He's such a LYING BASTARD!!!
Do you support a Mosque at Ground Zero?
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
He's such a LYING BASTARD!!!
Nancy better get on this! Who is funding these traitors!?!?
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fIlCiX0LIqA?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fIlCiX0LIqA?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fIlCiX0LIqA?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fIlCiX0LIqA?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
Right. We need to investigate those who oppose common sense and decency. She's SUCH A CUNT!!
Will they take al qaeda money too?
Islamic Center Backers Won't Rule Out Taking Funds from Saudi Arabia, Iran
'Ground Zero Mosque' Developers in Talks With NY Gov. Paterson
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Aug. 18, 2010â
The developers behind the Islamic center planned for a site near Ground Zero won't rule out accepting financing from the Mideast -- including from Saudi Arabia and Iran -- as they begin searching for $100 million needed to build the project.
The religious organization and the development company behind the center declined to say how much of the $100 million needed to build the facility has already been raised...
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11429998
Islamic Center Backers Won't Rule Out Taking Funds from Saudi Arabia, Iran
'Ground Zero Mosque' Developers in Talks With NY Gov. Paterson
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Aug. 18, 2010â
The developers behind the Islamic center planned for a site near Ground Zero won't rule out accepting financing from the Mideast -- including from Saudi Arabia and Iran -- as they begin searching for $100 million needed to build the project.
The religious organization and the development company behind the center declined to say how much of the $100 million needed to build the facility has already been raised...
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=11429998
It's Sept. 12, 2001 and Muslims want to build a Mosque anywhere, let alone ground zero. Wouldn't have been much of a discussion back then, now would there? What's changed? We all know he answer.
In short, the radical left is saying, hey, it's been 9 f'n years, get over it already. Yet, quite mysteriously, these are the same people who, 145 years after slavery was abolished, 45 years after Jim Crow was thrown out, still tell us we cannot forget past sins against humanity. Makes one wonder.
In short, the radical left is saying, hey, it's been 9 f'n years, get over it already. Yet, quite mysteriously, these are the same people who, 145 years after slavery was abolished, 45 years after Jim Crow was thrown out, still tell us we cannot forget past sins against humanity. Makes one wonder.
GROUND ZERO MOSQUE: THE REAL ISSUE
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
"The proposed mosque near to ground zero is not really a religious institution. It would be -- as many mosques throughout the nation are -- a terrorist recruitment, indoctrination and training center. It is not the worship of Islam that is the problem. It is the efforts to advance Sharia Law with its requirement of Jihad and violence that is the nub of the issue.
There is a global effort to advance Sharia Law and make it the legal system of the world. Most major banks and financial institutions offer Sharia Compliant Funds which have their investments vetted by the most fundamentalist and reactionary of clerics to assure that they advance Sharia Law. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the proposed Mosque, helps to prepare a Sharia Index which rates countries on their degree of compliance with Sharia Law. In the United Kingdom, many courts have recognized Sharia as the governing law on matters between two Muslims.
Not only is Sharia Law a vicious anti-female code which orders death by stoning, promotes child marriage, decriminalizes abuse of women, and gives wives no rights in divorce, but it also explicitly recognizes the duty of all Muslims to wage Jihad against non-believers and promotes violence to achieve its goals. In this respect, violent Jihad is as inherent in Sharia Law as revolution is in Communist doctrine.
But there are non-Sharia mosques where peaceful and spiritual Muslims worship God in their own way without promoting violence. A soon-to-be published study funded by Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy, found that 20% of the mosques in the United States have no taint of Sharia and simply promote peaceful worship. But 80% are filled with violent literature, Sharia teachings, and promotion of Jihad and its inevitable concomitant -- terrorism.
Which brings us to the ground zero mosque. There can be no doubt that any mosque organized and run by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf will be based on Sharia Law and will serve as local branch office of the pan-Islamic terrorist offensive against the west. That such a facility should be located right next to the place where Jihad achieved its most hideous triumph is unspeakably inappropriate.
President Obama is confusing the issue when he describes it as one of religious freedom. There is broad latitude to worship God as one chooses. But there is none to promote violence and terrorism. The record of involvement of Sharia mosques with the 9-11 attackers and the Ft. Hood massacre shooter is so deep and extensive that it vividly underscores the difference between a religious institution and an organization that promotes terrorism.
Politically, President Obama's defense of the mosque and his efforts to make it a First Amendment issue are incredibly self-destructive. They raise questions about his political sanity. It is hard to believe how tone deaf he must have become to take such a position. He has now embraced two positions that are anathema to two-thirds of all Americans -- the mosque and opposition to Arizona's immigration law. Neither was a controversy that sought him out. He waded into each one voluntarily with flags flying. He had no role in the Arizona law but his lawsuit to invalidate it made it his fight. He does not sit on the New York City Planning Commission, but his endorsement of the mosque puts him squarely in the center of controversy. What is he using for brains these days?
To continue the efforts to battle Sharia Law and the attempts of radical Muslims to use it to destroy our values and the gains of feminism, please follow the work funded by the Center for Security Policy and conducted by David Yerushalmi. To help to fund their efforts, go to www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org"
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
"The proposed mosque near to ground zero is not really a religious institution. It would be -- as many mosques throughout the nation are -- a terrorist recruitment, indoctrination and training center. It is not the worship of Islam that is the problem. It is the efforts to advance Sharia Law with its requirement of Jihad and violence that is the nub of the issue.
There is a global effort to advance Sharia Law and make it the legal system of the world. Most major banks and financial institutions offer Sharia Compliant Funds which have their investments vetted by the most fundamentalist and reactionary of clerics to assure that they advance Sharia Law. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the founder of the proposed Mosque, helps to prepare a Sharia Index which rates countries on their degree of compliance with Sharia Law. In the United Kingdom, many courts have recognized Sharia as the governing law on matters between two Muslims.
Not only is Sharia Law a vicious anti-female code which orders death by stoning, promotes child marriage, decriminalizes abuse of women, and gives wives no rights in divorce, but it also explicitly recognizes the duty of all Muslims to wage Jihad against non-believers and promotes violence to achieve its goals. In this respect, violent Jihad is as inherent in Sharia Law as revolution is in Communist doctrine.
But there are non-Sharia mosques where peaceful and spiritual Muslims worship God in their own way without promoting violence. A soon-to-be published study funded by Frank Gaffney's Center for Security Policy, found that 20% of the mosques in the United States have no taint of Sharia and simply promote peaceful worship. But 80% are filled with violent literature, Sharia teachings, and promotion of Jihad and its inevitable concomitant -- terrorism.
Which brings us to the ground zero mosque. There can be no doubt that any mosque organized and run by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf will be based on Sharia Law and will serve as local branch office of the pan-Islamic terrorist offensive against the west. That such a facility should be located right next to the place where Jihad achieved its most hideous triumph is unspeakably inappropriate.
President Obama is confusing the issue when he describes it as one of religious freedom. There is broad latitude to worship God as one chooses. But there is none to promote violence and terrorism. The record of involvement of Sharia mosques with the 9-11 attackers and the Ft. Hood massacre shooter is so deep and extensive that it vividly underscores the difference between a religious institution and an organization that promotes terrorism.
Politically, President Obama's defense of the mosque and his efforts to make it a First Amendment issue are incredibly self-destructive. They raise questions about his political sanity. It is hard to believe how tone deaf he must have become to take such a position. He has now embraced two positions that are anathema to two-thirds of all Americans -- the mosque and opposition to Arizona's immigration law. Neither was a controversy that sought him out. He waded into each one voluntarily with flags flying. He had no role in the Arizona law but his lawsuit to invalidate it made it his fight. He does not sit on the New York City Planning Commission, but his endorsement of the mosque puts him squarely in the center of controversy. What is he using for brains these days?
To continue the efforts to battle Sharia Law and the attempts of radical Muslims to use it to destroy our values and the gains of feminism, please follow the work funded by the Center for Security Policy and conducted by David Yerushalmi. To help to fund their efforts, go to www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org"
Queen of Jihad
By Scott Wheeler & Buckley Carlson
"Speaking of Jihad, Nancy Pelosi has called for a holy war against all who oppose the mosque at Ground Zero.
"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," said Mullah Pelosi yesterday.
Some have already surmised that she was referring to us because we produced the Ground Zero Mosque television ad that kicked off this whole controversy, and because we have demanded that official Washington declare where they stand on the issue. We have stirred up a beehive and the queen bee herself is now after us.
It's rare we get to say it, but Mullah Pelosi is right about one thing. This IS a political issue, and this HAS devolved into a political war. It's one we are happy to engage in, and which we believe should be fought in daylight and with as many witnesses as possible. Once again, Obama, Pelosi and the Far Left are on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of their political constituency, and the wrong side of the majority of Americans; not only do a majority of Americans oppose the Ground Zero Mosque, but so do a majority of Democrats.
The odd thing about this mosque is that it unites belligerent Islamists and the Elitist Far Left on one side against the rest of America. This dichotomy illustrates perfectly my analysis from five years ago: the only thing that radical Islam and the Left have in common is their mutual hatred of the United States. The Left hates America so much they are willing to unite with a religion that accentuates all that they hate about Christianity in order to destroy it. After 40 years of trampling on our freedom of religion the Left has now embraced it as the Holy Grail of America's greatness! Quick...lets all start praying in school before they change their minds!
The reason Pelosi and Democrats, including Obama, are terrified of this issue is because it puts them in a box right before an election, the time at which Democrats prefer to hide their anti-Americanism, and pretend they, too, believe in freedom. But this is why it is so important to highlight this in advance of the November elections; the American people have a right to know exactly where their elected representatives stand on such controversial issues that matter so much to their constituents. That this is a simple, up or down question makes it even more problematic for the Democrats because there is no room to obfuscate on the issue.
Obama tried it and came out looking like a fool, first by endorsing the mosque and then saying that the endorsement was only for the First Amendment. How clever. But we already knew where Obama stood before he put his foot in his mouth; he always takes the side of the Muslims over that of Americans, whether in his outrageous apologies for the crimes he imagines we've committed against Islam, or by his doling out our tax money to fund the terrorist group Hamas.
But now we have an opportunity to do what Democrats have done for years; politicize an issue to force the Democrats to pay a price. Remember when in 2005 and 2006 Reid and Pelosi declared that the war in Iraq was lost? And they did so - in contravention of the facts, and to the detriment of our soldiers actually fighting the war - only as a means to reinstall themselves in power? Now it's a different story-those of us who force Democrats to admit publicly who they really are must be investigated.
How about this? How about before we investigate the funding behind the opposition to the mosque, we investigate the funding of the anti-war movement on which Pelosi, Reid and Obama rode to power? Political gain from politicizing an issue may be right or it may be wrong, depending on the issue. In this case, the political gain might actually save the country from the Democrats."
By Scott Wheeler & Buckley Carlson
"Speaking of Jihad, Nancy Pelosi has called for a holy war against all who oppose the mosque at Ground Zero.
"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," said Mullah Pelosi yesterday.
Some have already surmised that she was referring to us because we produced the Ground Zero Mosque television ad that kicked off this whole controversy, and because we have demanded that official Washington declare where they stand on the issue. We have stirred up a beehive and the queen bee herself is now after us.
It's rare we get to say it, but Mullah Pelosi is right about one thing. This IS a political issue, and this HAS devolved into a political war. It's one we are happy to engage in, and which we believe should be fought in daylight and with as many witnesses as possible. Once again, Obama, Pelosi and the Far Left are on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of their political constituency, and the wrong side of the majority of Americans; not only do a majority of Americans oppose the Ground Zero Mosque, but so do a majority of Democrats.
The odd thing about this mosque is that it unites belligerent Islamists and the Elitist Far Left on one side against the rest of America. This dichotomy illustrates perfectly my analysis from five years ago: the only thing that radical Islam and the Left have in common is their mutual hatred of the United States. The Left hates America so much they are willing to unite with a religion that accentuates all that they hate about Christianity in order to destroy it. After 40 years of trampling on our freedom of religion the Left has now embraced it as the Holy Grail of America's greatness! Quick...lets all start praying in school before they change their minds!
The reason Pelosi and Democrats, including Obama, are terrified of this issue is because it puts them in a box right before an election, the time at which Democrats prefer to hide their anti-Americanism, and pretend they, too, believe in freedom. But this is why it is so important to highlight this in advance of the November elections; the American people have a right to know exactly where their elected representatives stand on such controversial issues that matter so much to their constituents. That this is a simple, up or down question makes it even more problematic for the Democrats because there is no room to obfuscate on the issue.
Obama tried it and came out looking like a fool, first by endorsing the mosque and then saying that the endorsement was only for the First Amendment. How clever. But we already knew where Obama stood before he put his foot in his mouth; he always takes the side of the Muslims over that of Americans, whether in his outrageous apologies for the crimes he imagines we've committed against Islam, or by his doling out our tax money to fund the terrorist group Hamas.
But now we have an opportunity to do what Democrats have done for years; politicize an issue to force the Democrats to pay a price. Remember when in 2005 and 2006 Reid and Pelosi declared that the war in Iraq was lost? And they did so - in contravention of the facts, and to the detriment of our soldiers actually fighting the war - only as a means to reinstall themselves in power? Now it's a different story-those of us who force Democrats to admit publicly who they really are must be investigated.
How about this? How about before we investigate the funding behind the opposition to the mosque, we investigate the funding of the anti-war movement on which Pelosi, Reid and Obama rode to power? Political gain from politicizing an issue may be right or it may be wrong, depending on the issue. In this case, the political gain might actually save the country from the Democrats."