_the_press_but_porns_around_corne.html#ixzz0wuMhiZro

“MichelleF says: You don’t seem to realize that we do NOT live in a democracy, we live in a Republic. You know the difference, right?
Or shall I be afraid of you and your religious beliefs?

Sure, if you want to be. Alot of people are scared of the truth.”

1st, yes know the difference. I would argue with direct election of the Senate we’re more democracy than republic, but either way, the majority does not rule, on all things, always and forever. Bill of Rights, remember that right?

And what truth…your truth? I gather your a Mormom right? Should your religion become the one religion of America because you believe its the truth?

I live in New York,. I was born here. I was in lower Manhattan on 9/11 and I witnessed a lot on that horrible day. What I feel about Ground Zero and the surrounding area has a lot more bearing on this story than someone from Alaska or any politician anywhere else for that matter. (By the way, have you noticed that the further someone is from Ground Zero, the more emotional they are as they vocally oppose the Islamic cultural center and mosque?)

Here’s the deal… will a few, and I stress a few, 9/11 families find this place insensitive and hurtful no matter how moderate and secular the people behind the project are? Yes. But the building is on a block that you do not have to walk down to get to the World Trade Center site. In fact, if you are coming out of any one of the many subway stops in the area, you would have to purposefully walk down this block if you were heading to Ground Zero. It’s not on a highly used street leading to the World Trade Center site. When you are on this particular street, you don’t even realize you are near Ground Zero! It is not hallowed ground! I freakin’ plane part fell through the roof. So what! People who were in the Twin Towers died, not people inside the lousy Burlington Coat Factory! Get over it. This particular building is not hallowed ground.

Friggin’ get over it! A bunch of politically motivated people are playing on your emotions and fears when talking about this project and the fact is all they really care about is their own poltical careers!!!!!!!!!!

THAT VIEW IS SHOWING THE ROTUNDA OF A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS!!!

LOL!!!!

File this under the heading, “things you won’t hear about on Mediaite”:

Arab TV Director: Ground Zero Mosque would be ‘Monument’ for Terrorists

The director of Al-Arabiya TV, a popular Arab-language news station, wrote that “Muslims never asked for” the proposed mosque at Ground Zero, and “do not care about its construction,” in a column for London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat on Aug. 16.

“I can’t imagine that Muslims [actually] want a mosque at this particular location, because it will become an arena for the promoters of hatred, and a monument to those who committed the crime,” wrote Al-Arabiya director Abd Al-Rahman al-Rashid in the column, which was translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute. “Moreover, there are no practicing Muslims in the area who need a place to worship, because it is a commercial district. Is there anyone who is [really] eager [to build] this mosque?”

Al-Rashid said that President Barack Obama’s support of the mosque was similar to the administration’s previous decision to close Guantanamo Bay and try suspected terrorists as civilians. “”Muslims do not [really] yearn [to build] a mosque near the 9/11 cemetery, nor do they care whether bin Laden’s cook is tried in a civilian court [or a military one],” said al-Rashid, noting that “tens of thousands of Muslims, likewise accused of extremism, are imprisoned in [even] worse conditions in the Muslim countries.”

According to the director, Muslims care about issues that impact “the destinies of [entire] peoples,” such as the creation of a Palestinian state.

“The last thing Muslims want today is to build a religious center that provokes others, or a symbolic mosque that people will visit as a [kind of] museum next to a cemetery,” said al-Rashid.

Al-Arabiya TV is based out of the United Arab Emirates, and is a direct competitor with Al-Jazeera, another Arab-language news station. Al-Arabiya “is consistently rated among the top pan-Arab stations by Middle East audiences,” reported BBC News in 2003.

According to Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol, al-Rashid’s column “should mean the end of plans for a mosque near Ground Zero.”

“Mr. Al-Rashid supports President Obama’s stand for the mosque in principle (as he supports Obama-like or even beyond-Obama-like policies with respect to the Middle East). He’s no neocon. But his practical case against building the mosque is irrefutable,” wrote Kristol on the Weekly Standard website on Aug. 17. “It should lead well-meaning liberals to join with us dastardly conservatives (well, it would be too painful for them to join with us—they can simply act in parallel, on their own, while continuing to denounce us) in calling for the organizers to shelve the plans for a mosque at this site.”

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/alana-goodman/2010/08/17/arab-tv-director-ground-zero-mosque-would-be-monument-terrorists#ixzz0wujKDSGs

“In Illinois many years ago, 8 people were killed in a fast food restaurant. The owners had the right to reopen his restaurant after the police were through with it. They owned the property and the building and yet they never reopened that location again. In fact they tore it down. They knew the people that lived there did not want the restaurant to remind them of the killings.
Does anything sound familiar here?”

Still waiting for the relevant analogy since nobody was ever killed at the community center with a prayer4 room that was not ever nor is not now a “mosque” and is *not* at “ground zero”.
No nothing sounds even remotely familiar here. May I recommend Analogy 101?

Is the Pentagon insensitive for allowing Muslim prayer in the Pentagon where active service members and civilians were killed on 9/11? Do they hate America, or what? How about the mosque four blocks away from the trade center. Is it outside the imaginary boundary of sacredness? Haven’t heard a goddamn word about the pentagon on Fox/GOP non-news, but I am confident you would know more about that than me.

BTW, Islam did not attack the US on 9/11, 2001, international terrorists allegedly did so, who happened to demagogue disingenuously, based on their alleged Islamic faith, much the same way the alcoholic and meth addict Glenn Beck pretends to be devoutly Christian. Both are fascist authoritarians who are driven by the desire to destroy America, whether from within or without.
If you want revenge so badly, how about we start by banning trade with Saudi Arabia from whence the alleged highjackers both came from and were financed by?

So Glenn Beck is a meth addicted fascist, out to destroy America. Homie is obviously not prone to exaggeration.

Jonathan A Cohen said:
Mosque gets all the press, but area near Ground Zero full of bars, porn, liquor stores, salons

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/16/2010-08-16_a_sea_of_filth_near_ground_zer0_mosque_gets_all_the_press_but_porns_around_corne.html#ixzz0wuMhiZro

Porn shop owners don’t have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The terrorist organization Hamas did not say “we have to build porn shops everywhere” or endorsed porn shops.

70% of American’s don’t oppose the building of the Muslim Mosque near the WTC; 70% of American’s who took a survey opposed the building of the Muslim mosque. The total number of that survey has never been revealed, so it could have been 70% of 100 people, or 70% of 3000 people. That’s how misinformation gets started. People just don’t read, and/or comprehend written information.