Muslims in NYC Planning to Build Second Mosque Near Ground Zero (1 Viewer)

[mad sweeney]

A Terrorist act is an act of hate, I'll give you that. Timothy McVeigh's act was a Terrorist one.

But it doesn't mean they can't build a church in Oklahoma City.

ETA: A Terrorist act is to create terror, like say, bombing an abortion clinic, or intimidating a witness before or during a trial. Both of which happen in America frequently, and not because of Muslim faith.

Are you seriously comparing Tim McVeigh and Christianity to radical Islamic terrorism and Muslims? That is as stupid as it gets. First off, McVeigh was purely an anti-government nut who acted basically on his own outside of some minor help from Nichols. Secondly, McVeigh was a self-proclaimed agnostic and certainly never made a claim he was doing this to advance Christianity in any way. Thirdly, there were no Christians dancing in the streets after the horrible OKC bombing. The facts are, there are millions of Muslims throughout the world who support suicide bombings of innocent civilians. Many countries like Pakistan, Iran, Jordan, and Lebonon, such acts enjoy the support of roughly half the population or more. Even in more moderate countries like Turkey about 15% support terrorist acts against civilians. And that 15% number is about the same here in America when polling Muslim youth. Shoot, only about 40% of young Muslims here in America believe Arabs were behind the 9-11 attacks.

Not only are you delusional and ignorant in making your analogy to Christianity, you are in denial about the problem of global terrorism by Muslim extremists and just how wide spread their support is. It is also funny to watch, the same people who argue the world would be better off without religion are now the same people making the arguement for religious freedom. What a friggin canard. Besides, it is such a bogus issue in this case since the ####### building is not a mosque as their side argues.

Not mutually exclusive concepts.Keep going though, every post is more "they do this", "them", "that's what they do" and I don't suppose you have any support for are your "facts" above? Any link to your financing canard? You really ought to stop using that word until your argument steps away from being the biggest one in the thread. Oh, but you're not against Muslims so I guess it's a bogus issue. Priceless.

 

[drummer]

Dude, if ya gonna troll, bring up a Church in ChiTown. I bet you never preached Gospel, even though you think you are doing it here. So again, one more thing you don't know much about, which is Religion.

Me the troll? You are the one with the whacked out trolling motor on, making some lame ties between McVeigh and the Christian Identity so you can make derogatory analogy with Christians and the OKC bombing. That is some pretty bad fishing.

Ever hear of Eric Robert Rudolph? Oh, yeah, that would lead to my other point about bombing abortion clinics. One that you failed to address.

 

[El Floppo]

I thought of McVeigh when all of this started to heat up.... didn't find much of a correlation to the matter at hand. As far as I know, his bombing wasn't about furthering his religious cause, regardless of who he was exposed to earlier.

And as far as where money for the cultural center might be coming from- prior to all of this, I know they were struggling to come up with the funds... doubt they'll have much problem now with all the free publicity they're getting. And just because money might be coming in, doesn't mean it's dirty (doesn't mean it doesn't either- but at least be honest you're making a jump by claiming the latter).

 

[jon_mx]

Not mutually exclusive concepts.Keep going though, every post is more "they do this", "them", "that's what they do" and I don't suppose you have any support for are your "facts" above? Any link to your financing canard? You really ought to stop using that word until your argument steps away from being the biggest one in the thread. Oh, but you're not against Muslims so I guess it's a bogus issue. Priceless.

I did not say they were mutually exclusive. What I was suggesting is that you are being completely disingenuous in making the argument. You can't be obsessed with how evil religion is on one hand, and then try to wave the flag of religious freedom as some holy cause. Many have made it known here that they would feel the earth would be a better place without religion, so let's not pretend that religious freedom is a cause you are too concerned about. It seems many are playing the role of useful fools for the cause of radical Islamics.

 

[MongoL3]

Sorry to post something off topic but liked this video. I apologize to the liberals for the song and pride shown willl be like nails to a chalkboard...Good for George tho!! I'd like to have a beer with him....

 

[ScottyFargo]

Not mutually exclusive concepts.

Keep going though, every post is more "they do this", "them", "that's what they do" and I don't suppose you have any support for are your "facts" above? Any link to your financing canard? You really ought to stop using that word until your argument steps away from being the biggest one in the thread. Oh, but you're not against Muslims so I guess it's a bogus issue. Priceless.

I did not say they were mutually exclusive. What I was suggesting is that you are being completely disingenuous in making the argument. You can't be obsessed with how evil religion is on one hand, and then try to wave the flag of religious freedom as some holy cause. Many have made it known here that they would feel the earth would be a better place without religion, so let's not pretend that religious freedom is a cause you are too concerned about. It seems many are playing the role of useful fools for the cause of radical Islamics.

That's not true at all. Personally, I hold a certain amount of contempt for all religions. It doesn't please me to see a mosque being built any more than it pleases me that the Greek Orthodox Church from the article you linked but failed to read is seeking more than 60 million to rebuild (apparently for a parish of 70 families? Is that what someone posted here? Ridiculous.) However: It is vitally important that all religions are treated equally in order that our country remains one of temperance and tolerance. It's the 1st amendment, jon.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

That's what it all comes back to. As far as the government is concerned, all religions are the same. I absolutely feel the same way. The people who disagree with that are the people who don't want mosques being built all over the country. This issue is not unique to New York, but now you all have your chance to rail against Islam in the name of insensitivity of 9/11 when in reality it's more about fear, as evidenced by your continued tinfoil hat claims about where the money's coming from or what the mosque will become or be a symbol of.

It is much more vitally important that America continue to be a symbol of freedom post 9/11 rather than allowing the terrorist attacks to turn the nation into some Orwellian dystopia where we've decided that Non-Christian religions are evil.

Being against all religion doesn't stop me from recognizing that all religions deserve the same treatments and opportunities.

 

[jon_mx]

The problem with the First Amendment argument, is that this is predominately a Muslim Cultural Center. It is not a church and there are zoning and approvals that a community has the right to exercise. So the community is perfectly in their rights to question if this is the best use for this property and reject it if they think this is not. Even so, Churches have been denied zoning numerous times if it is outside the zoning rules.

 

[ScottyFargo]

The problem with the First Amendment argument, is that this is predominately a Muslim Cultural Center. It is not a church and there are zoning and approvals that a community has the right to exercise. So the community is perfectly in their rights to question if this is the best use for this property and reject it if they think this is not. Even so, Churches have been denied zoning numerous times if it is outside the zoning rules.

Sounds like you're going to try and change your reason for being against it each time someone points out how wrong you are, though, I think you've reached the point where you can't pull anything else out of your ###.

 

[mad sweeney]

Not mutually exclusive concepts.Keep going though, every post is more "they do this", "them", "that's what they do" and I don't suppose you have any support for are your "facts" above? Any link to your financing canard? You really ought to stop using that word until your argument steps away from being the biggest one in the thread. Oh, but you're not against Muslims so I guess it's a bogus issue. Priceless.

I did not say they were mutually exclusive. What I was suggesting is that you are being completely disingenuous in making the argument. You can't be obsessed with how evil religion is on one hand, and then try to wave the flag of religious freedom as some holy cause. Many have made it known here that they would feel the earth would be a better place without religion, so let's not pretend that religious freedom is a cause you are too concerned about. It seems many are playing the role of useful fools for the cause of radical Islamics.

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean I can't defend it's right to exist as stated in our Founding Documents. It's not disingenuous or hypocritical and the fact you can't see that is thoroughly unsurprising given your disregard for those documents when faced with something you don't like. And don't be so hard on yourself just because you're playing into the radical islamics' plans by fostering an us vs them (all Muslims) atmosphere by demonizing all of "them" based on the actions of a few nuts and some kind of misguided perception of history that puts the their actions somehow worse than similar actions taken by pretty much everyone at dome point. Well done sir, you're doing their work for them in dividing our nation as they could possibly have hoped for.

 

[jon_mx]

Sounds like you're going to try and change your reason for being against it each time someone points out how wrong you are, though, I think you've reached the point where you can't pull anything else out of your ###.

My argument against this is the same as it was when I started posting to this thread. I think this is hate speech, the equivalent of people dancing on the graves of the victims of 9-11. I think anyone who supports this project financially is participating in making that statement. The first Amendment issue is a canard. Mostly disingenuous and not even applicable.

 

[jon_mx]

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean I can't defend it's right to exist as stated in our Founding Documents. It's not disingenuous or hypocritical and the fact you can't see that is thoroughly unsurprising given your disregard for those documents when faced with something you don't like.

And don't be so hard on yourself just because you're playing into the radical islamics' plans by fostering an us vs them (all Muslims) atmosphere by demonizing all of "them" based on the actions of a few nuts and some kind of misguided perception of history that puts the their actions somehow worse than similar actions taken by pretty much everyone at dome point. Well done sir, you're doing their work for them in dividing our nation as they could possibly have hoped for.

When you can explain what building a community center has to do with Congress establishment of a religion, get back to me. As I said, it is a canard.

 

[uwillbsoon]

A Terrorist act is an act of hate, I'll give you that. Timothy McVeigh's act was a Terrorist one. But it doesn't mean they can't build a church in Oklahoma City.ETA: A Terrorist act is to create terror, like say, bombing an abortion clinic, or intimidating a witness before or during a trial. Both of which happen in America frequently, and not because of Muslim faith.

Are you seriously comparing Tim McVeigh and Christianity to radical Islamic terrorism and Muslims? That is as stupid as it gets. First off, McVeigh was purely an anti-government nut who acted basically on his own outside of some minor help from Nichols. Secondly, McVeigh was a self-proclaimed agnostic and certainly never made a claim he was doing this to advance Christianity in any way. Thirdly, there were no Christians dancing in the streets after the horrible OKC bombing. The facts are, there are millions of Muslims throughout the world who support suicide bombings of innocent civilians. Many countries like Pakistan, Iran, Jordan, and Lebonon, such acts enjoy the support of roughly half the population or more. Even in more moderate countries like Turkey about 15% support terrorist acts against civilians. And that 15% number is about the same here in America when polling Muslim youth. Shoot, only about 40% of young Muslims here in America believe Arabs were behind the 9-11 attacks. Not only are you delusional and ignorant in making your analogy to Christianity, you are in denial about the problem of global terrorism by Muslim extremists and just how wide spread their support is. It is also funny to watch, the same people who argue the world would be better off without religion are now the same people making the arguement for religious freedom. What a friggin canard. Besides, it is such a bogus issue in this case since the ####### building is not a mosque as their side argues.

You know, this logic "religious fanaticism caused 9-11" isn't something I buy into. 9-11 was politically motivated by:1. US military bases in Saudi Arabia2. Support of Israel3. Sanctions in IraqThere are numerous videos of bin Laden and Al Qaeda members saying so. Al Qaeda leaders use religion to get the weak-minded to do their dirty work. Much like our political leaders call out freedom and democracy, and then have the CIA kill democratically elected foreign leaders and replace them with dictatorial puppet governments. See Latin America.I think it's convenient for us to say "Oh, they're religious fanatics, they hate our religion" because then we can turn a blind eye to what our government has done in the past all over the world. I'd argue that civilian attacks are supported here. Anecdotally, I've heard many people say "We should just bomb them back into the Stone Ages." Also, our military did invade Iraq. And it's well documented that civilians were killed. I don't have any numbers, but I'd guess 40 to 50% of the population supported the initial invasion. I know it's a stretch to then say they support bombing civilian targets specifically, but I think most of us are OK with "collateral damage" if we get targets of interest. It strikes me as ironic that Americans are mad about mosques in America when bin Laden's major beef was American military bases in Saudi Arabia. We all kind of want the same thing - keep those that are different than us out.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Sounds like you're going to try and change your reason for being against it each time someone points out how wrong you are, though, I think you've reached the point where you can't pull anything else out of your ###.

My argument against this is the same as it was when I started posting to this thread. I think this is hate speech, the equivalent of people dancing on the graves of the victims of 9-11. I think anyone who supports this project financially is participating in making that statement. The first Amendment issue is a canard. Mostly disingenuous and not even applicable.

Are you sure you're not talking about your zoning ? Because a few seconds ago you made it sound like you would have no issues as long as the building meets the zoning code.

It is not a church and there are zoning and approvals that a community has the right to exercise. So the community is perfectly in their rights to question if this is the best use for this property and reject it if they think this is not.

So which is it? Is it that it's hate speech or that it's not a church and it might not zoning code? Or are you hoping for any of the above to vindicate your opinion?

 

[jon_mx]

Sounds like you're going to try and change your reason for being against it each time someone points out how wrong you are, though, I think you've reached the point where you can't pull anything else out of your ###.

My argument against this is the same as it was when I started posting to this thread. I think this is hate speech, the equivalent of people dancing on the graves of the victims of 9-11. I think anyone who supports this project financially is participating in making that statement. The first Amendment issue is a canard. Mostly disingenuous and not even applicable.

Are you sure you're not talking about your zoning ? Because a few seconds ago you made it sound like you would have no issues as long as the building meets the zoning code.

It is not a church and there are zoning and approvals that a community has the right to exercise. So the community is perfectly in their rights to question if this is the best use for this property and reject it if they think this is not.

So which is it? Is it that it's hate speech or that it's not a church and it might not zoning code? Or are you hoping for any of the above to vindicate your opinion?

I never said I had no issues if it meets zoning codes. I was only suggesting using the zoning approval process is a method to fight this hate speech that certainly has no Freedom of religion issues in doing so. Just because they request this, does not mean the city has to sit back and take it, although it seems they are going down that path.

 

[mad sweeney]

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean I can't defend it's right to exist as stated in our Founding Documents. It's not disingenuous or hypocritical and the fact you can't see that is thoroughly unsurprising given your disregard for those documents when faced with something you don't like.

And don't be so hard on yourself just because you're playing into the radical islamics' plans by fostering an us vs them (all Muslims) atmosphere by demonizing all of "them" based on the actions of a few nuts and some kind of misguided perception of history that puts the their actions somehow worse than similar actions taken by pretty much everyone at dome point. Well done sir, you're doing their work for them in dividing our nation as they could possibly have hoped for.

When you can explain what building a community center has to do with Congress establishment of a religion, get back to me. As I said, it is a canard.

CANARD STORM!

 

[mad sweeney]

Sounds like you're going to try and change your reason for being against it each time someone points out how wrong you are, though, I think you've reached the point where you can't pull anything else out of your ###.

My argument against this is the same as it was when I started posting to this thread. I think this is hate speech, the equivalent of people dancing on the graves of the victims of 9-11. I think anyone who supports this project financially is participating in making that statement. The first Amendment issue is a canard. Mostly disingenuous and not even applicable.

Are you sure you're not talking about your zoning ? Because a few seconds ago you made it sound like you would have no issues as long as the building meets the zoning code.

It is not a church and there are zoning and approvals that a community has the right to exercise. So the community is perfectly in their rights to question if this is the best use for this property and reject it if they think this is not.

So which is it? Is it that it's hate speech or that it's not a church and it might not zoning code? Or are you hoping for any of the above to vindicate your opinion?

I never said I had no issues if it meets zoning codes. I was only suggesting using the zoning approval process is a method to fight this hate speech that certainly has no Freedom of religion issues in doing so. Just because they request this, does not mean the city has to sit back and take it, although it seems they are going down that path.

Should we go through and count how many times you called it a mosque? How many times you talked about what this means to Muslims and Islam? You want it denied because it's a Muslim building, nothing else. CANARD!!!!

 

[jon_mx]

Should we go through and count how many times you called it a mosque? How many times you talked about what this means to Muslims and Islam? You want it denied because it's a Muslim building, nothing else. CANARD!!!!

I am sure I have called it a mosque on several occasions. I have also called it a cultural center. And I have called it a mosque/cultural center. But it is irrelevant what I have called it. It is what it is, and that appears to be a cultural center that will have a mosque on top. Given those parameters, I don't see freedom of religion being an issue with denying approval for this.

 

[mad sweeney]

Should we go through and count how many times you called it a mosque? How many times you talked about what this means to Muslims and Islam? You want it denied because it's a Muslim building, nothing else. CANARD!!!!

I am sure I have called it a mosque on several occasions. I have also called it a cultural center. And I have called it a mosque/cultural center. But it is irrelevant what I have called it. It is what it is, and that appears to be a cultural center that will have a mosque on top. Given those parameters, I don't see freedom of religion being an issue with denying approval for this.

Whatever it takes to make sure there's no Muslim stuff there, eh?CANARD!

 

[ScottyFargo]

Should we go through and count how many times you called it a mosque? How many times you talked about what this means to Muslims and Islam? You want it denied because it's a Muslim building, nothing else.

CANARD!!!!

I am sure I have called it a mosque on several occasions. I have also called it a cultural center. And I have called it a mosque/cultural center. But it is irrelevant what I have called it. It is what it is, and that appears to be a cultural center that will have a mosque on top. Given those parameters, I don't see freedom of religion being an issue with denying approval for this.

The city of Gainesville just pulled the same kind of red-tape trick you're praying for to prevent this Cordoba thing to prevent your friends from burning Korans.So hold tight, there are ways around this pesky first amendment, jon! THEY WILL NOT CONQUER HERE!

 

[rascal]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

 

[jon_mx]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

 

[rascal]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

Do you know who said that?

 

[jon_mx]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

Do you know who said that?

Yes, but the argument is still a fallacy since this has nothing to do with establishing a religion. It is also a hyperbole, since people are denied zoning approval and building permits all the time. Whatever happens here, will have no impact on the Bill of Rights.

 

[Burton]

I see a lot of lefties in this thread viciously attacking jon_mx for doing nothing but telling the truth. Actually, jon_mx doesn't go far enough, as far as I'm concerned. As several commentators have correctly pointed out, this attempt to celebrate 9/11 in the form of a triumphal mosque is nothing less than a declaration of war against the United States and should be treated as such.

Shortly after 9/11, Michelle Malkin wrote a brilliant book called "In Defense of Internment", in which she pointed out that the relocation of Japanese Americans during World War II was necessary, both for their safety and the safety of the American public. Malkin went on to encourage that we consider a similiar treatment for Muslims in this country so long as we are at war with that religion (which we clearly are.) Her advice has been ignored by the "politically correct", and look at the results: in the last 10 years, there's been one threat after another. That major who went on the shooting spree last year should have been the last straw. How long are we going to pretend that Islam is not the enemy?

 

[mad sweeney]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

Do you know who said that?

Yes, but the argument is still a fallacy since this has nothing to do with establishing a religion. It is also a hyperbole, since people are denied zoning approval and building permits all the time. Whatever happens here, will have no impact on the Bill of Rights.

If it's not religion based then what you're saying is that swimming pools and basketball courts are a monument to America's defeat? Surely you don't object to swimming pools?! Oh wait, it's the Muslim part you don't like. I keep forgetting as you try and steer it further and further away from being a mosque.

 

[jon_mx]

If it's not religion based then what you're saying is that swimming pools and basketball courts are a monument to America's defeat? Surely you don't object to swimming pools?! Oh wait, it's the Muslim part you don't like. I keep forgetting as you try and steer it further and further away from being a mosque.

Not sure what your point is. I am not steering it anywhere. Yes, the problem is some $100 million monumental building (no matter what it is called) to Muslims adjacent to the site where the largest terrorist attack by Muslims occurred. They couldn't build a $10 million if this was at ANY other location. This is all about celebration of the 9-11 attacks. The continued naivety of those who don't realize this is astounding.

 

[Sinn Fein]

SO how is this different that christian missions to muslim countries?

 

[jon_mx]

SO how is this different that christian missions to muslim countries?

How is it the same?

 

[Radio Free Homer]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

Do you know who said that?

Yes, but the argument is still a fallacy since this has nothing to do with establishing a religion. It is also a hyperbole, since people are denied zoning approval and building permits all the time. Whatever happens here, will have no impact on the Bill of Rights.

Nice effort, but that's not the part of the First Amendment that this is about...it's the part right after that.

 

[jon_mx]

Tragedy has been and will always be with us. Somewhere right now, evil people are planning evil things. All of us will do everything meaningful, everything we can do, to prevent it. But each horrible act can't become an ax for opportunists to cleave the very Bill of Rights that binds us.

In the forecast today, we are expecting a hyperbole front moving in from the left followed by a showering of canards with the possibilities of fallacies throughout the evening.

Do you know who said that?

Yes, but the argument is still a fallacy since this has nothing to do with establishing a religion. It is also a hyperbole, since people are denied zoning approval and building permits all the time. Whatever happens here, will have no impact on the Bill of Rights.

Nice effort, but that's not the part of the First Amendment that this is about...it's the part right after that.

I was just addressing the section that has been quoted on this thread. OK, what does a cultural center have to do with the free exercise of religion? So in your opinion a religious organization has the right to build any kind of building it wishes in the name of free exercise of religion. Do you take the radical position with freedom of speech? If you do, that would mean anyone has the freedom to build any type of building where ever they want in the name of free speech.

 

[Sinn Fein]

SO how is this different that christian missions to muslim countries?

How is it the same?

seems like christians think Muslims are trying to take over the US. Muslims think christians are trying to take over their countries

 

[ScottyFargo]

If it's not religion based then what you're saying is that swimming pools and basketball courts are a monument to America's defeat? Surely you don't object to swimming pools?! Oh wait, it's the Muslim part you don't like. I keep forgetting as you try and steer it further and further away from being a mosque.

Not sure what your point is. I am not steering it anywhere. Yes, the problem is some $100 million monumental building (no matter what it is called) to Muslims adjacent to the site where the largest terrorist attack by Muslims occurred. They couldn't build a $10 million if this was at ANY other location. This is all about celebration of the 9-11 attacks. The continued naivety of those who don't realize this is astounding.

Your kind opposes mosques built anywhere so you can consider your 9/11 argument debunked, too. But we've already pointed that out.

 

[McJose]

I see a lot of lefties in this thread viciously attacking jon_mx for doing nothing but telling the truth. Actually, jon_mx doesn't go far enough, as far as I'm concerned. As several commentators have correctly pointed out, this attempt to celebrate 9/11 in the form of a triumphal mosque is nothing less than a declaration of war against the United States and should be treated as such. Shortly after 9/11, Michelle Malkin wrote a brilliant book called "In Defense of Internment", in which she pointed out that the relocation of Japanese Americans during World War II was necessary, both for their safety and the safety of the American public. Malkin went on to encourage that we consider a similiar treatment for Muslims in this country so long as we are at war with that religion (which we clearly are.) Her advice has been ignored by the "politically correct", and look at the results: in the last 10 years, there's been one threat after another. That major who went on the shooting spree last year should have been the last straw. How long are we going to pretend that Islam is not the enemy?

Great shtick. Keep it up.

 

[Radio Free Homer]

I was just addressing the section that has been quoted on this thread. OK, what does a cultural center have to do with the free exercise of religion? So in your opinion a religious organization has the right to build any kind of building it wishes in the name of free exercise of religion. Do you take the radical position with freedom of speech? If you do, that would mean anyone has the freedom to build any type of building where ever they want in the name of free speech.

It's not just a cultural center and it's not just a mosque. Nice strawman though.

 

[mad sweeney]

SO how is this different that christian missions to muslim countries?

Canards!!!

 

[ScottNorwood]

I'm not going to bother reading this thread, because I know how these discussions always go. But I'm sure that there are tons of people not from New York, that have never been to New York, and that don't know anyone from New York that feel the need to have their opinions heard. Regardless of which side they're on, those people can go to hell because it's not your business what does or does not get built in my neighborhood. Goodnight folks.

 

[MongoL3]

I'm not going to bother reading this thread, because I know how these discussions always go. But I'm sure that there are tons of people not from New York, that have never been to New York, and that don't know anyone from New York that feel the need to have their opinions heard. Regardless of which side they're on, those people can go to hell because it's not your business what does or does not get built in my neighborhood. Goodnight folks.

Well i like to make it my bussiness Scott, blouses....

 

[rascal]

oh...and I'm a conservative but I can't identify myself with the republican party of today.

 

[jon_mx]

If it's not religion based then what you're saying is that swimming pools and basketball courts are a monument to America's defeat? Surely you don't object to swimming pools?! Oh wait, it's the Muslim part you don't like. I keep forgetting as you try and steer it further and further away from being a mosque.

Not sure what your point is. I am not steering it anywhere. Yes, the problem is some $100 million monumental building (no matter what it is called) to Muslims adjacent to the site where the largest terrorist attack by Muslims occurred. They couldn't build a $10 million if this was at ANY other location. This is all about celebration of the 9-11 attacks. The continued naivety of those who don't realize this is astounding.

Your kind opposes mosques built anywhere so you can consider your 9/11 argument debunked, too. But we've already pointed that out.

Your kind? WTF is that suppose to mean? In this very thread I supported a local mosque built in the same area, so your hyperbole bigoted comment is wrong as usually.

 

[jon_mx]

SO how is this different that christian missions to muslim countries?

How is it the same?

seems like christians think Muslims are trying to take over the US. Muslims think christians are trying to take over their countries

So you are full of misconceptions about this topic and missionaries? Got ya.

 

[mad sweeney]

If it's not religion based then what you're saying is that swimming pools and basketball courts are a monument to America's defeat? Surely you don't object to swimming pools?! Oh wait, it's the Muslim part you don't like. I keep forgetting as you try and steer it further and further away from being a mosque.

Not sure what your point is. I am not steering it anywhere. Yes, the problem is some $100 million monumental building (no matter what it is called) to Muslims adjacent to the site where the largest terrorist attack by Muslims occurred. They couldn't build a $10 million if this was at ANY other location. This is all about celebration of the 9-11 attacks. The continued naivety of those who don't realize this is astounding.

Your kind opposes mosques built anywhere so you can consider your 9/11 argument debunked, too. But we've already pointed that out.

Your kind? WTF is that suppose to mean? In this very thread I supported a local mosque built in the same area, so your hyperbole bigoted comment is wrong as usually.

How do you know where THEIR money came from?! Especially if your unsubstantiated numbers of American Muslims that supported or secretly celebrated the attacks are true. Very high percentage that several, if not most of the worshippers ate potential terrorists. If your stats are true, then that's a hot bed of subversive behavior right there already!CANARDO-STORM!!!

 

[Christo]

CANARDO-STORM!!!

Thanks a lot butt-head, I used to really like that word.

 

[ScottyFargo]

Your kind opposes mosques built anywhere so you can consider your 9/11 argument debunked, too. But we've already pointed that out.

Your kind? WTF is that suppose to mean? In this very thread I supported a local mosque built in the same area, so your hyperbole bigoted comment is wrong as usually.

You're Christian, aren't you? I mean, if you're going to lump all of Islam together for being responsible for 9/11 as you have repeatedly done so here, am I amiss for lumping you in with the people opposing the Mosque in Tennessee, or burning the Koran in Gainesville? A Christian is a Christian is a Christian. Surely you understand this, because you believe a Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim.Of course, if you still think I'm wrong for lumping you in with Westboro, the Gainesville Koran burning Church, and the Mosque opposition in Tennessee, you might want to reconsider your position of assuming all Muslims are anti-American.

 

[MongoL3]

Your kind opposes mosques built anywhere so you can consider your 9/11 argument debunked, too. But we've already pointed that out.

Your kind? WTF is that suppose to mean? In this very thread I supported a local mosque built in the same area, so your hyperbole bigoted comment is wrong as usually.

You're Christian, aren't you? I mean, if you're going to lump all of Islam together for being responsible for 9/11 as you have repeatedly done so here, am I amiss for lumping you in with the people opposing the Mosque in Tennessee, or burning the Koran in Gainesville? A Christian is a Christian is a Christian. Surely you understand this, because you believe a Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim.Of course, if you still think I'm wrong for lumping you in with Westboro, the Gainesville Koran burning Church, and the Mosque opposition in Tennessee, you might want to reconsider your position of assuming all Muslims are anti-American.

The problem "I" have with Islam is you really have no idea who is involved in terrorists activity or an "sympathizer" until it is too late. They dont march around in uniforms...they can easily blend in here and in and at home. So its safer not to trust any of them. Sad but true....

 

[jon_mx]

You're Christian, aren't you? I mean, if you're going to lump all of Islam together for being responsible for 9/11 as you have repeatedly done so here, am I amiss for lumping you in with the people opposing the Mosque in Tennessee, or burning the Koran in Gainesville? A Christian is a Christian is a Christian. Surely you understand this, because you believe a Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim.Of course, if you still think I'm wrong for lumping you in with Westboro, the Gainesville Koran burning Church, and the Mosque opposition in Tennessee, you might want to reconsider your position of assuming all Muslims are anti-American.

I have never said all Islam is responsible for 911. You read much or you just like making crap up?

 

[Parrothead]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

 

[mad sweeney]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

As barbaric as the Bible.

 

[Parrothead]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

As barbaric as the Bible.

you actually believe that garbage???

 

[mad sweeney]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

As barbaric as the Bible.

you actually believe that garbage???

I believe in the 50 Year Canard Storm that's going to push 75' Hyperbolic waves in Leftern Chile. It'll be epic!

 

[Parrothead]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

As barbaric as the Bible.

you actually believe that garbage???

I believe in the 50 Year Canard Storm that's going to push 75' Hyperbolic waves in Leftern Chile. It'll be epic!

so you won't answer my question?