Do you support a Mosque at Ground Zero?

[stock777]

Quote from William Rennick:

Absolutely!! Once they build that somanabitch I driving a manure and kerosene packed Winnebego through the front door.

Rennick Allah Akbar out

Be careful buddy, they just sandbagged a net radio jock for talking some trash about Federal Judges.



You are posting too soon after your last post. Try again in a few minutes. Dont you know Elite Trader is still running off a Vic-20 and cant take the heat?

 

[nutmeg]

"We need this Islamic center to preach love and respect in contrast to those that preach hate and destruction"

So far, not much accomplished regarding love and respect and the dang thing isn't even built yet. I can't wait to feel the love.

 

[tradingjournals]

Related article from NY Times:


WASHINGTON — President Obama delivered a strong defense on Friday night of a proposed Muslim community center and mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, using a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan to proclaim that “as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

After weeks of avoiding the high-profile battle over the center — his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said last week that the president did not want to “get involved in local decision-making” — Mr. Obama stepped squarely into the thorny debate.

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

In hosting the iftar, Mr. Obama was following a White House tradition that, while sporadic, dates to Thomas Jefferson, who held a sunset dinner for the first Muslim ambassador to the United States. President George W. Bush hosted iftars annually.

Aides to Mr. Obama say privately that he has always felt strongly about the proposed community center and mosque, but the White House did not want to weigh in until local authorities made a decision on the proposal, planned for two blocks from the site of the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center.

Last week, New York City removed the final construction hurdle for the project, and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg spoke forcefully in favor of it.

The community center proposal has led to a national uproar over Islam, 9/11 and freedom of religion during a hotly contested midterm election season.

In New York, Rick A. Lazio, a Republican candidate for governor and a former member of the House of Representatives, issued a statement responding to Mr. Obama’s remarks, saying that the president was still “not listening to New Yorkers.”

“With over 100 mosques in New York City, this is not an issue of religion, but one of safety and security,” he said.

Sarah Palin, the former governor of Alaska and the Republican vice-presidential candidate in 2008, has called the project “an unnecessary provocation” and urged “peace-seeking Muslims” to reject it.

The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish organization, has also opposed the center.

In his remarks, Mr. Obama distinguished between the terrorists who plotted the 9/11 attacks and Islam. “Al Qaeda’s cause is not Islam — it is a gross distortion of Islam,” the president said, adding, “In fact, Al Qaeda has killed more Muslims than people of any other religion, and that list includes innocent Muslims who were killed on 9/11.”

Noting that “Muslim Americans serve with honor in our military,” Mr. Obama said that at next week’s iftar at the Pentagon, “tribute will be paid to three soldiers who gave their lives in Iraq and now rest among the heroes of Arlington National Cemetery.”

Mr. Obama ran for office promising to improve relations with the Muslim world, by taking steps like closing the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and more generally reaching out. In a speech in Cairo last year, he vowed “a new beginning.”

But Ali Abunimah, an Arab-American journalist and author, said the president has since left many Muslims disappointed.

“There has been no follow-through; Guantánamo is still open and so forth, so all you have left for him to show is in the symbolic field,” Mr. Abunimah said, adding that it was imperative for Mr. Obama to “stand up to Islamophobia.”

Once Mr. Bloomberg spoke out, the president’s course seemed clear, said Steven Clemons of the New America Foundation, a public policy institution here.

“Bloomberg’s speech was, I think, the pivotal one, and set the standard for leadership on this issue,” Mr. Clemons said.

Mr. Bloomberg, in a statement, said: “This proposed mosque and community center in Lower Manhattan is as important a test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime, and I applaud President Obama’s clarion defense of the freedom of religion tonight.”

Sharif el-Gamal, the developer on the project, said, “We are deeply moved and tremendously grateful for our president’s words.”

A building on the site of the proposed center is already used for prayers, and some worshipers there on Friday night discussed the president’s remarks.

 

[bpcnabe]

Obama's argument that Consitutional provisions allow people to practice their religion without interference is not the right argument for this situation: no one (well, most no one) says they can't have a mosque for their prayer - people are against the location of the mosque. Moving the mosque to a different location has absolutely nothing to do with Constitutional freedoms.

And on a side note - if Paterson gets them to move to state land someplace else, isn't that a violation of church - state religious issues or does that on;y apply to Church -state religious issues?

 

[Mav88]

I'm afraid the west will never learn that tolerance for tolerance sake is not a virtue. I don't want hear crap about freedom of religion either, if the KKK wanted to build a meeting hall near a MLK monument then all sort of 'laws' would be used to stop it. We don't tolerate pedophiles, Nazis, polyigamists, etc. Tolerance should be reserved only for those who tolerate you, it's a natural law we all live by. You don't tolerate everyone nor should you, tolerance is granted only to those who you feel deserve it.

Muslims don't like us, they feel superior to us and look down on others with contempt. They feel they are in mortal struggle with the west. They hate the idea of living with us and dream of conquering and conversion, but for now they (barely) try and put on a co-existance face. Make no mistake, if they ever get a voting majority you will rudely find out just what the muslim version of tolerance is. Constitutions and other pieces of paper will not save you. If you would like a foretaste, then go to a muslim country and try to speak your mind, build your own church, or suggest a synogogue near Mecca. If you can survive Muslim tolerance, then at least you'll understand that you cannot take freedom for granted. You will understand the deepness of Muslim hate, you will understand that muslims demand respect but will not give it back. The mosque is a victory shrine so they can privately feel good about 9/11, I hope someone flys a plane into it.

I'm glad Obama is for it, it is his true self. The feelings of average white americans are the only ones that do not deserve to be respected in his mind, offending white people is almost taken as an accomplishment. The left will ally even with the vile idealogy of Islam if it means opposing conservative white americans, their hatreds rival each other in magnitude but the day is coming soon if it is not here already, when they will find that they are incompatible with each other. Islam tolerates noone but muslims and results are usually violent, what a sad day for america.

 

[nutmeg]

Frankly I doubt the Pope could get a mosque built at Ground Zero if George Bush was in office. They wouldn't even try.

C'mon, if Hussien is your middle name......his comments aren't even newsworthy.

 

[Mav88]

Muslim tolerance, an older example but it is exactly what they are doing in Europe now. Why are liberal politicians so damned thick? stop the cancer while it is manageable.

Mary Boyce, Emeritus Professor of Iranian Studies at the University of London, has confirmed the external validity of Bat Ye’or’s analytical approach in her description of how jihad and dhimmitude (without the latter being specifically identified as such) transformed Zoroastrian society in an analogous manner. Boyce has written definitive assessments of those Zoroastrian communities which survived the devastating jihad conquests of the mid 7th through early 8th centuries 20. The Zoroastrians experienced an ongoing, inexorable decline over the next millennium due to constant sociopolitical and economic pressures exerted by their Muslim rulers, and neighbor. Boyce describes these complementary phenomena based on an historical analysis, and her personal observations living in the (central Iranian) Yezd area during the 1960s:

"Either a few Moslems settled on the outskirts of a Zoroastrian village, or one or two Zoroastrian families adopted Islam. Once the dominant faith had made a breach, it pressed in remorselessly, like a rising tide. More Moslems came, and soon a small mosque was built, which attracted yet others. As long as Zoroastrians remained in the majority, their lives were tolerable; but once the Moslems became the more numerous, a petty but pervasive harassment was apt to develop. This was partly verbal, with taunts about fire-worship, and comments on how few Zoroastrians there were in the world, and how many Moslems, who must therefore posses the truth; and also on how many material advantages lay with Islam. The harassment was often also physical; boys fought, and gangs of youth waylaid and bullied individual Zoroastrians. They also diverted themselves by climbing into the local tower of silence and desecrating it, and they might even break into the fire-temple and seek to pollute or extinguish the sacred flame. Those with criminal leanings found too that a religious minority provided tempting opportunities for theft, pilfering from the open fields, and sometimes rape and arson. Those Zoroastrians who resisted all these pressures often preferred therefore in the end to sell out and move to some other place where their co-religionists were still relatively numerous, and they could live at peace; and so another village was lot to the old faith. Several of the leading families in Sharifabad and forebears who were driven away by intense Moslem pressure from Abshahi, once a very devout and orthodox village on the southern outskirts of Yazd; and a shorter migration had been made by the family of the centenarian ‘Hajji’ Khodabakhsh, who had himself been born in the 1850s and was still alert and vigorous in 1964. His family, who were very pious, had left their home in Ahmedabad (just to the north of Turkabad) when he was a small boy, and had come to settle in Sharifabad to escape persecution and the threats to their orthodox way of life. Other Zoroastrians held out there for a few decades longer, but by the end of the century Ahmedabad was wholly Moslem, as Abshahi become in 1961. [Boyce’s footnote: The last Zoroastrian family left Abshahi in 1961, after the rape and subsequent suicide of one of their daughters.] It was noticeable that the villages which were left to the Zoroastrians were in the main those with poor supplies of water, where farming conditions were hard."

http://www.globalpolitician.com/22575-jihad

 

[Trader666]

I'm sure that some do... but here's what political correctness about it got us:

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vs0cwMhhnRw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vs0cwMhhnRw?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Quote from tradingjournals:

Noting that “Muslim Americans serve with honor in our military,” Mr. Obama said...

 

[Hello]

Not to mention the fact that the Obama admin is still paying this cocksucker his 6000$ a month salary, because it would be such a travesty if a mass murdering terrorist wasnt afforded due process.

Kudos to the banks for not accepting him as a customer and allowing him to cash them.

Quote from Trader666:

I'm sure that some do... but here's what political correctness about it got us:

Why is Maj. Nidal Hasan still being paid?


While awaiting trial, the alleged Fort Hood shooter is still drawing an army salary of $6,000 a month. What's going on?
posted on August 4, 2010, at 1:01 PM

Nidal Hasan: In jail, but still getting paychecks. Photo: Getty SEE ALL 4 PHOTOS
While waiting for his murder trial to begin, Maj. Nidal Hasan, the man charged with shooting 13 soldiers dead at Fort Hood, Texas, is reportedly still receiving an estimated $6,000 monthly salary from the United States Army because he can't be discharged until proven guilty. Not that the payments are doing him any immediate good, complains his lawyer: Since no bank will take on Hasan as a customer, the checks remain uncashed. Why is this "murdering terrorist" drawing a paycheck at all, asks Robbie Cooper at UrbanGrounds. The army always used to make soldiers forfeit "up to half their pay as part of their punishment" when they were disciplined. I don't want to defend Hasan, says Joshua Holland at Alternet, but for banks to refuse his custom is "outrageous in principle" and un-American: The "presumption of innocence before being proven guilty is a core principle in our justice system." Here's an ABC News report on Hasan's defense:


http://theweek.com/article/index/205692/why-is-maj-nidal-hasan-still-being-paid

 

[Trader666]

In Obamaville, it is un-American to NOT pay a terrorist who's murdered Americans.

Quote from Hello:

... I don't want to defend Hasan, says Joshua Holland at Alternet, but for banks to refuse his custom is "outrageous in principle" and un-American...