Answer to all six questions: 9/11.

It’s the magical don’t have to be rational answer to everything!

Excellent questions, BT. Pity that reasoning with bigots is like banging your head repeatedly against a reinforced concrete wall.

Usually presented by someone who is too scared to actually go anywhere near lower Manhattan in the first place.

70%ish of Americans find it offensive. Most don’t deny their right to build the whatever on their private property but we have the right to think and call them /ssholes… and to display an image of the prophet mohammed in a jar of urine.

Isn’t it amazing how wingnuts have been generating a constant stream of urine for nine fucking years?

Look, we have our own private wingnut bigot this afternoon!

Do you have a source for that “70%” figure or did you pull it out from beside your head?

Edit: And do you really think that Jesus would respond to Mohammed in that fashion? Seriously?

Peter King spent part of this morning on CNN, making water and crying about the hurt feelings and frayed nerves of New Yorkers in Lower Manhattan.

When Peter King makes Obama look brave and resolute, he is achieving something profound.

Perhaps we should outlaw the practice of religion entirely in America, to avoid further mishap?

All religions.

… or by someone who was running away from it.

I’d add this question:

Why does everyone insist on calling this community center a mosque?

Feel free to answer that question in comments, too.

oooooohhhhhh – you just made the cardinal sin when dealing with right wing nuts: you’re using basic logic. Since your questions are reasoned and logical, you can expect very angry responses from any right wingers that will also accuse you of hating America.

These questions prove Bobby Gibbs was right, by the way.

7. what about big fake titty “triumphalism”

our friend Kagro X reminds us there are 5 strip clubs within 2 blocks of “hallowed ground” . . . and they all face Mecca !

8. when will our sterling media corps quit fellating A Man Called Petraeus long enough to ask any of these questions ?

I’ve always thought of Burlington Coat Factory as hallowed ground — as Jon Stewart said, where else in America can you get a belted London Fog trench for under two and half clams?

My guess is that this issue will hurt progressives in November. It is better, however, to take a principled stand instead of trying to mollify those that want to create dissension.

I do not completely understand the President’s walking his views back – did he mean that the center has the right to be built but that he was not going to make any statement about the “rightness” of building it there?

Through the magnifying glass that is Peter King, behold Obama’s cojones!

My opinion has been that this would be a good idea, but as long as anyone else is allowed to practice religion in an area, everyone should be.

EDIT: Corrected that link.

“If only Bender had picked a mainstream religion, like Oprahism or voodoo.”
–Prof. Hubert Farnsworth

Lovely that La Cheney is now opposed to sending the Imam of this community center abroad to speak about being Muslin in America — considering her Dad’s “boss” sent him to the same places to talk about the same thing, back when BigFoot Hughes was running Muslin Outreach for Condi.

Question 7: Why are you not whining about the Mosque in the Pantagon?

My guess is that this issue will hurt progressives in November. It is better, however, to take a principled stand instead of trying to mollify those that want to create dissension.

Thoroughly disagree. The right wingers are already motivated to vote and this issue isn’t going to make more progressives stay away.

I do not completely understand the President’s walking his views back

He’s not walking anything back….unless you read Politico.

Were Obama to go help build the ‘mosque’ with his bare hands, it couldn’t enrage the frightie-righties more, but it might motivate religious-freedom-oriented progressives to help a like-minded neighbor get to the mid-term polling station this November.

Just another Professional Left-y opinion, White House political office. Pay it no mind, no mind at all.

Bizarro-World News Daily, funded by Bush-bankers and other assorted criminal BCCI folks.

And why are’t the teabagapublicalibertarians against property tax breaks for thousands of shopping-mall-sized churches squatting on prime real estate across the land? Ya wanna help the poor, why not help the poor instead of this weak-kneed trickle-down piousness that depetes local government coffers?

I do read Politico. Sun Tsu tells you to know your enemy.

Also lost in the rhetoric is that on the Island of Manhatten this objection percentage is not the same. Seems New Yorkers themselves are living the words of the constitution.

What Obama originally said:

In this country we treat everybody equally and in accordance with the law, regardless of race, regardless of religion.

What he said the next day:

But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances.

How is that “walking it back”? I’m all for Obama busting when he deserves it and lord knows he gives us ample reasons to do so but let’s not imagine things and let’s not take characterizations by Politico and FAUX “News” as credible or worth repeating.

Does Sun Tsu tell you to lend your enemy a credulous ear or to assist them in spreading propaganda?

It’s always those the most hard done by who get behind this whole heap of political bullshit from the Right. It’s also a legacy of race hate.

I believe the President was defending the right to build this COMMUNITY CENTER, but he was not interjecting his personal opinion as to the wisdom of such a move.

Everyone seems to want him on the record with an opinion. Don’t know why that is since I elect a president to defend to the finish the Constitution rights of the citizenry and not to project his personal ideology into it.

Sun Tsu tells you that you can only win when you fully understand your opponent – reading politico should be mandatory for everyone on our side. Head in the sand and ignoring what the other side writes is a recipe for losing.

4,000 years of human history to learn from and your mired in 9 years? Ah, that public school education.

Knowing-your-enemy and repeating-enemy-propaganda about the president ‘walking back’ his views are two entirely different things.

Come sit by me, Ma’m. I owe you a beverage, and I’m a terrible aim at sliding one down the bar.

Muslins are not a race!
/racist wingnut

He walked it back, merely by saying he didn’t say what he said because he thought the “mosque” was a good idea. Saying such a thing almost inevitably implies that it’s not a good idea. Given that the stated mission of this place was to foster greater understanding between people of different religions, I think the irony of Obama not being able to either say this was a good idea or just shutting up after reiterating what he said reaches catastrophically high levels.

Let me be plain – I have no use for religions, none whatsoever. Yet, I managed to say something positive about this project. Did I say “we can all argue until the cows come home about whether that’s a good idea or not”? I managed to be positive about it, despite my negative outlook on religion and my general cynicism, and I don’t have any speech writers on staff.

Obama screwed this up for the same reason he’s screwed so much up – because he just doesn’t want to stand for anything if people are going to say mean things about him.

Oh no, dissention, We can’t have that now, can we [Edited by Moderator]?

[Mod Note: Disagree but do not insult]

absolutely agree that the President should have either stayed mum or stepped up with full throated support of the center.

It is always a mistake when you are not clear. He should not have to explain what he meant.

What Teddy said@35! Obviously I know what Politico said about the situation or I wouldn’t have known where the “walking back” characterization came from. But I’m not the one telling people over at firedoglake that “I don’t understand why Obama is walking it back”, when he totally is not.

Sorry, I’ll amend that statement. Isn’t it amazing how wingnuts have been generating a constant stream of urine for four thousand fucking years?

There’s no term I’m aware of that corresponds to “racist” when we’re talking about religious beliefs. IOW, there’s no one-word term for “someone who wants to make his religion supreme over all others.”

It’s almost as if that were expected behavior…

Consume enough vinegar, and …

He walked it back, merely by saying he didn’t say what he said because he thought the “mosque” was a good idea

Oh please! Sounds to me like you’re determined to imagine something wrong with what he said. That’s a reach worthy of the ACORN videos.

“Anti-co-religionist” seems awkward but nevertheless apt.

I’m with you on the religion though Cujo. IMO they shouldn’t have tax exempt status. In fact people who make their living off other peoples’ insecurity and fear should be taxed more heavily than people who have a useful product. Just my .02

Why on earth should he support the center beyond expressing his belief that it can be legally built, especially if one believes, as apparently both you and I do, that religion is in and of itself built upon some subjective (or at least invisible) foundation that cannot be explained to the apostate?

In fact people who make their living off other peoples’ insecurity and fear should be taxed more heavily…

A wingnut tax? Sounds good to me…

I believe the 68% was from the ABC News poll on ABC’s “This Week”, this morning.

Not that I have a direct line to Jesus as you do(?) but no, I do not. But I think he would say that mohammed was a false prophet. Don’t think conversion by force was quite the Jesus way, do you?

Anyway, the pushers/backers of this project are morons if they hoped to build a tolerance bridge. Hard to believe they are that stupid so, what might their motive be?

Hehindeedy!

I think it interesting that righties profess to uphold the constitution, then trample it. Obama is doing what a president is supposed to do – enforce the constitution regardless of personal belief. I find the fact that there are numerous strip clubs in the vicinity of ‘ground zero’ that don’t concern you, as well as a mosque in the pentagon, quite ironic. Most righties admit there is a right to build the mosque but label it ‘insensitive’ and want to ban it on that basis. Talk about a slippery slope! When it comes to Christianity there have been numerous zealots – David Koresh, Jim Jones, the ‘witch burners’ of Salem, to name just a few – yet we do not paint Christianity with so broad a brush. This is a feeble attempt on the part of the righties to wave the flag as the party of patriotism, but they end up the party of prejudice.

I thought it was 6,500 years of recorded history for the young earthers?

(who are probably really confused by the articles out this past week about hominids having used stone tools 3.4Million years ago)

Yup.

Direct quote from Ben Smith’s Politico article:

“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding,” Obama said.

When people talk that way, it means they don’t want to avoid any hint that they think it’s a good idea. I’ve been around a lot of people discussing ideas. That’s what it sounds like when someone isn’t sure it’s a good idea.

Assuming the Politico quote wasn’t a fabrication, theirs was a fair interpretation.

Don’t think conversion by force was quite the Jesus way, do you?

tell that to the victims of the crusades, the witch trials, the Inquisition and etc.

Assuming the Politico quote wasn’t a fabrication, theirs was a fair interpretation.

Sure. But again, ONLY if you are determined to put everything out of his mouth in the worst possible light.

No, I do not have a direct line to Jesus but it seems from what I’ve read in the New Testament in the things like the Golden Rule or the Beatitudes that Jesus would probably not be going along with your use of the picture of Mohammed.

6014, next October 23rd….

What he said, in effect, was the opposite. He didn’t want to say it was a good idea. See my #55.

Given the circumstance of 9/11, which was caused by the xenophobic beliefs of adherents to one religion towards others, I think anything that’s designed to get members of different religions to work or play together is probably a good thing, even if it happens to be run by a religious organization.

Gee, adherents to a religion misconstruing what the founder of it practiced AND preached.

Whoever could have anticipate…

The wingnut was invented in ~ the last 100 years. Wow, you are even ‘fastener’ [Edited by Moderator. That's Strike 2]

[EDIT: This is a reply to #57, not #56. Stop typing so fast, Margaret. ;)]

No, that’s what it sounds like – it sounds like countless examples of hearing people say “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision”. It sounds like me saying that same thing, as I have more than once. All I needed to make that judgment was my experience.

If you wish it that way. Sort of a Sanctuary for Humanity movement where we can all spread credulity. No one without a place of worship sort of thing. I think it is a misguided project. I can see pitching in to build the community center as a show of support, as some rallied around mosques in solidarity, to stave off escallating ill-will. It might be productive. I am skeptical that we should hold the President’s feet to the fire if he does not do this.

Oh, I am sorry. I was referring to the Summarian’s cuneiform tablets. To what earlier writings (i.e. recordings) of history are you referring?

No, that’s what it sounds like

NO! Why does your perception HAVE to be superior to my own? Why is your opinion smarter or more important than mine? Why is your opinion objective while mine is not? Opinions are subjective by nature, otherwise they would be “facts”. You go on to say:

It sounds like me saying that same thing, as I have more than once.

Yes! It sounds to YOU like that! It sounds to ME like he’s trying to avoid offering a PERSONAL OPINION on the subject which would be entirely inappropriate under these circumstances due to the office he holds.

I don’t think most Muslims or most people of other religions are likely to change their minds about their religions. I’ll settle for them not trying to demonize and kill each other, at least in the short term.

Who said Jesus advocated that? Just more human twisting of what was said into what was never said to justify their corrupt desires.

Kinda like people who can’t accept the black ink on paper writings in the Constitution.

I find Catholicism offensive.

Since the Church has not only done nothing to stop wholesale child rape but shielded it’s priests-perps from the law, the church should not be allowed to run schools any longer and the practice of utilizing adolescent-and-younger males as altar boys should cease immediately.

Members of the Supreme Court who are practising Catholics should be relieved of their duties as they are accessories to their religion’s many crimes.

It sounds to ME like he’s trying to avoid offering a PERSONAL OPINION on the subject which would be entirely inappropriate under these circumstances due to the office he holds.

He could have done that merely by repeating what he already said. He could have added, as he has in the past, that part of being free is that sometimes you have to put up with things you don’t like. Emphasis on pronoun “you”.

The man has spent his life talking, for crying out loud, and he has speechwriters and communications advisors.

Who said Mohammed advocated for it either?

I see you have trouble when someone agrees with you on your point Jesus would probably not advocate putting an image of the mo-man into piss in order to annoy the muslims.

I do think it would give him a chuckle, though. Irony and all.

I’m pretty sure the answer to number two is 5,000 miles. Give or take.

Just more human twisting of what was said into what was never said to justify their corrupt desires.

And pollute their precious (not “vital”. Sorry) bodily fluids!

You’re determined to decide that he’s “walking it back” and I can see that you are so determined to believe that, that I may as well be arguing religion with a priest or explaining astronomy to a fortune teller. Fine. Believe what you wish but don’t p*ss down my back and tell me it’s raining and then expect me to praise your wisdom and insight. I’m more than capable of analyzing things for myself. Since explaining that black is the absence of color is lost on people who like to say “the color black”, I’ll give up before we wind up hating one another.

Maybe I’m being insensitive but I don’t understand why people say that the site of the World Trade Center is “sacred.” It’s a place where a terrible tragedy happened and everyone is sad about that but IMO that does not make it “sacred.” At least, I don’t think so.

You do know that the Bush Administration sent this Imam to muslim countries to speak about being muslim in America, right? And that Liz Cheney thinks it’s evil that the Obama Administration is doing the same?

It’s pretty clear America will miss Bush for one thing only: keeping the wingnuts under control with their Muslim-hating. I mean, they’ve gone insane, with their hatred of Obama for celebrating Ramadan in the White House, despite Bush having done so every year of his presidency.

Insane, literally insane. And there’s not much to be said for it, really, except it’s sad. (You are among the liars if you think the poll you quote was properly framed and asked, by the way.)

Not me, the mo-man is dead.

I just point out that the backers of this project are either insensitive or deliberately trying to intimidate and I for one as a lover of irony am enjoying the backlash against them that free speech provides us.

Kinda like people who can’t accept the black ink on paper writings in the Constitution.

Yeah, like the part where it prevents the government from passing any law that prohibits the free expression of their religion. But hey, it’s only mooslims you want to deny their free expression too. They don’t count.

Did I miss something here? First you say:

but we have the right to think and call them /ssholes… and to display an image of the prophet mohammed in a jar of urine.

and now you claim

I see you have trouble when someone agrees with you on your point Jesus would probably not advocate putting an image of the mo-man into piss in order to annoy the muslims.

So do you advocate for your first position or are you actually someone who follows Jesus who would not do such a thing?

Yes. I agree.

Churches near elementary schools, whether the schools are run by the Church or not, should be immediately relocated or closed and their property and effects sold to compensate victims of priest-rape.

I have to disagree just a tiny bit with that Teddy, sorry.

IMO they’ve been insane for quite some time now. They didn’t just get that way after W left office.

After all, you’d HAVE to be insane to vote for him (especially in ’04 when you knew him well), wouldn’t you?

No more so than anywhere on this poor planet we seem hell-bent on predating into doomsday, anyway.

Or maybe they’re just trying to teach a level of tolerance to others on religious views.

I do see you haven’t even come remotely close to attempting to answer the questions BT poses in the original post up top though.

I typed inartfully, as I meant specifically their public revelation of their hatred of American Muslim people. Bush managed to say to them, “No, these people are American and are NOT al Qaida.” And they listened, because it was Bush.

If he was a real person, he would speak up now. But of course he’s not a real boy at all….

ABC news, of course the right wing nuts they are biased a poll to make Obama look bad? If you say so. (someone call the orderlies, stat)

Bush, Cheney’s progeny, Obama; really makes the case for the evils of big Govt. It is a wonder people actually want a bifg Govt. to control us even more? Run by who?

Power corrupts so maybe we should, oh I don’t know … not have a multi-trillion $, 5 million people, many with weapons Government?

Oh, I see. Good idea. Move in next to Grover Norquist, home school and support your local police. We can barter with them for their services, because it is so much more efficient and enterpreneury.

Well, I do advocate that we should (and Constitutionally do) have the right to mock /ssholes like these particular muslims and to mock all the /sshole muslims that would and have actually responded to a taunt mocking the mo-man in a comic strip or on Southpark with death threats and violence.

I agree that Jesus would probably have told an individual, shrug off the insult and worry about your own ‘beam.’ But I do think he would appreciate the use of non-violent techniques like irony, to show that if the muslims are gonna have a tizzy over a little teasing but flout their countreymen’s feelings to build their whatever in that area well, I guess they are hypocrites.

Speakling of hypocrites, seems like you are trying to impose ‘Jesus’s way’ on me? Not really any of your business is it, now?

Wow, you are a lemming aren’t you.

Well when you run out of bread, I’m sure the Fed will give you cake. let me know how that works out.

[Mod Note: We recognize that you are new to this site and commenting here. Treat fellow commenters with a level of respect that you demand for yourself. Disagree without being disagreeable and insulting]

I’m not trying to impose “jesus’s way on you” – just pointing out that you’ve managed to come down squarely on both sides of the issue and that your way is decidedly non-tolerant.

But of course, there is the irony of demanding tolerance for your views while not being particularly willing to be as tolerant of those with whom you disagree. As well as the irony of you demanding your Constitutional right of mockery while trying to denigrate the rights of the folks wanting to build this community center.

Dear Moderator,

I am new. So let me get this straight, wingnut is OK, lemming is not. Do you provide a lexicon of acceptable insults and verbotten?

Thanks for your patience,

Me

I don’t think you’re insensitive. There is nothing hallowed or sacred about the Ground Zero site, not in any religious sense, anyway. Using “hallowed” or “sacred” are attempts to bolster the arguments of opponents, by conflating the meanings of sacred or of hallowed. Actually the Muslims’ right to exercise religion trumps any secular, historical concerns. I hope the Muslims build and do not self-censor or self-abridge their free exercise rights, i.e., allow themselves to be bullied by Know Nothings.

I’m no moderator, but using the term wingnut generally and saying “You’re a wingnut” are a little different.

Kinda like using the term lemming generally and “Wow, you are a lemming aren’t you” are different, since you’re specifically addressing a particular poster.

If you notice, the moderator did not edit out the “lemming” comment.

I think s/he was just warning you to be careful. My understanding (limited though it may be) is that direct insults towards other commenters are generally forbidden. Sometimes the Mods will give a warning when they think someone is approaching the line.

But it seems you are sensitive to being called a wingnut? Now why would that be so? To be honest, you do seem to fit the profile of the wingnutz who come in to threads here at FDL and try to disrupt things with strawman arguments or “yeah but” type responses.

No, I was responding in kind to your “position[s]“,
“ABC news, of course the right wing nuts they are biased a poll to make Obama look bad? If you say so. (someone call the orderlies, stat)

Bush, Cheney’s progeny, Obama; really makes the case for the evils of big Govt. It is a wonder people actually want a bifg Govt. to control us even more? Run by who?

Power corrupts so maybe we should, oh I don’t know … not have a multi-trillion $, 5 million people, many with weapons Government?”

Which is a collection of pompous implications and assertions delivered in Glen Beck-like gibberish. If for me to ridicule by calling it what it is, libertarian twaddle, rather than respond to this pap is lemming- like, I guess that, yes, I am a lemming. I would take it as no insult. Bless your precious bodily fluids, each and every one.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2010/08/sink-bucks-obama-on-mosque.html

“Like all Floridians, I’m grateful for our constitutional right to freedom of religion,” Sink said in a statement to the St. Petersburg Times. “When it comes to what to build close to the hallowed site of Ground Zero, I think it ought to be up to the people of New York City to decide. It is my personal opinion that the wishes of the 9/11 victims’ families and friends must be respected. They are opposed to this project and I share their view.”

This is from Alex Sink (female), the leading Dem candidate for Governor of FL.

Book Salon up with John Atlas’s Seeds of Change: The Story of ACORN, America’s Most Controversial Antipoverty Community Organizing Group hosted by Tula Connell

Just another politician playing to the masses fears, bigotry, and intolerance.

The beautiful thing about our system of government is that our rights, ALL of our rights, our protected by the constitution from the fears, bigotry, and intolerance of the masses, even if they constitute the majority.

We just saw an example of this in California where a majority of California voters showed their fear, bigotry, and intolerance toward others and a federal judge rightly said “Sorry, these rights are protected even from the majority’s wishes.”

Pols that play to that fear, bigotry, and intolerance are weak, slimy assholes even if the letter D appears after their name.

4,000 years of human history to learn from and your mired in 9 years? Ah, that public school education.

Well, that “public school education” taught me how to distinguish between “you’re” and “your.”

Clearly not so much for you.

Blue,

I didn’t see anyone try to answer your questions, but I’ll give it a shot.

First, here a question for you to ponder while you read my answers.

SHOULD THE PROP 8 ORGANIZERS OPEN A BIG OFFICE IN THE CASTRO DISTRICT IN SF? AND, SHOULD THE RESIDENTS REFRAIN FROM PROTESTING IT SINCE THE PROP 8 ORGANIZERS HAVE A ‘RIGHT’ TO OPEN THE OFFICE IN PRIVATE OFFICE SPACE? Clearly, if someone rents the space to them, they have the right to do so.

Now, to your questions.

1. Since the ground zero area is pretty big strictly speaking, I’d say a block or two away qualifies as being considered part of the ground zero area. To me, any section there that might have been cordoned off as part of the site during the week or so after and was directly affected by the debris, etc. could be considered “ground zero” even though not strictly ground zero. Same as you would not consider the strict boundaries of the concentration camps as ALL that would be considered part of concentration camp areas.

2. This is like asking what is an acceptable distance from Aushwitz (sp) was for the Catholic nuns (who, of course, had nothing to do with running the camps and were not part of the Nazi party–same as the Iman did not fly the planes and his congregation is not part of Al Queda) to build their facility. The answer is subjective and also similar to “how close should someone be able to stick their face in front of yours?” As close as you feel comfortable–and that is for you to decide, not them. Clearly, for many, citizens as well as families, the mosque is close enough to cause them discomfort and distress. Yes, some families don’t care. I am sure some families in Littleton, Colorado would not object to students wearing black trench coats to Columbine High in the time after the shootings, but since it would have made many families feel not so great, that has little weight.

to me, I’d say far enough away to not bring up the association with Ground Zero. It subjective. Maybe a mile or two.

3. Sure there is a difference. Just as there was a difference between the Catholic nuns and the Nazi’s. In this case, it really is beside the point. Groups that have some association, even tenuous or specious, with those committing large scale crimes just need to be sensitive to those on the other side. And, they ARE going to suffer some consequences for not better “policing” those within their broader community–just as the Catholics didn’t commit the crimes, they didn’t do much to prevent them. You really don’t see a whole lot of ostrizicing (sp) of Al Queda from the Muslin community. Yes, there is some lip service to it, but not the kind of rejection and isolation that clearly places the group in a dead beat dog house, so to speak.

4. For the reason that a decent person, in consideration of the feelings of others would not do something that causes others great distress. Building mosques in the US does not cause great distress, so the point is not that “Oh, are you saying no mosques should be built in the US?” I am sure many mosques have been built or opened in the US since 9/11 and no one had a problem with it. It is this specific mosque in this specific location. Withholding yourself from doing something you can do out of consideration for the affect on others is a point of personal honor.

5. No one has objected to whatever they have been doing in this location. And not likely anyone would object to them continuing doing it. But, the current facility and activity compared with a $100 million project are very, very different. In my town, no one would object to a small store front being put near the beach. But, they would have a total objection to a huge discount store being put there.

6. The government is able to regulate land use and that is a well known and well established function. People object to “how” they regulate it but almost never to ‘that’ they regulate it. That is not the question here. Churches are denied the special land use permits to build churches or church facilities all the time. In my town, at least two such projects have been denied in the last 10 years.

But, the question is not should the government say yes or no. Nearly all people know the Iman has the right to build his mosque there. The question is whether it is good judgment to build it there.

And, people have a right to protest it and work against it. They have a right to protest any damn thing they please whether war, high taxes, police brutality, sex ed in schools or any damn thing they don’t like.

It’s sacred to right wingers because it is the foundation of their manipulative scare tactics designed to intimidate the sheeple into compliance with their malignant world view.

In f*cking big type on the cover of a major ‘news’ magazine, too.
As if they don’t know exactly what the building plan is.

(I’m going to add, slightly OT, that at least one of the major supermarket tabloids is pushing the ‘Obama is a seekrit Muslim from Kenya’ meme. They’re pushing it really hard, as I’ve seen it on their cover twice in the last month.)

Also, using publicly-funded parking and traffic control around megachurches on weekends. Or allowing megachurches at all (especially when they don’t require adequate parking for their six weekend and two midweek services).

And the Cordoba center, having followed the law and gotten permission from the planners IN THE COMMUNITY to build this community center, which will be open to everyone in the community, now are allowed by law to build the community center, which happens to include a room that will be used as a mosque, just like the World Trade Center did.

The building is not, despite all the wingnut screaming and posturing, a mosque. It was never intended to be a mosque. And all the talk about being sensitive to the people who lost family members misses the point that a lot of the people who died in the WTC that day were Muslims.

1. Since the proposed site for the Park51 worship space is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero, why do you keep calling it the “Ground Zero Mosque”?

The Building was hit by an airplane’s landing-gear assembly, which crashed through the roof during the attack. The building has been unoccupied ever since. It qualifies as Ground Zero on that basis alone.

2. What precisely is an acceptable distance from the former site of the World Trade Center for Muslims to practice their religion? (Terms like “so close” or “in the shadow of” or “steps away” are obviously subjective.)

Irrelevant. The current location is inappropriate, that is the only issue before us.

3. Is there a difference between violent Islamic extremists and mainstream Muslims?

Yes

4. If your answer to #3 is “yes,” why is there an objection to Muslims practicing their religion in Lower Manhattan?

I don’t object to their practicing their faith in lower Manhattan. I object to a well funded radical who refuses to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization from erecting a Victory Mosque at Ground Zero under any circumstances let alone the pretense its an interfaith cultural center or some other such blather as “useful idiots” (Lenin) like pro GZM liberals are peddling to the public.

5. Since Muslims have been holding religious services at Park51 for over a year, should they be stopped?

Yes, it was not zoned nor approved for such activities to begin with. We do not reward unlawful behavior with a building permit under normal circumstances. Please review your incongruous inquiry with actual facts:

The city’s Department of Buildings records show the building has been the focus of complaints for illegal construction and blocked exits in the last year. Recent entries from Sept. 28 and 29, 2009, indicate inspectors have been unable to access thebuilding. One complaint states, “Inspector unable to gain access – 1st attempt – No access to 5 sty building . Front locked. No responsible party present.” The second, just a day later, states, “Inspector unable to gain access – 2nd attempt – no access tobuilding. No activity or responsible party. Building remains inaccessible at Park Place.”

So who exactly has been practicing there for the last year and under what color of law or color of legal authority?

6. As Park51 is private property, are you in favor of the government regulating how the space is utilized?

I’m in favor of the current Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court which at this time requires an answer in the affirmative. Yes, currently, the government has an ABSOLUTE right to regulate how the space is utilized.

Church and synagogue zoning variances and building permits are rejected daily across the USA….are you saying anybody can build anything anywhere they want?

The way you ask the question is Obamesque, you are confusing the right to build with the right to worship….which are two very different things. You should try reading the law sometimes so your questions don’t come across as sophomoric. The power to determine how land can be utilized is controlled by local zoning ordinances. The local zoning/landmark authority gave the Mosque a green light. No problem there. So your question is academic.

So the issue is not one of law, as your question implies, it is a question of propriety and peaceful coexistence. If people interpret the building of the Mosque as a deliberate sign of disrespect, as the victims families appear to do….then a strong and severe push back, can and should, be expected.

Just because something can be built doesn’t mean it should be built. N’est pas?

Americans have a right to protest its construction and its utilization as a Mosque for every day of its construction and existence. You don’t have a problem with free speech and lawful peaceful protests do you? I didn’t think so.

I think a British writer once said “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.”

Mosque, Muslim center, etc. They add up to the same concept and reason for opposition.

Was the Catholic nuns building a prayer chapel, a dormatory or something else? did it matter?

My teacher told me either one was OK, as long as I knew what I meant. We don’t point out mistakes anymore, you know; fragile self esteem and all.

2. What precisely is an acceptable distance from the former site of the World Trade Center for Muslims to practice their religion? (Terms like “so close” or “in the shadow of” or “steps away” are obviously subjective.)

Irrelevant. The current location is inappropriate, that is the only issue before us.

This really says it all. Such rock-solid reasoning. You declare it “inappropriate” — just because — therefore it is.

Well, that’s pretty much what Sarah Palin and every other wingnut is saying. Mosques just give you people a frowny face.

Everyone all together now…

:(

It fascinates me that when it comes to nature, liberals believe if we interfere in the least, we will ruin it. When it comes to human affairs like the economy why, we must manage it like it was a Bonsai tree. Maybe we should tread lightly with both?

Glen Beck? I work and don’t hear his shtick so, if we share traits, perhaps we shared a womb and were separated at birth?

Too bad the anti-mosque people can’t see that the mosgue could actually be a sign of respect from Islam concerning 9-11.

So, you are saying that capitalism is not groomed in any way by corporations or the MOTU?

Well, if the intent of the Imam is to establsih a more positive view by Americans of the muslim faith, the distance would be that which annoys a minimal number of Americans. Probably a good twenty blocks should do it.

If the Imam’s intent is a stick in the eye, I think he found a good spot.

Face it, the PR sucks and supporters are out of touch. If they were smart they would have proposed an interfaith center and gotten support from the clergy of other faiths.

or perhaps all of the Xtians opposed to the mosque should read up on the teaching of Jesus.

I am sensitive to hypocricy. And I am sensitive to lazy and superficial thinking. First time on the site and the labels are flying. One of my critics challanges where I got a statistic from and I provide the source. They then deride the source. I then noticed the same statistic on the news story on the subject issue right here on your site.

It seems many here wish to ping-pong the same old liberal/progressive dribble drabble back and forth to each other.

Anywho, I am enjoying interacting with your band in its natural setting.

So we won’t have to find it, enlighten us specifically on what Jesus taught us on his support for building places of worship for other faiths. Let us know how he came down on Fatwas ordering killing people while you are at it.

And who supports corporations? The large State and Federal Govts.? Aren’t they (corps) defined as a creation of the State?

Much of what we want from the Govt. sounds good on paper but people are people and they corrupt so easily. Corps and Govt, officials are in each other’s pockets. Recognize that, don’t let individuals and groups amass power and we could legitimately claim to be free.

MOTU? Are you in to He-Man?

Let’s see. A woman says that a co-worker’s statement to her is “inappropriate.” Well, I guess that’s wrong. She shouldn’t complain because it is “just because” therefore it is.

She has to do better than, “it’s inappropriate,” “it affects my work” (according to who? you ask her).

I think a great definition of wingnut is someone who refuses to understand that the center near ground zero is about as appropriate as a Jewish temple near the Shrine in Mecca.

It’s called, you can do it, but have some regard for people’s feeling. Now, I realize that you and others like the ‘finger in the eye’ aspect of this.

On the other hand, I see you standing up for people of religious faith and their rights all the time, so that could not possibly be the motivation.

It’s a good thing this mosque doesn’t glorify George Bush or the Blue Texan would be running it out of town on a rail with a swift kick in the arse and a good wad of spit in the face–rights or no rights.

It’s a piece of real estate. Life has to go on.

…glorify George Bush…

For that, we have a wrecked planet.
So there’s that.

In the spirit of political compromise, I say we give them this:

Because 9/11 happened and Americans died and family members survived and those family members want a more sensitive location for the mosque

as long as we can have this

The Iraq War happened and people died and family members survived so the asshats that ginned up this war on false pretenses – Bush, Cheney, Kristol’s PNAC, Wolfowitz, Perle – should be allowed to be in the Unites States but banned from Washington forever as there presence is an insult and as an accommodation to those of us who survived family and friends who died in Iraq.

The government is supposed to be neutral as to religion.

In your scenario, that woman is complaining about a co-worker wearing an Islamic crescent pin, and otherwise, minding his own business.

Her assertion that it’s “inappropriate” a) doesn’t mean it is; and b) says more about her than the person she’s accusing of inappropriate behavior.

Also, with your Jewish temple example, you’re conflating mainstream Islam with the radical variety, and conflating an inherently religious, sectarian site with a crime scene where the victims were of all nationalities and religions — including Muslims.

Have a nice day.

Congratulations BT

You seemed to have brought out more of teh stoopid, teh ignorant, and teh intolerant in this thread than I’ve seen in quite some time.

I know that wasn’t your goal, but dayem!!!! Did we get a real dose of the shit or what.

I actually started to sit and answer each point in each post, then thought, why???

Probably best to just leave teh stoopid out there, unfettered, for all to see. Nothing like sunshine and fresh air on a pile of shit to eventually take away the smell.

Oh well, this particular example is so smelly it deserved a little attention.

Well, if the intent of the Imam is to establsih a more positive view by Americans of the muslim faith, the distance would be that which annoys a minimal number of Americans. Probably a good twenty blocks should do it.

If the Imam’s intent is a stick in the eye, I think he found a good spot.

So you and you alone get to define the Imam’s intent? Suppose his intent wasn’t to establish a more positive view by Americans of the muslim faith AND it wasn’t a stick in the eye. Suppose the Imam’s intent was just to build in a location that was convinient for those using the center. I know, I know, that sounds like a really stupid reason for picking a location, but believe it or not Einstien some folks use illogical reasoning like that.

And while we’re on the subject. Suppose it were a Jewish center being proposed go there. Are you going to protest that just as loudly or do you admit your beef is with the Islam faith itself? Because no matter how many times you scream “BUT ALL OF THE 9/11 PERPS WERE MUSLIMS” doesn’t indict the entire religion any more than the fact that all the perpetrators of Oklahamo City were right wingers indicts all right wingers.

Or would you support Oklahoma City having a ban on all organization associated with the right wing. Which includes the Republican Party. Since, you know, if the purpose of the Republican Party in Oklahoma City was to provide a more positive view of right wingers they would obviously relocate away from all of that death and destruction.

But if their purpose was a stick in the eye. HA! Right wingers killed all those children and we’re sticking a stick in your eye by being here everyday! Well then, they succeeded.

At least, according to your unshakable logic.

Oh, I’m always having a nice day. I noticed you never answered my answer to your 6 questions.

The truth remains that they only reason you are so hepped up on this is that you perceive it sticks it to people on the other side of the fence from you. If the mosque had been intended to show something supportive of anything you disagree with, you’d be right out there pushing to get it out of New York. And upper Manhattan would not be far enough for you.

Such are your “principles.”

You know, if the people of Oklahoma decided that having a GOP office near the old Fed building site would cause them pain, I’d say, “OK, let’s do it somewhere else.”

I would get into some asinine argument with them about, “Well, Tim McVeigh was not part of the GOP and blah, blah, blah.” I’d just say, OK, we’ll do it somewhere else if it stirs it up too much for you. End of story.

That’s consideration. That’s human kindness. That’s good judgment.

1. Since the proposed site for the Park51 worship space is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero, …why do you keep calling it the “Ground Zero Mosque”?
A: While 2 blocks is pretty far, the Mosque can be seen from Ground Zero. I prefer referring to it as the “Mosque near Ground Zero.”

2. What precisely is an acceptable distance from the former site of the World Trade Center for Muslims to practice their religion? (Terms like “so close” or “in the shadow of” or “steps away” are obviously subjective.)
A: Not sure where the cutoff point would be, but I’m thinking further away than a building where landing gear from one of the hijacked planes landed: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h25pThz7AHPTQM8-tl2NRsuEUk_QD9HGS4D03

3. Is there a difference between violent Islamic extremists and mainstream Muslims?
A: ABSOLUTELY! …and even moderate, mainstream Muslims disagree with building the Mosque here: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Mischief+Manhattan/3370303/story.html

4. If your answer to #3 is “yes,” why is there an objection to Muslims practicing their religion in Lower Manhattan?
A: I have no objection…just find the building of the Mosque to be a tad insensitive. Build away!

5. Since Muslims have been holding religious services at Park51 for over a year, should they be stopped?
A: Nope. You are an idiot if you beleive this.

6. As Park51 is private property, are you in favor of the government regulating how the space is utilized?
A: Nope.

Consideration. Human kindness. Good judgement.

Let’s see.

This organization is in no way associated with 9/11.

This association is full of ordinary Americans just going through life like the rest of us, and looking for a place to get together.

And they most certainly aren’t hurting anybody or anybody’s property.

So, yeah, sounds to me like consideration, human kindness, and good judgement means allowing these American citizens the community center they want so badly.

And dood, btw, you’d be wrong on both accounts.

Indicting entire organizations because of the acts of a few is always wrong.

But feel free to continue to be wrong. And when you do, you then have no right to complain when someone in a group that you happened to be affiliated with does something if some want to hold you accountable. I’ll await with bated breath to hear how your’re happy to be the scapegoat for someone else’s acts and you’ll gladly make any changes necessary, even ones you’d rather not make, because of the acts of someone else.

Please link me to that when the day comes. After all, you’re not a kermit and live in a cave with no interaction do you? Suppose you work for BP?? Hmm, since BP destroyed the gulf it’s YOUR FAULT!!

Sell your house, give the proceeds to the Gulf Relief Effort.

Yeah, that’s fair.

1. Since the proposed site for the Park51 worship space is 2 blocks away from Ground Zero, why do you keep calling it the “Ground Zero Mosque”?

The reason Park51/Burlington Coat Factory is vacant, and thus available for this use, is that it was damaged by a piece of wreckage (a landing gear assembly) from one of the planes used. It is an integral part of “Ground Zero” (although, wingnut that I am, I find that usage objectionable; you might try to figure out why)

A better name would be “Dome of the Rock of New York”. It fits the purpose of the project precisely.

2. What precisely is an acceptable distance from the former site of the World Trade Center for Muslims to practice their religion? (Terms like “so close” or “in the shadow of” or “steps away” are obviously subjective.)

The distance is irrelevant, as you knew when you formulated the question so beautifully. What is objectionable is the triumphalist attitude you admire so much.

3. Is there a difference between violent Islamic extremists and mainstream Muslims?

Some. It’s growing less all the time, as you and your like-minded “thinkers” hand the violent ones more and more triumphs to crow about. Moslems, especially Arab Moslems, are the world’s champions at trying to discern and ally themselves with the “strong horse”. I estimate that when this project goes through, it will reduce the number of “moderate” (i.e., not aligned with al-Qaida or the Taliban) Moslems by approximately 40%.

4. If your answer to #3 is “yes,” why is there an objection to Muslims practicing their religion in Lower Manhattan?

There isn’t, and never has been, any such objection. (Note in particular flag “G”, “Masjid Manhattan”. Do you know what a “masjid” might be?) Makes a nice issue for you to demagogue, though, since it exists only inside your skull.

5. Since Muslims have been holding religious services at Park51 for over a year, should they be stopped?

The issue hasn’t come up, nor should it. (See above.) Too bad the parishioners of St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church aren’t receiving the same consideration, don’t you think?

6. As Park51 is private property, are you in favor of the government regulating how the space is utilized?

“…worship is virtually the only activity that may not locate anywhere in those municipalities without first applying to and receiving permission from zoning officials, who operate with the power to deny permission for any reason or no reason…” (a href=”http://libertyworks.com/obamas-religious-rights-sanctimony/”>Libertyworks.com)

But no, I’m not in favor — I am, in general, opposed to most zoning regulations, especially the Byzantine sort found in NYC, the purpose of which is to allow officials to lean on property owners for “political contributions”. Nor do I know of anyone in either the mainstream or the Tea Party right who has proposed Government intervention.

I do reserve the right to tell them they’re being triumphalist a*holes who deliberately chose the site for maximum offense to the maximum number of non-Moslems in minimum time, which they — and you — are.

Regards,
Ric

HTML fail: Libertyworks.com. Next time I’ll use the “link” button, I promise.

The distance is irrelevant, as you knew when you formulated the question so beautifully.

If the distance is “irrelevant” — why do conservative leaders keep citing it’s supposed proximity as the reason they oppose it?