If crimes "begin and end with the criminals who commit them,"....

[sangha]

They killed another Christian in Egypt today. How many think it would be cool for us to fly airplanes into the pyraminds and erect a big Christian Church on the site? Raise your hand!

So now you're comparing one of the eight wonders of the world with the twin towers? More worryingly, you are comparing a 3rd world shithole's morals/mores/norms with that of the USA. How does that feel?

The site of the WTC is hallowed ground, just like where the USS Arizona sunk. There are remains of Americans brutally killed in both of those places.

It deserves the same reverence, decency, and respect.

The mosque is located at the hallowed ground that used be known as The Burlington Coat Factory, just a few doors down from the sacred Pussycat Lounge

I've worshiped at both locations.

 

[sangha]

You know, when bodies get mixed up at Arlington, the military haters are out in force with all of their "respect for the dead" lip service.

When you ask them for a little decency and respect in a place where human tissue was flying out of destroyed aircraft on the buildings below as far as far as jet parts, they can't deal with that.

rightwingers can't help but politicize the deaths of innocents

It's the decent and respectful thing to do

 

[sangha]

So, how much stand off does Ground Zero get?

And do we limit any new buildings (short of a monument) or just the religions that offend us personally.

If a legitimate group of survivors families asks for respect, then a religion of peace should honor that.

If they don't, then they're offensive assholes.

They are not asking to clear out all of lower Manhattan of mosques.

What is legitimate?

What about the families who said they didn't mind or even supported the mosque?

I guess the families of the Muslim victims who wanted the mosque to be built arent legitimate. In wingnuts mind, they probably helped plan the attack that killed their loved one.

 

[sangha]

than why the outrage over the Mosque at Ground Zero?

What are you parsing?

What POINT are you trying to relay?

You are MIXING events.

As to the Mosque genius?

The American people have an aversion to allowing the RELIGION of the KILLERS from that day holding SACRED GROUND.

Or aren't you that fucking bright and showing your lackluster brillience at being a Statist moron?

The sad thing is, the greater the mental illness, the less likely they will seek help

 

[NYcarbineer]

1.) The 9/11 attack was not solely a crime, it was not even primarily a crime, it was an act of war.

2.) Preventing your eneimy in war from gaining a tool they can use against you is the province of the government.

3.) The propoganda value to AQ of a mosque being built at that location in their war against us outstrips anyones right to build a mosque there, unless of course you think property rights somehow extend so far as to allow a person tp provide aid and comfort to the enemy in war, whether or not that's the intention of the provider. (it is subjective and it is a judgement call)

There is no propaganda value to building the mosque there, the moderate Muslim imam is reviled by the extremists.

If there were propaganda value that superseded the religious rights of Americans, then you could apply to any mosque anywhere,

which, effectively, would end religious freedom in America. Somehow, I fear, a lot of people like you aren't particularly troubled by that contingency.

 

[sangha]

You cannot apply vicarious liability to one group and not to another, Missourian.

That is why I have said Revere puts himself into a pretzel shape.

What group did Loughner belong to?

He was an American, and evidentially had some interest in politics.

All americans with an interest in politics should leave Tuscon

It's the decent and respectful thing to do

 

[Dr Grump]

I think in his twisted mind denying the killers the privilege of building a mosque to establish Muslim dominance over Western culture at ground zero is the same as demolishing a mosque that already exists.

I guess. It's sick and twisted, but I think that's it.

Grump is a sad, hateful little bigot. I'd like to say he grows on you with time, but except in the sense that a fungus or viral infection grows, it just isn't true.

If a picture dictionary ever had somebody as their poster person for the word 'ignorant', Allie would be there with her shit eating grin. You would be one of the most bigotted, hateful, uneducated, ignorant asses on this board - which is saying something when you have the likes of Mr T, Gautama and USArmyretired around. I won't even start on the Pretend Rabbi or Revere.

No, in my mind, I'm wondering why, in a country where its right-wing uber neocons are always spouting on about the constitution, 'live free or die" and all the other patriotic, flag waving bullshit, that what you really mean is, that those "morals" only apply to 'real' Americans. THAT's what I mean. Because we all know that Muslims - whether they were born in the US or not - aren't really Americans, are they Allie Baby...

Because you know, the elephant in the room; the one thing that nobody says because shouts of "Bullshit" from the neocon peanut gallery chime in the ear like a bad bout of tinnitus, is that trailer trash like yourself and Palin don't want the mosque built there because you hate Muslims - in fact you hate anything or anybody that doesn't fit your White, Christian, 2.5 kids, pick fence, no premarital sex, gun totting view of the world. And when I talk about Muslims, I'm not just talking about the terrorists, I'm talking about every single one of them - the majority of which are just trying to get by like you and I. You hate their guts and if you had your way every single one of them would be kicked out of 'your' country so you can live in your little "Utopia"...

 

[sangha]

I think in his twisted mind denying the killers the privilege of building a mosque to establish Muslim dominance over Western culture at ground zero is the same as demolishing a mosque that already exists.

I guess. It's sick and twisted, but I think that's it.

Grump is a sad, hateful little bigot. I'd like to say he grows on you with time, but except in the sense that a fungus or viral infection grows, it just isn't true.

If a picture dictionary ever had somebody as their poster person for the word 'ignorant', Allie would be there with her shit eating grin. You would be one of the most bigotted, hateful, uneducated, ignorant asses on this board - which is saying something when you have the likes of Mr T, Gautama and USArmyretired around. I won't even start on the Pretend Rabbi or Revere.

No, in my mind, I'm wondering why, in a country where its right-wing uber neocons are always spouting on about the constitution, 'life free or die" and all the other patriotic, flag waving bullshit, that what you really mean, is that those "morals" only apply to 'real' Americans. THAT's what I mean. Because we all know that Muslims - whether they were born in the US or not - aren't really Americans, are they Allie Baby...

Because you know, the elephant in the room; the one thing that nobody says because shouts of "Bullshit" from the neocon peanut gallery chime in the ear like a bad bout of tinnitus, is that trailer trash like yourself and Palin don't want the mosque built there because you hate Muslims - in fact you hate anything or anybody that doesn't fit your White, Christian, 2.5 kids, pick fence, no premarital sex, gun totting view of the world. And when I talk about Muslims, I'm not just talking about the terrorists, I'm talking about every single one of them - the majority of which are just trying to get by like you and I. You hate their guts and if you had your way every single one of them would be kicked out of 'your' country so you can live in your little "Utopia"...

Yep. Their hate is not limited to the muslims. They practice an ideology of hate

 

[Dr Grump]

Oh come on Madeline, of all people, YOU should understand this issue.
Here's a question for you:

If someone were to propose tearing down Auschwitz or the Holocaust memorial and replacing it with an "earth-friendly German car dealership"....How would you react?

Come come now...Be truthful.

What a crappy analogy. Come on now, be truthful. You're comparing a place of religion that is not even at Ground Zero with Auschwitz and a car dealership?

<walks about shaking head>

 

[BenNatuf]

1.) The 9/11 attack was not solely a crime, it was not even primarily a crime, it was an act of war.

2.) Preventing your eneimy in war from gaining a tool they can use against you is the province of the government.

3.) The propoganda value to AQ of a mosque being built at that location in their war against us outstrips anyones right to build a mosque there, unless of course you think property rights somehow extend so far as to allow a person tp provide aid and comfort to the enemy in war, whether or not that's the intention of the provider. (it is subjective and it is a judgement call)

There is no propaganda value to building the mosque there, the moderate Muslim imam is reviled by the extremists.

completely irreevant, they don't care who builds it, a mosque is a modsque is a mosque. The Muslims in it can be as appostate and reviled as they want to be... it's still a mosque in the Muslim tradition of building mosques at the site of great victories over the infidel. That is all that will matter.

If there were propaganda value that superseded the religious rights of Americans, then you could apply to any mosque anywhere,

completely false red herring. A Mosques built somewhere besides ground Zero or overlooking ground Zero is just a mosque, not a testament to Allah's great victory.

which, effectively, would end religious freedom in America. Somehow, I fear, a lot of people like you aren't particularly troubled by that contingency.

I defend religious liberty of all types, the question here is not about religious liberty, it's about property rights and how far they extend. Whether there is or is not a mosque built there will not stop, inhibit or aid one single Muslim in the practice of their religion. Personally, I am very libertarian in my view of property rights, but even given that I have to say that when those rights are claimed to do a thing which will provide aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war, they are not a right at all. That does not preclude a mosque from ever being built there, and does not preclude any mosque from being built anywhere else.

I recognize that the ammount of benefit the enemy will get from it is relevant to the decission of whether it tips the balance. IMO it does, and that of course is a subjective call which anyone is free to disagree with; however, to deny the benefit to the enemy en todo is just to be willfully blind to the reality of it.

 

[sangha]

completelty irreevant, they don't care who builds it, a mosque is a modsque is a mosque. The Muslims in it can be as appostate and reviled as they want to be... it's still a mosque in the Muslim tradition of building mosques at the site of great victories over the infidel. That is all that will matter.

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

 

[Dr Grump]

which, effectively, would end religious freedom in America. Somehow, I fear, a lot of people like you aren't particularly troubled by that contingency.I defend religious liberty of all types, the question here is not about religious liberty, it's about property rights and how far they extend. Whether there is or is not a mosque built there will not stop, inhibit or aid one single Muslim in the practice of their religion. Persona;;y, I am very libertarian in my view of property rights, but even given that I have to say that when those rights are claimed to to a thing which will provide aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war, they are not a right at all. That does not preclude a mosque from ever being built there, and does not preclude any mosque from being built anywhere else.

I recognize that the ammount of benefit the enemy will get from it is relevant to the decission of whether it tips the balance. IMO it does, and that of course is a subjective call which anyone is free to disagree with; however, to deny the benefit to the enemy en todo is just to be willfully blind to the reality of it.

1) Are the people building the mosque 'the' enemy?
2) If the Westboro church picket the funeral of the nine year old girl who was killed in Arizona, are they representing all Christians?
3) The mosque was zoned to be built well before 9-11.
4) It is not at ground zero, it is two blocks away
5) Using your analogy, we would have to sit down every time we decided to do something and think about if our actions would give benefit to some anarchistic/terrorist third party - who might be just like us, but with a different set of mores and values - about whether we should carry out the action. IOW, you are basically stating, because Muslims carried out the attacks on 9-11, then any other Muslim who is going about their business legitimately not only should be open to scrutiny, but should in fact be stopped going about their lawful business because it might provide comfort to some other group of people who have nothing in common with them except their religion (see my Westboro church analogy)..

Terrible precident to set IMO...

 

[BenNatuf]

completelty irreevant, they don't care who builds it, a mosque is a modsque is a mosque. The Muslims in it can be as appostate and reviled as they want to be... it's still a mosque in the Muslim tradition of building mosques at the site of great victories over the infidel. That is all that will matter.

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

Is that the depth of your argument? Do you know why the Imam chose the building? You are aware that it's being hit on 9/11 was a factor in his decission right? You do know the signifficance of it originnally being the "cordova project" right? Are you aware of Muslim tradition in building Mosques at the site of great victories for Allah? Do you have any idea what that will mean to our enemies, what they could do with it, and why we closed and deported shinto priests who had a shrine near one of the sites attacked in 1942?

 

[Dr Grump]

completelty irreevant, they don't care who builds it, a mosque is a modsque is a mosque. The Muslims in it can be as appostate and reviled as they want to be... it's still a mosque in the Muslim tradition of building mosques at the site of great victories over the infidel. That is all that will matter.

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

Is that the depth of your argument? Do you know why the Imam chose the building? You are aware that it's being hit on 9/11 was a factor in his decission right? You do know the signifficance of it originnally being the "cordova project" right? Are you aware of Muslim tradition in building Mosques at the site of great victories for Allah? Do you have any idea what that will mean to our enemies, what they could do with it, and why we closed and deported shinto priests who had a shrine near one of the sites attacked in 1942?

Links please.

BTW, just as a side note. If I was to click on your name and check out what forums you post in, they wouldn't be Conspiracy Theory ones would they? If so, I'll bow out now...

 

[sangha]

completelty irreevant, they don't care who builds it, a mosque is a modsque is a mosque. The Muslims in it can be as appostate and reviled as they want to be... it's still a mosque in the Muslim tradition of building mosques at the site of great victories over the infidel. That is all that will matter.

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

Is that the depth of your argument? Do you know why the Imam chose the building? You are aware that it's being hit on 9/11 was a factor in his decission right? You do know the signifficance of it originnally being the "cordova project" right? Are you aware of Muslim tradition in building Mosques at the site of great victories for Allah? Do you have any idea what that will mean to our enemies, what they could do with it, and why we closed and deported shinto priests who had a shrine near one of the sites attacked in 1942?

So you have no information about a muslim victory at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory?

Could you at least tell me if I can still worship at the Pussycat Lounge or have the taken over that hallowed ground too?

 

[BenNatuf]

which, effectively, would end religious freedom in America. Somehow, I fear, a lot of people like you aren't particularly troubled by that contingency.I defend religious liberty of all types, the question here is not about religious liberty, it's about property rights and how far they extend. Whether there is or is not a mosque built there will not stop, inhibit or aid one single Muslim in the practice of their religion. Persona;;y, I am very libertarian in my view of property rights, but even given that I have to say that when those rights are claimed to to a thing which will provide aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war, they are not a right at all. That does not preclude a mosque from ever being built there, and does not preclude any mosque from being built anywhere else.

I recognize that the ammount of benefit the enemy will get from it is relevant to the decission of whether it tips the balance. IMO it does, and that of course is a subjective call which anyone is free to disagree with; however, to deny the benefit to the enemy en todo is just to be willfully blind to the reality of it.

1) Are the people building the mosque 'the' enemy?

has little or no relevance on whether our enemies will be able to use the mosque to instill moral in their fighters and secondarily as a recruiting tool.

2) If the Westboro church picket the funeral of the nine year old girl who was killed in Arizona, are they representing all Christians?

Are we at war with any Christian organizations who can use those protests against us?

3) The mosque was zoned to be built well before 9-11.

false

4) It is not at ground zero, it is two blocks away

tell that to the Imam who siad when he purchased the building that one of the reasons he liked it as the site was because it had been hit on 9/11

5) Using your analogy, we would have to sit down every time we decided to do something and think about if our actions would give benefit to some anarchistic/terrorist third party - who might be just like us, but with a different set of mores and values - about whether we should carry out the action. IOW, you are basically stating, because Muslims carried out the attacks on 9-11, then any other Muslim who is going about their business legitimately not only should be open to scrutiny, but should in fact be stopped going about their lawful business because it might provide comfort to some other group of people who have nothing in common with them except their religion (see my Westboro church analogy)..

complete BS. We are not at war with any anarchist terrorist organizations, we are at war with AQ, it supporters and it affiliates. We should look at how thing may or may not provide our enemy in war with a tool to use against us, and the criteria should be a high hurdle. That is nothing more the being prudent. The law is pretty clear that a person is responsible for the consequences of their actions even if the consequence is unintended. Given that fact, this mosque at this location at this time will have unintended consequences regardless of what the owner intends. That should be a factor, and as I have said it is completely subjective as to whether or not anyone believes the aid and comfort the enemy will get from this mosque being built tips the balance on the rights issue. All rights are subject to such balance, they always have been, they always will be. If you use your "rights" in such a way that by consequence you provide aid and comfort to the enemy ther should be a judgement made as to whether the aid and comfort the enemy recieves outweighs the exorcize of those rights. Because no-one's rights extend som far that they would permit a person to provide aid and comfort to an enemy in war.

Terrible precident to set IMO...

It wouldn't be a precedent, it would be the same thing we did in HI with the Shinto shrine.

 

[Dr Grump]

BenNatuf

More than happy to carry on discussion once you provide link on:
1) The site was purchased post 9-11
2) The Iman responsible bought it for the reason you stated.
3) I believe you are either lying, or your 'source' is less than credible...

 

[BenNatuf]

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

Is that the depth of your argument? Do you know why the Imam chose the building? You are aware that it's being hit on 9/11 was a factor in his decission right? You do know the signifficance of it originnally being the "cordova project" right? Are you aware of Muslim tradition in building Mosques at the site of great victories for Allah? Do you have any idea what that will mean to our enemies, what they could do with it, and why we closed and deported shinto priests who had a shrine near one of the sites attacked in 1942?

Links please.

BTW, just as a side note. If I was to click on your name and check out what forums you post in, they wouldn't be Conspiracy Theory ones would they? If so, I'll bow out now...

I will have to dig up the link, but I can assure you we did deport Shinto preists in HI who had a shrine near one of the attacks and closed down the shrine. They reopenned it after the war.

Link to your hearts content, I only post in one other board regularly and the nick is B' en Natuf (wouldn't take the accent and space here). I think conspiracy nutters are nuts. Not5 a Birther, not a troofer, not even a fan of Uncle Goofy (WronG Paul).

 

[BenNatuf]

What great victory did the muslims acheive at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory? I ask because I'm concerned that they may have taken over the Pussycat Lounge, two door down.

I worship there regularly

Is that the depth of your argument? Do you know why the Imam chose the building? You are aware that it's being hit on 9/11 was a factor in his decission right? You do know the signifficance of it originnally being the "cordova project" right? Are you aware of Muslim tradition in building Mosques at the site of great victories for Allah? Do you have any idea what that will mean to our enemies, what they could do with it, and why we closed and deported shinto priests who had a shrine near one of the sites attacked in 1942?

So you have no information about a muslim victory at the sacred Burlington Coat Factory?

Could you at least tell me if I can still worship at the Pussycat Lounge or have the taken over that hallowed ground too?

The reasons the Imam building it gave aren't enough? Honestly, if this the depth of your "debate" it's pretty damned weak.

 

[Dr Grump]

]complete BS. We are not at war with any anarchist terrorist organizations, we are at war with AQ, it supporters and it affiliates. We should look at how thing may or may not provide our enemy in war with a tool to use against us, and the criteria should be a high hurdle. That is nothing more the being prudent. The law is pretty clear that a person is responsible for the consequences of their actions even if the consequence is unintended. Given that fact, this mosque at this location at this time will have unintended consequences regardless of what the owner intends. That should be a factor, and as I have said it is completely subjective as to whether or not anyone believes the aid and comfort the enemy will get from this mosque being built tips the balance on the rights issue. All rights are subject to such balance, they always have been, they always will be. If you use your "rights" in such a way that by consequence you provide aid and comfort to the enemy ther should be a judgement made as to whether the aid and comfort the enemy recieves outweighs the exorcize of those rights. Because no-one's rights extend som far that they would permit a person to provide aid and comfort to an enemy in war..

Total utter crap. If you believe that then you could say that about any mosque, or any muslim, in the country. So if the NY Times show pictures of Muslims walking near or around ground zero, would that be giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

What you are doing here is letting the terrorists win. They are now calling the shots on what legitimate Muslims and American citizens can now do. Do you really want that?