Muslims in NYC Planning to Build Second Mosque Near Ground Zero (2 Viewers)

[Christo]

Should the government be doing anything at all to ensure the mosque organizers have no ties to terrorism?

Of course they should.

What do you suggest they should do? Should warrants be issued? What's the probable cause? John555's opinion?

I would imagine that the gov't (city or state or feds) look into any large construction project and try and figure out where the funding is from. Dont they?

Why would they?

 

[Christo]

Should the government be doing anything at all to ensure the mosque organizers have no ties to terrorism?

Only if you think the government should look into the financing of every building/rehab.

So if certain fears actually are realized, and the government had the power and position to investigate and potentially prevent, but did nothing, isn't that a problem?

No. The government may have an interest in seeing that the money doesn't flow the other way so that they're supporting terrorist activities, and we have material support statutes that prevent this. But if Hamas or Al Qaeda want to build a Burger King, there's no government interest in stopping them from doing something legal. You may want to know where the money comes from, and even to protest the mosque/community center/Burger King if you aren't satisfied in the source. But I fail to see how it's the government's job to investigate that for you.

FWIW, if law enforcement wants to find where terror cells congregate and organize, it's heck of a lot easier infiltrating mosques than figuring out whether they're in the Radio Shack or the Sbarro. You're not eliminating the terror cell by elimanating the mosque, you're just driving it elsewhere and making the organization even more decentralized and harder to infiltrate.

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

Protect them from what?

 

[bigbottom]

Just because that Christian Church has the right to protest at the funerals of U.S. soldiers... doesn't mean that they should or that it would be the most effective way of promoting their message.

Kind of like these people.Link

"Ground Zero Mosque" protest ends up, predictably, with racially-motivated hatred"

There was a protest yesterday, attended by various wingnuts, racists, riled-up nativists, and terrified fools, of the supposed "Ground Zero mosque." (It will not be at Ground Zero, and it will actually be a community center that will include a mosque. But still.)

While national conservatives have picked up the ball, what local opposition there is to the proposed community center has been ginned up by Rupert Murdoch's New York Post -- mainly via perpetually outraged columnist Andrea Peyser, whose anti-mosque columns are regularly teased on the front page.

The entire anti-mosque campaign isn't about anything other than pure, paranoid Islamophobia. A Peyser column a few weeks ago was entirely about people in Sheepshead Bay -- some miles from Ground Zero -- protesting a proposed mosque solely because they're scared of Muslims.

Anyway, they had their protest yesterday. Mike Kelly of the Bergen (New Jersey) Record reported this heartwarming incident:

At one point, a portion of the crowd menacingly surrounded two Egyptian men who were speaking Arabic and were thought to be Muslims.

"Go home," several shouted from the crowd.

"Get out," others shouted.

In fact, the two men – Joseph Nassralla and Karam El Masry — were not Muslims at all. They turned out to be Egyptian Coptic Christians who work for a California-based Christian satellite TV station called "The Way." Both said they had come to protest the mosque.

"I'm a Christian," Nassralla shouted to the crowd, his eyes bulging and beads of sweat rolling down his face.

But it was no use. The protesters had become so angry at what they thought were Muslims that New York City police officers had to rush in and pull Nassralla and El Masry to safety.

"I flew nine hours in an airplane to come here," a frustrated Nassralla said afterward.

But don't you dare call these people bigots!

Glad to see they weren't hurt, but I sort of have to laugh at those two guys.

 

[Mark Davis]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

 

[oneohh]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I know you do; and it's sad.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Just because that Christian Church has the right to protest at the funerals of U.S. soldiers... doesn't mean that they should or that it would be the most effective way of promoting their message.

Kind of like these people.Link

"Ground Zero Mosque" protest ends up, predictably, with racially-motivated hatred"

There was a protest yesterday, attended by various wingnuts, racists, riled-up nativists, and terrified fools, of the supposed "Ground Zero mosque." (It will not be at Ground Zero, and it will actually be a community center that will include a mosque. But still.)

While national conservatives have picked up the ball, what local opposition there is to the proposed community center has been ginned up by Rupert Murdoch's New York Post -- mainly via perpetually outraged columnist Andrea Peyser, whose anti-mosque columns are regularly teased on the front page.

The entire anti-mosque campaign isn't about anything other than pure, paranoid Islamophobia. A Peyser column a few weeks ago was entirely about people in Sheepshead Bay -- some miles from Ground Zero -- protesting a proposed mosque solely because they're scared of Muslims.

Anyway, they had their protest yesterday. Mike Kelly of the Bergen (New Jersey) Record reported this heartwarming incident:

At one point, a portion of the crowd menacingly surrounded two Egyptian men who were speaking Arabic and were thought to be Muslims.

"Go home," several shouted from the crowd.

"Get out," others shouted.

In fact, the two men – Joseph Nassralla and Karam El Masry — were not Muslims at all. They turned out to be Egyptian Coptic Christians who work for a California-based Christian satellite TV station called "The Way." Both said they had come to protest the mosque.

"I'm a Christian," Nassralla shouted to the crowd, his eyes bulging and beads of sweat rolling down his face.

But it was no use. The protesters had become so angry at what they thought were Muslims that New York City police officers had to rush in and pull Nassralla and El Masry to safety.

"I flew nine hours in an airplane to come here," a frustrated Nassralla said afterward.

But don't you dare call these people bigots!

Glad to see they weren't hurt, but I sort of have to laugh at those two guys.

 

[drummer]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I know you do; and it's sad.

 

[Christo]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

 

[the moops]

Should the government be doing anything at all to ensure the mosque organizers have no ties to terrorism?

Of course they should.

What do you suggest they should do? Should warrants be issued? What's the probable cause? John555's opinion?

I would imagine that the gov't (city or state or feds) look into any large construction project and try and figure out where the funding is from. Dont they?

Why would they?

If I was going to build a 100 million plus building I would just imagine that someone would look into where the funding comes from. Perhaps I am wrong.

 

[John555]

You think liberals treat Christians and Muslims the same... Christians are against gay marriage....Liberals are outraged and spew hatred towards these homophobe.Muslim countries kill thousands of gays for being gay.....Liberals, hardly a word outside of a few international gay organizations.Christians freely allow Muslims to build mosques virtually everyone except an area represented by less than 0.00002% of our country.....Liberals throw a fit.Muslims don't allow building of churches and kill Christians if they try to spread the Word.....Not a peep out of liberals.Despite the fact that Christians are far more civil, Liberals act as though there is some kind of moral equalilency. Reliatively speaking, Muslim countries are stuck in the dark ages of human rights. But liberals really don't seem to care about the abuses of women and other minorities. So what if Saddam was killing 50,000 innocent people a year, liberals wish to equate the 4,000 or so that have died each year during the war with those senselessly slaughtered by Saddam. If the Iraq War was about the abuses of Saddam Hussein alone, the war was justifiable. But no, we have to equate our actions to liberate their country with the acts of a ruthless dictator.

Let me put this as simply as possible, so that you might understand. I do not protest the actions of countries like Syria because I do not live in Syria. I do not vote in Syria. I have no say in what the government of Syria does and no means to be heard on the question.In the United States, my government represents me. Consequently, when my government kills people or discriminates against homosexuals or denies religious freedom, I speak out. I don't want a government that represents me to do those things, because I don't want ME to do those things.It is ironic that your supposed solution to this entire problem is that I should be more tolerant of the United States starting to resemble Syria. I greatly prefer the United States to Syria, in part because of the way we handle homosexuality, government power, and religous freedom. What Syria, or Iran, or Iraq does should have nothing to do with what we do. The only one trying to draw any equivalence between the two is you.

Few are proposing the use of government powers to discriminately stop them from building. All groups have to go through zoning approval, so comparing us to Syria is a hyperbole. They could have been denied the zoning based on many legitimate reasons. And lots of people in this thread have been trying to draw moral equivencies between Christianity and Islam.

 

[Steve Tasker]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

Yeah, I'm interested in how far this would stretch. Would we investigate all mosques and Muslim centers? What about Christian churches? How about a corner store that's started by a white guy? Black guy? Middle Eastern? What if a church is largely financed by someone with an extensive criminal record?This argument, while I understand both sides on the surface, makes me curious. I don't see how the government could really police this - even if there was a threshold (projects greater than $x dollars will be investigated, for example), the people who want to slip by unnoticed will just fund smaller projects.

 

[drummer]

You think liberals treat Christians and Muslims the same... Christians are against gay marriage....Liberals are outraged and spew hatred towards these homophobe.Muslim countries kill thousands of gays for being gay.....Liberals, hardly a word outside of a few international gay organizations.Christians freely allow Muslims to build mosques virtually everyone except an area represented by less than 0.00002% of our country.....Liberals throw a fit.Muslims don't allow building of churches and kill Christians if they try to spread the Word.....Not a peep out of liberals.Despite the fact that Christians are far more civil, Liberals act as though there is some kind of moral equalilency. Reliatively speaking, Muslim countries are stuck in the dark ages of human rights. But liberals really don't seem to care about the abuses of women and other minorities. So what if Saddam was killing 50,000 innocent people a year, liberals wish to equate the 4,000 or so that have died each year during the war with those senselessly slaughtered by Saddam. If the Iraq War was about the abuses of Saddam Hussein alone, the war was justifiable. But no, we have to equate our actions to liberate their country with the acts of a ruthless dictator.

Let me put this as simply as possible, so that you might understand. I do not protest the actions of countries like Syria because I do not live in Syria. I do not vote in Syria. I have no say in what the government of Syria does and no means to be heard on the question.In the United States, my government represents me. Consequently, when my government kills people or discriminates against homosexuals or denies religious freedom, I speak out. I don't want a government that represents me to do those things, because I don't want ME to do those things.It is ironic that your supposed solution to this entire problem is that I should be more tolerant of the United States starting to resemble Syria. I greatly prefer the United States to Syria, in part because of the way we handle homosexuality, government power, and religous freedom. What Syria, or Iran, or Iraq does should have nothing to do with what we do. The only one trying to draw any equivalence between the two is you.

Few are proposing the use of government powers to discriminately stop them from building. All groups have to go through zoning approval, so comparing us to Syria is a hyperbole. They could have been denied the zoning based on many legitimate reasons. And lots of people in this thread have been trying to draw moral equivencies between Christianity and Islam.

I think you're in denial about how Christianity has been used to induce violence towards who they fear.

 

[oneohh]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

Yeah, I'm interested in how far this would stretch. Would we investigate all mosques and Muslim centers? What about Christian churches? How about a corner store that's started by a white guy? Black guy? Middle Eastern? What if a church is largely financed by someone with an extensive criminal record?This argument, while I understand both sides on the surface, makes me curious. I don't see how the government could really police this - even if there was a threshold (projects greater than $x dollars will be investigated, for example), the people who want to slip by unnoticed will just fund smaller projects.

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

 

[scoobygang]

Few are proposing the use of government powers to discriminately stop them from building. All groups have to go through zoning approval, so comparing us to Syria is a hyperbole. They could have been denied the zoning based on many legitimate reasons. And lots of people in this thread have been trying to draw moral equivencies between Christianity and Islam.

Yes, if the zoning commission had concluded that community centers and religious buildings were not zoned for that area that would be a perfectly reasonable, viewpoint-neutral decision. What the zoning commission cannot do is decide that a Christian Community Center or church could go in the area while a Muslim Community Center or mosque couldn't. That's viewpoint discrimination that offends the free speech and free exercise clauses of the 1st Amendment and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.Now, some claim that nobody is calling on the government to take any action here. I don't think every national politician would have been asked about this if this were really true, but nevertheless, you have every right to picket this center. Protest Islam all you want, just as the homosexual protestors may protest their local churches.

 

[Christo]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

 

[mad sweeney]

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

Yeah, I'm interested in how far this would stretch. Would we investigate all mosques and Muslim centers? What about Christian churches? How about a corner store that's started by a white guy? Black guy? Middle Eastern? What if a church is largely financed by someone with an extensive criminal record?This argument, while I understand both sides on the surface, makes me curious. I don't see how the government could really police this - even if there was a threshold (projects greater than $x dollars will be investigated, for example), the people who want to slip by unnoticed will just fund smaller projects.

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why? Because they're Muslim?

 

[oneohh]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why? Because they're Muslim?

Sure.

 

[Steve Tasker]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

 

[oneohh]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

I'm not outraged at anything other than certain people's ridiculous denial that there's anything to worry about. And for the record, anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

 

[drummer]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

I'm not outraged at anything other than certain people's ridiculous denial that there's anything to worry about. And for the record, anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

So you want more Government when it comes to Religion?

 

[oneohh]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

I'm not outraged at anything other than certain people's ridiculous denial that there's anything to worry about. And for the record, anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

So you want more Government when it comes to Religion?

Anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

 

[drummer]

Anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

Even if you by chance wanted to start one?

 

[Steve Tasker]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

I'm not outraged at anything other than certain people's ridiculous denial that there's anything to worry about. And for the record, anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

Should be available for investigation, or there should be a government-mandated investigation? I was under the impression that non-profits were subject to more investigation by the government and faced stricter rules, but I could be wrong. I'm not sure if funding is one of them, though, and I think the government focuses more on making sure that the government money is being used to further the non-profit's mission and isn't being misappropriated.That said, I don't think this would deter future "threats", so to speak, as people would just start funneling money into a for-profit business. To be honest, it kinda sounds to me like wasteful spending, something that we can't afford to be doing. That's just my opinion, though.

 

[CBusAlex]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Wow. It's not every day you see someone come out in-thread as fundamentally opposed to the rule of law.

 

[Christo]

Anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

 

[Mark Davis]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

If there is reason to believe money came from Hamas, then it should be looked at. If the money didn't come from them, it's no problem. I don't know what the circumstances are so I'm not qualified to make that call. I have no quarrel with Muslims in general and don't really give $.02 whether this group or any other builds a mosque or not. If there is reason to believe money came from a terrorist group, I do expect the government to investigate and seize any such assets shown to be related to terrorist organizations. To me that's just common sense, it may not be politically correct, but I just prefer to take safeguards against groups hell bent on killing Americans. I honestly don't care if said groups prove to be comprised of Muslims, the Jehovah's Witnesses at the door, or the folks ringing the Salvation Army bells at Walgreens.

 

[Christo]

You fail to see how it's the government's job to protect citizens?

I fail to see how preventing Hamas from funding a mosque protects citizens. Let's say John Gotti wants to whack Andrew Cuomo. He also wants to finance a family style pizza parlor. Stopping the pizza parlor has nothing to do with stopping the murder of Andrew Cuomo. We don't make every Shakey's franchise prove that it's not financed with mob money.

I couldn't care less if someone wants to build a mosque. I would care if a terrorist organization were allowed to funnel funds into the U.S. If that were to be the case then we should seize the assets and stop the flow.

There's a big difference between saying we should stop Hamas from sending money into the country and saying the government should investigate the funding of this particular project because it happens to involve Muslims and they haven't opened their books for us.

If there is reason to believe money came from Hamas, then it should be looked at.

The point is, there is no evidence that it did. People are suggesting that the government should be able to perform a preemptive investigation just because this whole thing leaves a bad taste in their mouth. But that's not how it works.

 

[John555]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

 

[mad sweeney]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

 

[John555]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

Would you support it?

 

[perry147]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

I think he means the same way Fox News is.

 

[John555]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

I think he means the same way Fox News is.

Yeah, that is a problem. Not sure their prediction has come true, but the potential to influence news coverage is there.

And you can bet it will affect FOX News’ already soft coverage of Islam and negative stories involving violent Muslims.

 

[Radio Free Homer]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

Would you support it?

Does the rich Saudi give material support to terrorists or just agree with their goals/methods?

 

[John555]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

Would you support it?

Does the rich Saudi give material support to terrorists or just agree with their goals/methods?

Assume he is funding them.

 

[bigbottom]

I understand why the mosque should be allowed, I just want to know if my government spends any time investigating the people behind a project like this. I don't really care if it's "right" by some letter-of-the-law code most of you lawyer types spend a life-time twisting for monetary gain.

Why specifically this project, though, and not all mosques? And if you're in favor of investigating the funding for all mosques, what about churches/temples for other denominations?I understand the outrage about this particular mosque and the perceived "slap-in-the-face", but I really don't see how this would be effective government policy.

I'm not outraged at anything other than certain people's ridiculous denial that there's anything to worry about. And for the record, anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

So you want more Government when it comes to Religion?

Anything non-profit should be available for government investigation.

Why?

 

[mad sweeney]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

Would you support it?

Does the rich Saudi give material support to terrorists or just agree with their goals/methods?

Assume he is funding them.

Assuming he funds terrorists would make us just like you.

 

[Offa]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

 

[drummer]

What if the money came from some rich oil Saudi who was a vocal supporter of terrorism?

What if?

I think he means the same way Fox News is.

Yeah, that is a problem. Not sure their prediction has come true, but the potential to influence news coverage is there.

And you can bet it will affect FOX News’ already soft coverage of Islam and negative stories involving violent Muslims.

What? Fox pundits have been demonizing Muslims for years. Where the hell have you been?

 

[John555]

I think he means the same way Fox News is.

Yeah, that is a problem. Not sure their prediction has come true, but the potential to influence news coverage is there.

And you can bet it will affect FOX News' already soft coverage of Islam and negative stories involving violent Muslims.

What? Fox pundits have been demonizing Muslims for years. Where the hell have you been?

FYI, I was disagreeing with the quote as well. Sometimes I think no matter what I post, certain posters will disagree with and attack me. Even on a tennis thread. It doesn't matter the subject. It is kind of funny really how deeply personal some posters make this.

 

[Christo]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Evil Genius?

 

[Parasailer]

Should the government be doing anything at all to ensure the mosque organizers have no ties to terrorism?

Of course they should.

What do you suggest they should do? Should warrants be issued? What's the probable cause? John555's opinion?

I would imagine that the gov't (city or state or feds) look into any large construction project and try and figure out where the funding is from. Dont they?

No. They look at what impact said building will have on their community but generally they don't look to see where the funds from the building are coming from.

 

[Parasailer]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

So that people can use them as a hypothetical antagonist.

 

[John555]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

 

[Mario Kart]

SHUT IT DOWN!!

 

[McJose]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

Why would he need a front?

 

[Christo]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

Why would he need a front?

To support johnny's theory, of course.

 

[McJose]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

Why would he need a front?

To support johnny's theory, of course.

I think his theory is a front for another theory.

 

[Offa]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

Yes John, it's all a conspiracy.

 

[John555]

Why would a rich Arab fund an initiative dedicated to improving the Islamic world's relations with the west, and Islamic terrorists at the same time?

Because the first part is just a front.

Yes John, it's all a conspiracy.

I thought so!

 

[Radio Free Homer]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/28/...in6814690.shtml



Fire at Tenn. Mosque Building Site Ruled Arson

Construction Equipment at Site of Planned Islamic Center Torched; Vocal Protests Against Mosque Have Been Ongoing

(CBS/AP) Updated at 9:25 p.m. ET

Federal officials are investigating a fire that started overnight at the site of a new Islamic center in a Nashville suburb.

Ben Goodwin of the Rutherford County Sheriff's Department confirmed to CBS Affiliate WTVF that the fire, which burned construction equipment at the future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, is being ruled as arson.

Special Agent Andy Anderson of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told CBS News that the fire destroyed one piece of construction equipment and damaged three others. Gas was poured over the equipment to start the fire, Anderson said.

The ATF, FBI and Rutherford County Sheriff's Office are conducting a joint investigation into the fire, Anderson said.

WTVF reports firefighters were alerted by a passerby who saw flames at the site. One large earth hauler was set on fire before the suspect or suspects left the scene.

The chair of the center's planning committee, Essim Fathy, said he drove to the site at around 5:30 a.m. Saturday morning after he was contacted by the sheriff's department.

"Our people and community are so worried of what else can happen," said Fathy. "They are so scared."

The fire was smoldering by the time Fathy and the center's imam, Ossama Bahloul, had arrived. Fathy was told that responders had smelled gasoline near the fire.

Fathy was later contacted by members of the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, who told him the incident was under investigation and to remain calm.

Digging had begun at the site, which was planned as a place of worship for the approximately 250 Muslim families in the Murfreesboro area, but no structure had been built yet, according to Saleh Sbenaty, a member of the planning committee and a professor of engineering technology at Middle Tennessee State University.

"This is a shock," said Sbenaty. "We've had small act of vandals. But this is going to be a crime and whoever did it, they should be punished to the full extent of the law."

The center had operated for years out of a small business suite. Planning members said the new building, which was being constructed next to a church, would help accommodate the area's growing Muslim community.

"We unfortunately did not experience hostilities for the 30 years we've been here and have only seen the hostility since approval of the site plan for the new center," said Sbenaty.

Opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer; they are afraid the 15-acre site that was once farmland will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government.

"They are not a religion. They are a political, militaristic group," Bob Shelton, a 76-year-old retiree who lives in the area, told The Associated Press.

Shelton was among several hundred demonstrators who recently wore "Vote for Jesus" T-shirts and carried signs that said "No Sharia law for USA!," referring to the Islamic code of law.

Others took their opposition further, spray painting a sign announcing the "Future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro" and tearing it up.

Earlier this summer opponents criticized the planned mosque at hearings held by the Rutherford County Commission, as supporters held prayer vigils.

At one such prayer vigil, WTVF reported opponents speaking out against construction.

"No mosque in Murfreesboro. I don't want it. I don't want them here," Evy Summers said to WTVF. "Go start their own country overseas somewhere. This is a Christian country. It was based on Christianity."