Asks Pelosi, going all conspiracy theory. It just can't be that people — and it's the vast majority of Americans! — actually read/hear news reports and commentary and arrive at opinions.
Meanwhile, the right is headed over to the conspiracy place too.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
182 comments:
Wow, signs cost a lot I guess...I'd say it's mostly being funded for FREE, Nancy...
Funny we're all about finding out who's funding the OPPOSITION, but not so keen on finding out who's funding the MOSQUE!
Pelosi is incredibly offensive.
She disdains and gets queasy about most Americans, and prefers to identify with the foreign world (as does Obama) as an exotic travel destination filled with interesting and unusual people.
Pelosi, Obama, the liberal media, and many Democratic politicians just don't like Americans very much. They are too good for us.
Seems like the right bigpeace.com actually did some investigative work. Pelosi? No, she wants an investigation by whom? Government? More than likely.
70% of the American people oppose building a mosque on ground zero. 70%!!! Their outrage at being crapped on by the muzzies and their hard left allies doesn't need any funding. It's real. Not faked. Not manufactured. Not a product of the control freak Harvard-Marxist Axis. In November we bury the freaks.
In the words of Bill Clinton (more or less):
"Sometimes you'll be walking along and see a turtle on a fencepost. Well, you know that turtle didn't get up there all by itself."
The opposition to the Mosque comes from Republican elected, Republican celebrities and a the former half-term Governor of Alaska. It has been fodder in right wing media for months until the Lamestream Media picked it up.
It's pretty obviously a creation of the Republican PR machine. Which is a pretty effective machine.
Can we all please just ignore Alpha Liberal rather than letting him hijack another thread with his aburdities? He is not arguing in good faith.
The simplest scenario would be that these guys had this idea for a mosque or "cultural center," but not much funding, so they thought they would call attention to the site's proximity to "Ground Zero" in order to raise some controversy and publicity to raise funds, and then got much more than they had bargained for.
Or did they? At this point they may both get funding galore, a free site somewhere else, and immediate approval with no difficulties from the PLZ. Actually, the scheme may be working out better than they had dreamed of!
In the interest of actual dialog, here is a piece from Salon showing how the latest Spontaneous Manufactured Outrage came to be.
They have a timeline and these "facts."
Pam Geller, who Ann never notices thrusts her breasts in all directions, seems to be a prime instigator.
Then various organs of the Rupert Murdoch (News Corp just openly gave $1M to the Republicans) media empire started to pick it up and run it with.
Digby on Pam Geller. We love you, Digby!
@Ann:
You are making a false moral equivalence regarding left and right conspiracy theories by juxtaposing a statement by the Democratic Speaker of the House with a post by an unknown blogger.
This is not an apt comparison to what Pelosi is doing. She is essentially threatening dissident speech with a government investigation because she disagrees with the speech.
Lucid, I'm not hijacking. I am directly addressing the subject of the post.
What you seem to mean to say is "please ignore AlphaLiberal because he doesn't agree with the rest of the Althouse Herd."
Fixed that for ya.
To the subject of the post:
I wouldn't go to the money so much as it is so much "soft money," ie, payroll for NY Post, Fox News, Palin's outfit, Wingnut Welfare outfits, etc. Is Geller on someone's payroll? Don't know.
I do think Ann could prove her supposed balance by writing about Pam Geller using her breasts in her activism.
Nancy might be able to sell this crazy in San Francisco, but it is not going to sell anywhere else.
I am directly addressing the subject of the post.
What you seem to mean to say is "please ignore AlphaLiberal because he doesn't agree with the rest of the Althouse Herd."
Actually he's correct. When you have been confronted with answering a direct question on a topic your typical response is 'I'm outa here!' so no Alpha, you don't argue in good faith but rather fling a lot of poo and run off.
yeah, i share a special pictorial response to nancy, here:
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/nancy-pelosi-on-ground-zero-mosque-hey.html
I'll make a deal with you nancy. we can have an investigation into the financial support behind the opposition, if you also check out the funding behind the mosque itself. deal?
Holy smokes!! Pat Buchanan is saying Newt went too far?
"How do you get more attention than Sarah Palin, who's very good at this, is to go two steps further. I mean, I think bringing the Nazis into the argument is always absurd in American politics because there is no valid comparison there. And secondly, you know, you bring that in and that's all we start talking about."
I just noticed the Muslims want to build their Cordoba Center at a Park Place address.
You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to fear that if they then build another one on Boardwalk, we're screwed!
Why would this need to be investigated?
Is there something illegal about organizing opposition to the building of the mosque?
Even if this were a coordinated effort of the Republican Party, what needs to be investigated?
So, let's suppose Pelosi discovered to her satisfaction that the opposition was "ginned up." So what?
I get that Pelosi doesn't like opposition. Opposition, ginned up or otherwise, isn't illegal, and doesn't need to be investigated.
I see nothing anti-semitic at the link, AW. False charge.
I still do not understand why conservatives blame all the Muslims of the world for the actions of a few.
Should all Catholics be condemned for the pedophilia of a few? No.
ha ha! This Mosque debate is the equivalent of the "Freedom Fries" debate of a few years back.
'"I want everyone watching this program to take a deep breath and really think what this is going to look like four years from now, or five years from now, or twenty years from now," Hayes says. "Which side of this debate will come out looking good when history renders its judgement? You don't want to be on the side of freedom fries." '
Except for the part where it makes the country look like we hate all of Islam and do not provide freedom of religion. So, it's a bit more serious than the freedom fries baloney.
Any broad based outcry that is in opposition to its orthodoxy is a puzzle to liberals. Such outcry must be paid for since non-leftists are apolitical and stupid. Also, Pelosi is a very stupid woman.
Could this investigation also include how Nancy Pelosi gets her funding?
A check in the mail from a wealthy donor helps steer support towards certain projects, after all.
Except for the part where it makes the country look like we hate all of Islam and do not provide freedom of religion.
OmegaLiberal, the only thing you've ever got going is your asshole, sanctimonious bigot routine.
Bigots, bigots, bigots! They're everywhere! Everything is bigotry!
So, since you are a idiot obsessive, with nothing to say except for your dumbass bigotry ravings, why don't you shut the fuck up!
It will improve the conversation immensely.
BTW, here is a map of the World Trade Center site, and the religious buildings nearby.
There are many. What the opponents are saying is that, either officially or unofficially, they want America to tell the world that:
A) We openly discriminate against Islam and favor other religions over it.
B) We oppose all of Islam and hold all of them responsible for the actions of a very few. (i.e., we believe in collective punishment).
C) We are really full of shit when it comes to preaching genuine religious values.
I disagree, think this debate is terrible for the nation's security and image, and think people will look back on the anti-Muslim hysteria they are falling prey to with the same regret of someone with a hangover for those excessive drinks.
Again I think it’s amusing that the Left is all up in arms over the opposition of the construction of a religious building. I have to keep reminding myself what exactly their motivation is in supporting this aside from the fact that conservatives appear to be leading the charge.
Well perhaps to put things into perspective; I’m quite confident that if the Westboro Baptist Church sought to establish one of their churches within view of Arlington National Cemetery, you’d see what real protest and outcry is.
In reality though I think the Left is really in a fit over the fact that the ‘protest’ and ‘demonstration’ over some ‘outrage’ (a historically a leftist tactic) is more and more being used by conservatives, to great effect I might add and the left simply finds this intolerable. Case in point, the skin color of the vast majority of tea partiers happens to be same tone as the vast majority of pro-gay marriage protestors. Yet, the preponderance of white tea partiers to the Left denotes its inherent racism where the white pro-gay marriage protestors does not.
From this I can only conclude that the Left demands exclusive right to protest, demonstrate and petition for grievances and if anyone right of V. Lenin should just sit down and be quiet.
AL wrote "Except for the part where it makes the country look like we hate all of Islam and do not provide freedom of religion."
You know what, Alpha Liberal? I don't think most people give a shit if stupid people think that we all hate Islam and do not provide freedom of religion. Because only stupid people would think either of those things were true when demonstrably they are not.
How about a bit of umbrage from the left about the splendid features of Islam pertaining to women, abortion, freedom of speech, and religious freedom? These are, or were, issues that once animated liberals. Progressives not so much.
OmegaLiberal, the idiot says again:
Bigots! Bigots! Everywhere!
Bigots here! Bigots there!
There are bigots in my underwear!
OmegaLiberal, you sanctimonious fool, stop wetting your pants!
How did you become so enamored of your halo?
How did you become such an unctuous creep?
Oh, I meant to add:
D) We are at war with Islam.
I know the right wing extremists among us yearn for an open war with all of Islam. They have recruited many to their cause with this anti-Muslim stunt.
But we are not at war with all of Islam. They are not at war with us.
I love Islam. I like what they think should happen to homos.
Another bigot outrage from OmegaLiberal, the pinhead:
I know the right wing extremists among us yearn for an open war with all of Islam. They have recruited many to their cause with this anti-Muslim stunt.
Oh, there's bigots on my left!
There's bigots on my right!
There's bigots under my bed!
I dream about bigots at night!
Fool, shut up! You are a sanctimonious jackass!
there was a rumor in the 15th century that the world was flat. it looked flat to a lot of people but nobody knew for sure but that did stop people from talking about it and others teaching it.
pretty soon it was considered flat by most of the people. if you asked just about anyone they said, yes it is flat because so many people were talking about it being flat. no proof of course. just talk.
get it?
We oppose all of Islam and hold all of them responsible for the actions of a very few. (i.e., we believe in collective punishment)
Alpha, maybe you can explain to us what constitutes a very few. Because I hear that its only a 'very few' of the 1+ billion Muslims who are radicals/jihadists. Well if it was a 'very few' so few in fact that we should not be 'hysterical', a rational person should conclude that these few radicals would be so marginalized that they'd be rendered ineffective. Yet they see to be able to hold considerable sway over other Muslims who for some odd reason are either incapable or unwilling to confront these guys and end this crap.
Michael, try this.
The whole point is that the mere presence of the Muslim building will offend people.
Replace "Muslim" with "Jew" and see how that sounds:
"The whole point is that the mere presence of the Jewish building will offend people."
In such case would you really think it fair to say the Jews should be prohibited from building because others harbor prejudice against them?
Hey, a big shout out to Kathleen Parker for speaking up for sanity (I don't agree wit everything she writes):
"The mosque should be built precisely because we don't like the idea very much. We don't need constitutional protections to be agreeable, after all.
This point surpasses even all the obvious reasons for allowing the mosque, principally that there's no law against it. Precluding any such law, we let people worship when and where they please. That it hurts some people's feelings is, well, irrelevant in a nation of laws. And, really, don't we want to keep it that way? "
Althouse, I think you need to do a photo shoot at Ground Zero...Coffee on Willy Street.
Every time I see news stories about this, I'm thinking of that establishment next to Eldorado of the fine fine Margaritas.
How do we rid ourselves of the mental illness that is OmegaLiberal?
His bigotry obsession, and his demented obsession with his own holiness... what do you do with this kind of shithead?
Institutionalization?
Drugs?
A good swift kick in the ass?
And the shithead thinks he's a serious thinker!
Bigots! It's bigots, I tell you!
Bigots, everywhere!
Save us, oh great Omega Liberal, from the infestation of bigots!
God help me, I think I might agree with Hoosier Daddy:
"Yet they see to be able to hold considerable sway over other Muslims who for some odd reason are either incapable or unwilling to confront these guys and end this crap."
Agreed. This Imam is doing just that! That's why the Bush Admin, and now Obama Admin, sent this Imam overseas to say appeal to other Muslims not to support al Qaeda, to tell them the West does not hate Islam and that there is freedom of religion for Muslims in the West.
Imagine him now, today, trying to sell that line in Malaysia! Must be pretty hard!
The more we attack Islam for the sins of al Qaeda, the more we strengthen AQ. We need to be smarter than that.
But, alas, we are not. And, so, this is Exhibit A for AQ that Islam is oppressed by the west.
Holy Mother of God!
The holy bigot hunter, OmegaLiberal, is here to save us from our sins!
His halo shines so bright, it's like the Star of Bethlehem.
Nobody loves blacks, gays and women (and, now, Muslims) like the great sanctified bigot hunter, OmegaLiberal.
God sent the great bigot hunter, OmegaLiberal, to redeem us from our sins!
MadisonMan, good point. Madison would have no trouble with Mosque near Ground Zero (coffee shop).
but, here in Madison we consider the freedom of religion to be "hallowed." If only more Americans did!
OmegaLiberal, you dumb clown.
When are you going to stop jabbering about your bigot obsession?
"Meanwhile, the right is headed over to the conspiracy place too. "
So, the Speaker of the House is the Left?
And a post by one blogger is "the right"?
Is that how I'm supposed to read that?
Tell us, oh great bigot hunter OmegaLiberal, what you have done to save blacks, gays, women and Muslims today?
Your holiness astounds and humbles us poor sinners.
Did you give your money away to blacks today?
Oh holy, holy, bigot hunter OmegaLiberal, tell us about your great and wonderful sacrifices.
Only you, great bigot hunter, can save us from our sins!
Can you perform miracles too, great bigot hunter?
The total absence of any Muslims chiming in on this controversy seems remarkable.
And I still have this feeling the promoters of this project are smiling happily.
Agreed. This Imam is doing just that! That's why the Bush Admin, and now Obama Admin, sent this Imam overseas to say appeal to other Muslims not to support al Qaeda, to tell them the West does not hate Islam and that there is freedom of religion for Muslims in the West.
Hmmm...that doesn't exactly strengthen your argument. If the vast majority Muslims are so indifferent or apathetic about a terrorist organization that slaughters innocent people in the name of Islam that we have to send an Iman from the US to tell them not to join forces with them then maybe the paranoid conservatives have a point.
but, here in Madison we consider the freedom of religion to be "hallowed." If only more Americans did!
Which is an interesting turn of phrase as the previous liberal mantra used to be freedom from religion. At least when it came to Christianity that is.
See Alpha, one of the problems I tend to have with liberals on this issue is that any criticism, mockery or comedy made about Islam was denounced by your side of the aisle as bigotry or culturally insenstive. Yet to do the same to Christianity was celebrated as a First Amendment right to be cherished.
That is exactly why your sudden defense of 'religion' is met with the cynicism and suspicion it deserves.
Watching Obama and most (though less every day) of his Party side with the fundamentalists has been a treat.
Likewise the pugnacious laissez faire attitude expressed by virtually all of the Professional Left.
Hey there lawyers. If I form a certain types of corporations in New York you don't have to list officers and owners. An attorney files the papers as an agent and no names are listed anywhere except for a mailing address and the agent/attorney.
Under what right or what set of reasoning do you think that anyone associated with the mosque "has to give up" this information that others can keep completely private.
Unacceptable reasons to oppose the GZM: proximity to Ground Zero, questionable funding, questionable motive.
Acceptable reasons to oppose the GZM: carbon footprint, environmental impact, lack of diversity, discovery of endangered bedbug colony on site.
Hoosier Daddy, I don't see it. I honestly try to live by these principles, as do many libs I know. My liberal values actually from from Christian background and the teachings of Jesus Christ (as opposed to the Old Testament Christians of the religious right).
I am not aware of any liberal efforts to restrict religious freedom by Christians. To stop them from using government to enforce their religious doctrine? Yes, but that's very different.
That is by no means the same as criticizing Christian leaders (or people who claim to be The One True Christian). Freedom of religion is not freedom from criticism. (And, yes, some Islamic leaders will come in for criticism from libs, as well).
But that's all a tangent to the main point! We are not at war with Islam! We are stronger to just let this thing be built!
OmegaLiberal says it again:
It's the BIGOTS!
Bigotty, bigotty bigots!
How many times do I have to tell you.
IT'S THE BIGOTS!
They're everywhere!
"Hmmm...that doesn't exactly strengthen your argument. If the vast majority Muslims are so indifferent or apathetic about a terrorist organization that slaughters innocent people in the name of Islam that we have to send an Iman from the US to tell them not to join forces with them then maybe the paranoid conservatives have a point."
I never said I think it is the vast majority of Muslims supporting al Qaeda. I do not believe that is correct, especially as AQ has also killed Muslims, not to mention bring hate and disrepute upon their fate.
They just need a few, really, to make a lot of trouble. Such as the member of the Saudi Arabian aristocracy and their big fat checkbooks.
"upon their fate." should be "upon their faith."
Gotta go. I am truly sorry to see all the hate being spawned against the Muslims. It's bad for our our nation, bad for our future, and bad for our souls.
Gotta go. I am truly sorry to see all the hate being spawned against the Muslims. It's bad for our our nation, bad for our future, and bad for our souls.
You see, I told you:
IT'S THE BIGOTS! THE BIGOTS, I TELL YOU!!
BIGOTS EVERYWHERE!!
Ground zero was a place where several thousand people were murdered by religious bigots. The religious bigots were Muslims. The opponents to the mosque have reason for their distrust and should not have to justify it. I do not know if the mosque is being built in the spirit of trumphalism, but it is a fair question to raise. A more sensitive religious leader would avoid raising that question......Prior to 9/11 I knew several Muslims. Their religion was background info, like the color of their shoes or marital status. It was not something that inspired either comity or hositily. After 9/11, their religion became a foreground detail. If someone was a Muslim, you noted that fact. That's what happens when you murder thousands in the name of religion. The hijackers achieved their purpose. They inspired distrust where none existed. The iman seems to be furthering this purpose.
Anyone else get the impression Alpha got all his talking points at once?
But, to the topic. There are all manner of foundations, left and right, that will fund signs, ads, etc., sotto voce. The fact that opposition to the mosque is so vast makes even small contributions by a large number of organizations add up quickly.
So, it's like what ANSWER, ACORN. and SEIU do all the time, but the people actually support this.
PS Alpha's Obamaesque disdain for the American people's disapproval of this project couldn't come from a Chamberlainesque cowering in the hope this will save him from the wrath of Islam, could it?
William, the point is that al Qaeda WANTS us to go to war with all of Islam. He is telling them we are doing just that.
How playing into al Qaeda's plans helps us is beyond me.
Even George Bush, to his credit, asked people not to blame all Muslims. Here is what George Bush said:
"I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people. "
Hoosier Daddy, I don't see it. I honestly try to live by these principles, as do many libs I know.
Well then Alpha you evidently have a very small circle of acquaintences or clearly have not been paying attention. Christianity has never received any kind of respect from liberals that even remotely approaches what Islam receives. The movies, 'artwork', comedian slams and outright criticism are well documented in which Christianity is attacked and mocked, all with the approval of liberals.
I never said I think it is the vast majority of Muslims supporting al Qaeda. I do not believe that is correct, especially as AQ has also killed Muslims, not to mention bring hate and disrepute upon their fate.
I think you need to go back and read what I said. If AQ and those like them are so few as I keep hearing, then it should not be that hard to marginalize them. However it would appear that there is a lot of indifference or apathy (these are not synonomoys with support) within the Muslim world in which to suppress these radicals, especially, as you say, they're also killing fellow Muslims.
I am truly sorry to see all the hate being spawned against the Muslims.
And this is why you don't argue in good faith. If being critical of Islam is the equivalent of hate in your book then further discussion with you on the subject is pointless.
It's not the vast majority of Manhattanites though. In fact, a majority of Manhattanites support this project.
Why is Ann Althouse trying to dictate zoning laws for a city she doesn't live in and doesn't even know.
Under what right or what set of reasoning do you think that anyone anyone associated with the mosque "has to give up" this information that others can keep completely private.
Dialogue. Building bridges. Whatever word or phrase you fit best that is, supposedly at the heart of this project.
Transparency is a great indication of integrity and honesty. Choosing to hide behind a right to silence is not in keeping with the rhetoric of open, respectful conversation.
Especially when the Speaker of the House calls for those opposing the mosque to be officially investigated.
Here is what George Bush said:
Which is pretty much pablum since McVeigh admitted he pretty much gave up on religion well before he decided to become a terrorist.
The desire to make an equivalency between Mcveigh who was simply an anti-Government terrorist with 17 Islamic terrorists who yelled Allah Akbar as they flew planes into buildings is laughable at best.
Could any one of the Democrats on this blog please explain to me how Rep. Pelosi's statement in any way advances the chances of Democrats getting elected/re-elected this fall.
I just couldn't believe she was that tone-deaf.
Alpha Liberal: I happen to think that this particular location for a mosque is tasteless. On the other hand if we think it so important to please the Muslim world why don't we just build a mosque ourselves on the very site of the WTC, like the biggest one in the world. And name it the George W. Bush Mosque.
I frankly doubt they can build here because they don't have the equity and they don't have the financing. They may well be trying to bait us into moving the location and building it at public expense. Which would be a really big belly laugh for them.
"Could any one of the Democrats on this blog please explain to me how Rep. Pelosi's statement in any way advances the chances of Democrats getting elected/re-elected this fall"
A new political strategy to win elections. It's called Frankenpaigning.
You don't appeal to the voters, you appeal to the vote-counters.
This abomination spits in the eye of everyone who lost someone on
911. Especially the working class fireman and policemen who were murdered while trying to save people.
They are the core of the opposition. They are the people that AlphaLiberal,HDhouse, downtownlad, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama never gave a shit about. Never did, never will.
We know what side they are on. It is not ours.
Poor ole Nancy is off her medication again.
Hear Hear Trooper York
So....since Harry Reid has come out against the proposed Cordoba House Mosque to save his political bacon, I suppose Nancy Baby will now sick the FBI hounds on the Senate Majority Leader, n'cest pas?
Alpha made a rational point. We need to fool the Islamic people of the world who are at war with us into thinking we respect them and their religion so much that we don't blame them for any murder of Crusaders ( that is us) by Al Quaeda. That should trick them into not trying so hard.But suppose it is only fooling ourselves. What do we do then Alpha?
So, our hardcore libs are OK with the government investigating people simply because the government disagrees with 70% of the country?
As has been said repeatedly, scratch a lib and you will find a fascist.
Eventually, the powers that be will see what happens when you not only ignore but openly attack the governed. It won't be pretty.
Meanwhile, the right is headed over to the conspiracy place too.
Shariah in the West: A Discussion with Andy McCarthy .
Hint: Sharia is not one of the Muslim virgins.. and Andy McCarthy is not some swamp dweller.
Ha ha ha ha ha. Turtle. Fencepost.
Come on now, that's funny.
How revealing it is. It appears as if the spokespersons are leading opinion because in that world is is how opinion works. It's spoon-fed. The idea of spokespeople being sought to express general opinion is inconceivable. In that world world view opinion is always top down. Thus this widespread opinion was put there like a turtle on a fencepost. . Poor thing, the holder of that sadly fallacious reasoning, not the turtle, makes one wonder how they manage through life. I think I do know, by relying on others, especially government officials, to do the opining for them.
Good question from a Republican Muslim: Why are Republicans opposing private property rights?
"Republican Muslim" being a historic artifact as the GOP drives yet another block of non-white voters away.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/republican-muslims-to-gop-youre-on-thin-ice.php
This is also a good point:
Ramadan echoed a sentiment that conservative activist Grover Norquist shared with Slate: in Norquist's words, "Republicans will lose Jewish votes by focusing on a mosque in New York.... You're going to lose Jewish votes, Indian votes, Buddhist votes. Every member of a minority group looks at a situation like this and says, oh, the people hitting this minority will eventually start hitting me."
"So, our hardcore libs are OK with the government investigating people simply because the government disagrees with 70% of the country?"
Pelosi did not call for a government investigation. She can call for looking into something like this and someone can do so without being a part of Congress.
And, it seems, she was pushing back on calls for the religious finances behind the mosque to be investigated. She now supports that, too, which is dumb.
This whole episode is really a Stupid Contagion. Most of the pols come out sounding pretty dumb as they dance around it.
We are not at war with Islam.
You will note that on the thread about the couple that was stoned to death by Moslem extremists, none of the Liberal champions of truth and justice had anything to say.
AlphaLiberal, hdhouse, downtownlad and all the rest had nothing to say.
You see islamic terrorism and barbarism is not the enemy....they couldn't care less. They would not take a minute out of their day to denounce that.
It is only conservatives and Republicans that are worthy of their unceasing attacks.
They will never denounce the barbaric acts of terrorist in plain simple language. It is beyond their capablities.
"But suppose it is only fooling ourselves. What do we do then Alpha?"
I hope and pray we are not. Let's leave the religious wars in the past.
Really, Jesus did not preach hate, nor war, but love and forgiveness. Going to war in Jesus' name is pretty dumb.
Tim Brown who is the leader of the opposition is an ex-fireman who went into the Towers that day.
He is obviously a Republican party operative.
Trooper York:
"You will note that on the thread about the couple that was stoned to death by Moslem extremists, none of the Liberal champions of truth and justice had anything to say."
The thing speaks for itself, I hope. It is sick and barbaric and comes from a backward part of the world.
Kind of like the so-called "Christians" in Africa who tried to make homosexuality punishable by death. Did you speak against that? If not should we assume you want to kill all gays? (No)
But it is not being done in my country's name and against my country's founding principles.
Nor does suspending freedom of religion for Muslims address that.
TrooperYork uses 9/11 victims as political pawns just to make a point:
"This abomination spits in the eye of everyone who lost someone on
911"
No, it doesn't. There is one group, allied with Liz Cheney, which has been pushing this. There are other groups who oppose inflaming the religious war on their behalf.
There are also Muslims who died in the attacks on 9/11. I guess you thin they don't count.
There is also the medical relief act to help survivors suffering health problems from that day. How is it not spitting in their eye when Republicans prevented the bill from passing?
Pelosi did call for one. Pretty clearly.
Nice to know you side with that, fascist.
To give you a heads up, the only way a tiny minority can control a large movement is with the support of the majority. The myth that most Muslims oppose radicals does not stand up to cursory examination.
You don't see white power groups dominating Christianity, do you?
So, the Liz Cheney group has SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE COUNTRY ON THEIR SIDE.
Yes, clearly fringe. They should be investigated.
Nancy Pelosi is the gift that keeps on giving...to the GOP.
AlphaLiberal wrote: It's pretty obviously a creation of the Republican PR machine.
If its so damn obvious then why would Pelosi demand an investigation? By the terms of your argument (actually not an argument but a puerile fallacy) Pelosi must be some kind of idiot
Really, Jesus did not preach hate, nor war, but love and forgiveness. Going to war in Jesus' name is pretty dumb.
Is it? Really, please cite your Scripture. Jesus did not oppose His Own Death, but that was because God, the Father, told Him not to, “Let this cup pass from me…not my Will, but Thy Will.” Jesus did NOT say, “If a man says he will kill all the Jews, help him run the ovens.” Jesus said “Love your enemies”….but did not say, you won’t have enemies, or that your enemies should be allowed to run roughshod over the good or the innocent…Jesus said “Forgive them” but He never said, “Forget what they did.” or to allow them to continue in the evil, at the expense of the innocent, either.
AlphaLiberal wrote: Republicans prevented the bill from passing?
Republicans cannot prevent ANYTHING from passing into law, you lame-ass poltroon, the Democrats enjoy an absolute majority in both chambers.
Another stooge of AlphaSockPuppet's "Republican PR Machine" does the bidding of evil conservatives:
The New York Times' Maureen Dowd brushes aside Obama; pleads for George W. Bush's leadership on "ground zero" mosque.
Yes, Maureen, it's time for the adults to run things again.
I think this is a revealing gaffe for Pelosi et al.
I mean, it's like she's thinking:...I know we have a well-funded conspiracy behind us so they must too...
Nancy Pelosi lost touch with the American people long ago at every level. She may have tenure in her little Congressional district but thank God her tenure as SOTH is revocable--this Fall
AL manages to combine idiocy, tedium, and cowardice in a way not seen since, well, Pelosi.
Republican Muslim" being a historic artifact as the GOP drives yet another block of non-white voters away.
Alpha, is being non-white a pre-requisite of being Muslim? Just asking because the last time I checked, Muslims aren't a race.
Yes, Maureen, it's time for the adults to run things again.
Hmmm..first Alpha is quoting Dubya and now Dowd?
How bad is it when they're turning to George W. McHitlerburonbush to make their case for them?
i will point out, for the record, Ann, that as far as an islamist conspiracy theory...
Well, isn't there undeniably one. I mean what do you call it when 19 people get together to fly planes into buildings? What do you call an international organization dedicated to such mayhem? what do you call Al Qaeda, but a conspiracy? so searching for an islamist conspiracy, well, its like searching for a mafia conspiracy. So its not laughable on its face, or even equivalent.
Asking who funds it and searching for a hidden agenda isn't paranoid. its sensible.
Scott
"Nancy Pelosi is the gift that keeps on giving...to the GOP."
Hey, Scott, if Captain Kickass and Badass Biden are eating dinner together and a bomb goes off, "the gift" will be .....
AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH
Pelosi is dumber than ??? How about a poll Althouse.
Kind of like the so-called "Christians" in Africa who tried to make homosexuality punishable by death. Did you speak against that? If not should we assume you want to kill all gays?
Who exactly where these so-called Christians? Did they succeed? Is there an African country with a Christian ruling party that punishes homosexuality with execution? I'm not aware of one but know several Muslim ones that do. In fact, every Muslim country in the ME has legal prohibitions against the practice, a few punishable by death, others by prison.
@rdkraus: I would not ever associate myself with that repugnant statement.
I hope they live long and happy lives; and that the processes of constitutional government will soon send them into their new careers on the lecture circuit.
I love that dolts like Pelosi and the Left here confuse "It shouldn't be built in this location" for an assault on property rights. Makes their stances on Walmarts all the funnier.
Pelosi is like McCarthy....if McCarthy was not actually correct in his claims.
Scott
You miss my point.
Alpha...You made another good point about Jesus attitude towards war. He taught us not war against men in the "flesh", but he said that Christians are born into an ongoing war against the kingdom of satan using spiritual weapons such as spoken words and prayer; and that He will finish the war for us soon. In the meantime we are told to stay alert, stand our ground, and to proclaim His word everywhere, including in Muzlim ruled parts of the world ( which is the reason that why Christians are under Muzlim attack). The day has come when politicians will be forced to get off the fence they all would prefer to sit on. That is why it is a political issue. As Trooper says, we want to know which side of the fence you are on...sitting on it will not work.
Sorry, but what else do you expect a Mosque to do but promote Shariah law? Just as if we had a Catholic community center that promoted pro-life works...Islamic centers are bound to promote their religion and its principles. I hardly think that is 'conspiracy' theory.
Actually RedA...Shari'a Law is NOT a pre-requ of Islam, IIRC. It is ONE version, a Sunni belief or set of laws.
It's like saying a Christian Church will promote Christianity, but not necessarily the same as any other Christian Church...
@rdkraus: Okay, I'll bite. What did you mean?
Nancy Pelosi lost touch with the American people long ago at every level.
You think that at some point she was in touch with things? I don't.
Ted Olson's wife died in the 9/11 attacks. He is a Republican and the lead attorney for Bush in 2000.
He has some powerful words to say in opposition to the anti-Islam rhetoric:
"Well it may not make me hap-- popular with some people, but I think probably the president was right about this," Olson responded. "I do believe that people of all religions have a right to build edifices, or structures, or places of religious worship or study, where the community allows them to do it under zoning laws and that sort of thing, and that we don't want to turn an act of hate against us by extremists into an act of intolerance for people of religious faith. And I don't think it should be a political issue. It shouldn't be a Republican or Democratic issue, either. I believe Gov. Christie from New Jersey said it well -- that this should not be in that political, partisan marketplace."
Link to page with text and video.
We are not at war with Islam.
Nancy Pelosi doesn't have to be in touch with the American people. She just has to be elected by her constituents in that fantasyland known as San Francisco. She then has to be elected by the other Democrat Congresstards to be their leader.
duhMikesec:
So, the Liz Cheney group has SEVENTY PERCENT OF THE COUNTRY ON THEIR SIDE.
Not really. A majority also said they have the right to build their mosque. The media chose not to go apeshit over that question.
Quaestor:
Republicans cannot prevent ANYTHING from passing into law, you lame-ass poltroon, the Democrats enjoy an absolute majority in both chambers.
Oh, for Pete's sake.
This is really too ridiculous to comment on, but about 93% of Rs voted against the bill and defeated it with about 6% of Ds.
And they have stopped bill after bill in the Senate by an unprecedented abuse of minority rights.
traditionalguy:
"he said that Christians are born into an ongoing war against the kingdom of satan using spiritual weapons such as spoken words and prayer; "
So Muslims worship Satan? Do you actually believe that?
You're wrong.
And they have stopped bill after bill in the Senate by an unprecedented abuse of minority rights.
What you mean the use of the Senate-Allowed Filibuster?
To AL, "unprecedented" means when someone I don't like does something....
So Muslims worship Satan? Do you actually believe that?
You don't understand religion well do you?
Ask a Muslim if, as a Catholic I am furthering Satan's Goals on Earth...Geeeeeez, dood/doodette that's not what Traditional said....you ust like to be dense, don't you?
Uh, no, Joe. "Unprecedented" means it's not been done to this extent before.
Facts are cruel:
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm
Bottom line: Republicans are thwarting the will of the voters by abusing minority rights.
------------------
Someone was whining about the people behind the mosque plans not speaking up more. Here is an interview with the developer:
http://www.ny1.com/content/news_beats/politics/123935/story
For the provocatively-named Cordoba Initiative to engage in this expression of obvious triumphalism is divisive and insensitive.
But almost nobody is claiming that they don't have the LEGAL right to build the mosque. To assert the contrary is a straw dog argument.
So again AL you mean people ae using the Rules of the Senate to thwart things YOU like, right?
And considering the election of Christie, of McDonnell, of Scott Brown, and the desire of 60% of the voters to repeal ObamaCare, I don't if the Republicans are obstructing or REPRESENTING the "Will of the Voters."
Alpha
> "Sometimes you'll be walking along and see a turtle on a fencepost. Well, you know that turtle didn't get up there all by itself."
Mmm, yeah, you are citing… bill Clinton.
Anyway, actually the metaphor ain’t half bad. But do you really think our opposition to the mosque COULDN’T POSSIBLY BE JUST GRASS ROOTS?
I remind you, that over 50% of democrats oppose this project.
And really, bringing in Pat Buchanan to speak out against the mention of Nazis? The man stated he admired hitler and gosh we should have allied with him during WWII. I’ll take Buchanan as seriously on the topic as he deserves.
> I see nothing anti-semitic at the link, AW. False charge.
Another liberal who can’t see anti-semitism even when it smacks them in the head. Shocka.
> What the opponents are saying is that, either officially or unofficially, they want America to tell the world that:
How about this as a message. Don’t let AQ funded victory mosques be built in places where islamofascist terrorists murdered innocents. I know, I know, you guys deny that is what it is, but I don’t care.
As for your silly claim that we are demonstrating intolerance of islam, what do you say to the Muslims who equally say it shouldn’t be built there?
> "The whole point is that the mere presence of the Jewish building will offend people."
I don’t know. Is there anywhere in the world similar to ground zero, vis-à-vis Judaism? Any place where the jews murdered non jews for not being jewish, while shouting “God is great!”?
I mean the faith has been around for a long time, so I imagine there is somewhere in the world like that, but I am having trouble thinking of even one.
>Hey, a big shout out to Kathleen Parker
Yes the part where she explained that the builders of the mosque didn’t fly planes into buildings was priceless in its stupid obviousness.
> This Imam is doing just that!
You mean like when he refused to condemn hamas? Or when he met with Iranian officials and put a happy picture of it on the site until someone noticed? Or how about when he blamed us for 9-11 in that classic “9-11 is not america’s fault, but…” fashion.
Indeed, if they really wanted to send an anti-terror message and all that, why didn’t they name the mosque something else. Dozens of innocent Muslims were murdered by terrorists on 9-11. Why not name it for one of them? Or how about any of the Muslims who have given their lives around the world fighting terrorism? Why pick a name of a victory mosque at cardoba?
Scott
Only that it would be no "gift" to have her in Obama's place.
She may be a politial "gift," but she's not gift in general.
I'm pretty sure we agres.
;-)
@rdkraus: I try not to think the unthinkable.
The opposition to the Mosque comes from Republican elected, Republican celebrities and a the former half-term Governor of Alaska. It has been fodder in right wing media for months until the Lamestream Media picked it up.
It's pretty obviously a creation of the Republican PR machine. Which is a pretty effective machine.
So, the organized families of victims of 9/11 are shills for the GOP?
Ginned up in a story about Muslims? Hello? Can we show a little more cultural sensitivity please?
Hello? Can we show a little more cultural sensitivity please?
yes this sort of insensitivity DOGS Muslims...
So, the organized families of victims of 9/11 are shills for the GOP?
Would these be the same families Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck attacked and called shills for Democrats shortly after 9/11?
It's SWINISH to use words like "gin" and "Muslim" together, please show some restraint and sensitivity.
WV: "prade" we'all you-szuly has'em on the Forth of July an' Thanksgiv'n, less'n its rain'n 'r snow'n.
Would these be the same families Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck attacked and called shills for Democrats shortly after 9/11?
No Gm those would be "The Jersey Girls" but thank yo for playing.....
Jersey Girls weren't grieving 9/11 family members?
AL, know why the media didn't go nuts that most people think they have a right to build it?
Because nobody disputes that. At all.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Jersey Girls weren't grieving 9/11 family members?
They were a recognizable sub-group of 4...are you saying that the 9/11 families here are an organized group as well?
Certainly Beck, Limbaugh and Coulter attacked the jersey Girls, but that's not calling ALL 9/11 families, "shills."
But thank you for playing.
@AL
Replace "Muslim" with "Jew" and see how that sounds:
When Jews, Catholics, or Baptists hijack airliners and fly them into NYC skyscrapers, then you may have a point.
Now, not so much.
Next strawman please.
Alpha "Should all Catholics be condemned for the pedophilia of a few? No."
==============
There was no pedophilia, just a pack of gay priests and their mostly eager rent boys aged 12-18. Pederasty, not pedophilia. The gay chickenhawk is a recurrent fixture in gay society, going back to ancient times.
The Catholic Church's big mistakes were:
1. Being tolerant of homos in their ranks chasing boys.
2. Giving the homosexuals psychological counseling vs. just booting them out.
3. And keeping them in the ranks, not alerting new parishes they were getting a gay priest with a sordid past.
4. Not paying off the mostly eager rent boys up front, but hiding behind lawyers when some of the pronged adolescents showed up wanting a payoff or informing the Church some poofter in clerical garb gave them AIDs, anal herpes, etc.
********************
Some Muslim perspectives on why the mosque should not be built.
Also: Did you note that Ann's post was timestamped 9:11 a.m.?
(Cue Twilight Zone music.)
Alpha...IF you are right, then islam would not behead me for saying that Jesus is the llving son of God. Please tell them and Danny Pearl's famly.
@Joe
yes this sort of insensitivity DOGS Muslims...
*Snert* *Giggle* *Buhwahaha!*
Really, Joe, can't you see that AL is trying to work his progessive panties into a proper bunch.
Back to you AL, flail away.
Would these be the same families Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck attacked and called shills for Democrats shortly after 9/11?
No idea, Garage, you would have to ask them or review their audio. What's that got to do with the question at hand?
Alpha maintains the opposition is GOP-generated, much like he and you and others of your ilk did regarding the Tea Party before mountains of evidenced seemed to shut that meme up.
Apparently, even the Muslim-based opposition to this project are GOP shills, right, Garage?
Would these be the same families Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck attacked and called shills for Democrats shortly after 9/11?
garage do you own stock in a straw company?
You know whats funny is you and others like you are the only ones on this blog who actually go around quoting Limbaugh, Beck or Hannity to make some kind of point which tells you guys listen to him a whole lot more than us conservatives do.
Garage
i am sorry, but what exactly did Rush and Beck say about them. and provide a source. and media mutters doesn't count.
Transparency's good.
And perhaps there should be an investigation into any rightists who are foaming at the mouth at the possibility of a mosque.
As there should be investigations into Sen. Pelosi's connections (allegedly includes muslims, even possibly radical ones).
Hoosier Daddy said...
Republican Muslim" being a historic artifact as the GOP drives yet another block of non-white voters away.
Alpha, is being non-white a pre-requisite of being Muslim? Just asking because the last time I checked, Muslims aren't a race...
******************
Not only do Islamoids come in all colors and stripes...what we think of as the "classic Muslim" - some hook-nosed Semite riding a camel - is 100% caucasian. And much to their beefing, not entitled to the affirmative action bennies many other swarthy people get.
Alpha
> "Republican Muslim" being a historic artifact as the GOP drives yet another block of non-white voters away.
Btw, totally glossed over this racist comment. Seriously, are you under the impression that John Walker Lindh wasn't white?
So Muslims worship Satan? Do you actually believe that?
You're wrong.
So, it's the bigots!
As always, OmegaLiberal, it's the bigots!
God, they're everywhere.
The bigots probably made up that thing about the Koran saying that the infidels should be beheaded.
It's always the bigots, right OmegaLiberal?
Tell us more about the bigots, OmegaLiberal? Have you found any more under your bed?
Turtles? Fenceposts? Nancy Pelosi?
We need to build a turtle fence! (Link is to YouTube and is totally safe for work!)
The opposition to the Mosque comes from Republican elected, Republican celebrities and a the former half-term Governor of Alaska [...] It's pretty obviously a creation of the Republican PR machine. Which is a pretty effective machine.
The funny thing is that Alpha followed up the above conspiracy theory with a link to a Salon article... that traced the origins of the story back to an anti-Islamic blogger and the New York Post. So much for the "Republican PR machine". So much for it being originated by Sarah Palin and "Republican celebrities". Oops! :)
Augh.
Another non-story.
Really and truly. A NON-STORY.
How anyone could really care about this issue is beyond me. It's a non-profit organization setting up a community center.
August must be Teh Crazy™ month.
Response to Ms. Pelosi:
How are the advocates of the mosque being funded? Who is funding the small vocal minority in favor of this? What big bucks progressive sugar daddies are putting up the dough for Pelosi and the progressives to keep this on the table?
They really make it too easy.
here's a better approach--Dantean!
Pelosi's like ...La Gran Puta. La Gran Puta de Babilon.
Then so is...Sarah Palin. Two flavors of Ho, if you will
Let them build the mosque. Then let someone build a gay bar on one side and a BBQ joint on the other. See how the Muslims will howl!
AlphaLiberal said...
Bottom line: Republicans are thwarting the will of the voters by abusing minority rights.
Really? How? Is there legislation before the NYC council? Is there some rule or regulation against it? What is the actual thwarting by republicans that you can cite as legislative? Now is there popular opinion against it? Oh yes, but you see in your little fantasy land of lies, that equates to the same thing.
Seriously, AlphaLiar, you are, I believe one of the terminally insane. You are a crazy person. You live in a world of fantasy and fiction created by your disgusting ideology? You have become a mental victim to it? You should see how you look to real common sense thinking people. You're a fucking nut to them. I, however see you for what you really are and that is a willing and complicit agent of evil. You are an evil individual and you know this and you don't care. You harbor evil, you defend evil, and you fight for evil.
You in effect become no different than the adherents to the religion of peace. You will, lie, cheat, steal, and do any other number of things in the name of your ideology because like muslims, it's okay to do that to people who are not muslims, but in your case, who are not leftards. You've constantly been outed for this and yet you continue looking for the same result. Insane and evil.
What the heck is Pelosi thinking here?
At a time where we could use some calming voices, she comes up with this?
Sheesh.
btw, the GZM founders refuse to rule out being funded by iran.
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/nancy-pelosi-on-ground-zero-mosque-hey.html
See the third update.
It's amazing to me how much fear you folks promote. I thought the whole idea of going to war in the first place was to help Muslims. To reach out to them and give them an alternative to the extremism. Now with this silliness you are pushing them away.
The same thinking that blames all Muslims for 9/11 is the same kind of thinking that happened during Reconstruction when whites blamed all blacks for crimes committed by people who happened to be black. Read some history and you'll see it is eerily similar.
I thought the whole idea of going to war in the first place was to help Muslims.
No, that was merely a fortunate side-effect. It worked, too. :)
In the future, issues like the "Ground Zero Mosque" will be seen for what they are: self-organized, leaderless conspiracies.
Some Muslims want to have a Mosque in downtown NYC. Some Republicans see talking up opposition to this as a great political opportunity. Democrats go on the defensive, and the President punts. Absolutely no one focuses on the big issues of the day.
Where's the conspiracy, you ask? The system marches on while the people and the pundits and the media are distracted with this meaningless mosque shit. We edge ever closer to a World War III sparked by an Israel-Iran conflict. Our economy continues to deteriorate; the real estate market, for instance, seems to be on the precipice of a huge collapse. The socialist Democrats take over more and more of the economy in an assuredly permanent way.
And what an achievement for those who want to destroy America! Our attention is diverted while the destruction takes place. Why? Because we set up the system and we insist on the perpetuation of the system even if it is going to lead to our country's self-destruction, much like the Romans of the Third Century focused on petty oneupmanship instead of the big picture.
wv: "nonsold"... that's what I am on the Establishment's plans for America.
Alpha,
What's your position on states flying Confederate Flags, or even businesses flying confederate flags, or college students having confederate flags in their windows?
Matt said...
It's amazing to me how much fear you folks promote.
...
The same thinking that blames all Muslims for 9/11 is the same kind of thinking that happened during Reconstruction when whites blamed all blacks for crimes committed by people who happened to be black. Read some history and you'll see it is eerily similar.
Matt, can you identify the specific people you mean by "you folks", and identify the exact statements that are "promoting fear"?
I can see by the rest of your tirade that you're strongly critical of group/collective guilt, so please take this opportunity to clarify which individual comments and commenters here you are condemning.
Thanks.
Harry Reid is a moron. And he gets it! Or at least is smart enough to say the things that will not piss off the majority of his constituents. And what he says is this - yes they have a right to build the mosque. But he thinks it should be built elsewhere, as to build it there could be thought of as insensitive or could rile the emotions of many people, still grieving over the death of loved ones.
Again, he is a moron. Yet he understands this basic principle. Is Alpha Liberal an even bigger moron than Harry Reid?
David Patterson is about as popular as Milli Vanilli. And even he gets it. Build it, but find a location that doesn't piss everyone off. It's all about compromise.
Why are these morons capable of understanding this basic concept yet people like Alpha keep demagoging it as if that principle isn't in play? Alpha, you're a moron. And for the left to suddenly come up with the concept of religious tolerance after spending the better part of my entire lifetime denigrating christians as knuckle dragging bigots is the height of hypocricy and inconsistency. Traits which are very common in the liberal mindset.
Where is the fairytale new world order hegemoned over by the US Government? The Bush family tried to talk it into being until no one would listen anymore. The Islamic world is in revolt and the Chinese Hegemons have come into being while we slept. It is time to deal with setting new boundaries that stop the others' expansion. Obama says he wants us to ride the wave of all is peace among friends but he is lying. He wants credit for ending Afghanistan like he took credit for Iraq being over.The battle for Lower Manhattan is not yet over as a bridge too far. Let's set a boundary there.
Is Alpha Liberal an even bigger moron than Harry Reid?
Did you have to ask?
Some Muslims want to have a Mosque in downtown NYC. Some Republicans see talking up opposition to this as a great political opportunity. Democrats go on the defensive, and the President punts.
Actually the Republican who brought it to my attention was Mayor Bloomberg, who -- like President Obama -- confuses whether it's a legal thing to do (it obviously is) with whether it's a thoughtless and insensitive provocation (which it obviously is).
If the President better understood both the power and the limits of the bully pulpit, he'd have stayed as far away from the issue as he could. Instead he got right in the center, tried to walk it back through a spokesperson, and then (figuratively) shrugged his shoulders and walked it forward again.
But whether or not there's a controversy over the mosque, the issue between Iran and Israel is going to move forward. It's a distraction, but this President long ago lost control of that situation.
I'll leave you with an interesting thought. Is the reason that the Obama family is spending so much time outside of DC lately due to a fear that an Iranian nuke might just go off somewhere in downtown Washington? Makes one wonder.
Go ahead and build a mosque in every corner of every dwelling, hamlet, town, city and county of all 57 states..
just not at ground zero
So by the rules of conservatives, we can't ask who funded this video opposing the mosque?
However you want a religion to open up their books on how they're financing their house of worship?
And you think that all sounds fair?
Conservatives who oppose government controlling their lives seem to have no trouble with the government telling Muslims where they can and cannot build. Then they get upset when someone like Pelosi dares to ask who is funding both the mosque and attacks against the mosque.
Ironic.
Matt said...
Conservatives who oppose government controlling their lives seem to have no trouble with the government telling Muslims where they can and cannot build. Then they get upset when someone like Pelosi dares to ask who is funding both the mosque and attacks against the mosque.
Ironic.
Matt, could you identify which specific conservatives you're referring to?
Again, I note from your previous rant that you clearly hate hate hate when people condemn or stereotype an entire group based on the actions of a few members, so could you please identify the specific individuals you're referring to in your 8/18/10 4:56 PM and 8/18/10 6:05 PM comments?
Thanks.
Sounds like you live on an interesting planet, Matt, but perhaps you would like to join us back here on Earth?
AL,
Of course it is fair to ask about funding to build the mosque. The state and city have the right to know if the money to build the mosque is available and also where it comes from. When you go for a loan there are certain sources you cannot use to qualify for that loan legally. Once you have the loan and own the property, which by the way this crew does not as yet, then the state and city have to know you can afford to pay the mortgage and the taxes and other fees due the government. In the case of non-profits, the source of the funding is required because non-profits cannot take money from certain stated sources and remain non-profits. So yes, it is right for the question about funding by the mosque to be asked and it is also no business of anyone the funding of the video about the mosque.
I thought the whole idea of going to war in the first place was to help Muslims.
I thought the whole idea of going to Afghanistan was to get the guys who attacked us on 9/11.
I thought the whole idea of going to Iraq was for oil and wmds and to get back at Saddam for trying to kill Dubya's daddy.
Liberals send you to sensitivity training if you say the wrong word at a party or at the office..
But to hell with the sensitivities of 9/11 survivors.
Conservatives who oppose government controlling their lives seem to have no trouble with the government telling Muslims where they can and cannot build.
Hey Matt you want to know what's ironic?
It's when liberals who have no problem whatsover criticizing, mocking and degrading Christians and Christianity are now suddenly tripping over their dicks in their rush to defend Islam.
I'd really like one of you bleeding hearts explain your newfound interest in respecting religion.
Hey do any of the liberals think that an Islamic outreach center and mosque in NYC would be better placed in say, the Afghan hinterlands where they stone men and women who have extramarital sex and butcher 10 innocent Christian charity workers who were unselflishly trying to help Muslim with medical care.
Seems the one's who need a lesson in outreach aren't in the USA.
Any of you liberals care to comment on that?
AL,
Hate to tell you but your problem with passing bills is not the 93% of the Republicans voting against them; it is the 6% of the Dems who vote against them.
Alpha Liberal wrote:
So by the rules of conservatives, we can't ask who funded this video opposing the mosque?
However you want a religion to open up their books on how they're financing their house of worship?
And you think that all sounds fair?
Who is arguing that noone can ask about the funding of a video opposing the mosque. Considering that 70% of the public are opposed though and considering even people like Harry Reid, Howard Dean and David Patterson are taking the default conservative position (which contrary to the witch hunt language suggested by the left is seeking to find compromise to allow the mosque to be built but also respect the feelings of those who lost loved ones on 9/11) it's simply dumb to look for conspiracy theories. But conservatives look forward to Nancy Pelosi taking an exrremely unpopular position and then running with it. If she thinks that will win her votes, then more power to her.
Hoosier Daddy wrote:
Seems the one's who need a lesson in outreach aren't in the USA.
Any of you liberals care to comment on that?
Seriously. Why do WE need to be taught a lesson about tolerance? The left keeps warning of a muslim backlash after 9/11, after the Hood massacre after the opposition to the mosque being built, yet there has yet to be any actual backlash.This country has been remarkably tolerant towards Muslims, despite daily calls of Death to America in more than one muslim country.
xhttp://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/017/372nmbdt.asp
SMGalbraith said...
What the heck is Pelosi thinking here?
At a time where we could use some calming voices, she comes up with this?
Sheesh.
[insert leftard name here] Oh, where do you want me to step in it? Oh, like this? Thanks, that feels much better now.
Don't build there.. there's owls nesting there.
Don't park there.. there's an elk pass there.
Don't fly there.. migrating birds passing thru there.
An Islamic mosque at the site where in the name of Islam thousands of our fellow citizens were murdered?
Go ahead.. the same 'sensitive' liberals say.
"Lem said...
Liberals send you to sensitivity training if you say the wrong word at a party or at the office..
But to hell with the sensitivities of 9/11 survivors"
I think there is a limit to solicitude of the "Hero Victim Families of 9/11. They don't control all development in Lower Manhattan forever. "Ground Zero"
is just one block of a city wrecked. Pray we never have a real "Ground Zero" from a WWII level magnitude attack on a city or worse. Burning Tokyo did not make the whole city "blessed soil", Tokyo was not "Ground Zero" under Victim Family's say so.
The whole "sacred earth of the hero victims" "Hallowed ground" is a pile of New Age Victimhood crap that has thugs saying the sidewalk Delron Rashid was gunned down in a bad Philly drug deal at is "Holy", any fatal accident scene is now "consecrated". Cult of Victimhood crap.
Lincoln did not say anywhere a person died in the Civil War was made "Hallowed Ground"...his remarks were in context of a frikkin military cemetery he was there to help dedicate - in one corner of the 17 square mile Gettysburg battle ground.
The Pearl Harbor memorial is accorded high symbolic status not because "heroes fell in their sleep" on Ford Island - but because it is located above an official gravesite.
That said, Islamoids building so close to the old WTC site in Lower Manhattan is provocative.
Just a little tired of roadside memorials for car crash victims called "holy sites," plane crash craters now demanded by grieving "victim families" to be considered "a memorial ground of reverence" where the property owners must be restricted forever in using the land as they wish.
Ground Zero? I've been in Tokyo and Nagasaki..real Ground Zeros that were rebuilt quickly and were thriving 5 years after being rubblized.
If she thinks that will win her votes, then more power to her.
It WILL win her votes. Her party, well, not so much.
It goes to show that the left is not the least interested in "sensitivity".. Sensitivity is only a means to an end.
Political Power.
The 9/11 survivors are not a viable political force to pander to.. so liberals don't give a shit.
@Cedaford
This tread is not about historical comparisons.
Is about a scar that...
Just say so Cedaford.. you don't give a shit about this.
Lem - "An Islamic mosque at the site where in the name of Islam thousands of our fellow citizens were murdered?"
I am not sure we can keep using criminal justice language "9/11 crime scene, etc.." then complain when our government then agrees and wants to try our enemy in civilian criminal justice courts.
They are enemy. They are not civilian criminals.
Had they been a little smarter, they would have attacked the WTC in low occupancy hours, and said they attacked a financial center, not civilians. Along with a military and civilian leadership command and control center. No different than us bombing similar things in Baghdad in 1991, killing thousands. But they were stupid, stating killing civilians was a goal.
So they should have been tried in military court for war crimes.
From the Left through Rudy, we sort of screwed up by putting transnational potent enemy with military training and organization on par with bank robbers or some drug dealer shooting another one.
jr565
"I would caution everyone, Democrats and Republicans, to be very careful, very sensitive in how you address this," said the congressman from New York. "For instance, I think it was wrong for Newt Gingrich to use the term "Nazi" in talking about this mosque, making a Nazi comparison."
I agree with Peter King. He's a Republican. So I have no trouble agreeing with plenty of Republicans. However most of those Republicans - including Peter King and certainly Newt - think the government should have a say over this mosque business.
MOST Republicans do not like the government in our lives. Do I really need to tell you that? If I do then you're obviously not one.
I'm sure that's all very interesting for some academic paper Cedarford.
But for now, I'm just interested in denying them this victory mosque.. the mosque at that site.
Re AL
"Holy moly!!1!!1!!"
why oh why couldn't anybody have listened to 'lucid' at 9:27 this morning and just ignored the thread hijacker?? why get sucked into arguing with some idiot? it's a big problem on this site.
let them talk to themselves and maybe they will, eventually, just slink away.
ST. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church will not be rebuilt government declares.
Way.To.Go.
Idiots.
This is just so wrong.
And out of the mouth of our babe, Lem...
"This tread is not about historical comparisons."
"Is about a scar".
You are right, my friend. Scars, or did you mean scares(?)... no matter. They both make for very DEEP treads.
History aside, it seems wise to at least get out of those ruts to forge a new towpath.
Would you agree?
Come on, AlphaLiar, for once in your pathetic and miserable life, confess that you are nothing more than a tool and a stooge. You still haven't come through on your lies of how republicans are squashing the minority. I've already given you the challenge and every time you tell a lie, you get called out and you fail. Every time.
Grassroots Or Astroturf? Signs At 'Mega Mosque' Protest Were Pre-Printed (VIDEO)
Who paid for the signs?
Post a Comment