Plan for Mosque III...

[dosed150]

This whole thing reminds me of that whole hullabaloo about the NRA convention being hosted near Columbine a few weeks after the shootings.

john stewart actually mentioned this, had a video of charlton heston speaking about people opposing the nra conference in denver, and it applied to this situation quite well, then john stewart called himelf at the time an idiot for being one of the people charlton heston was talking about

 

[MobBoss]

You oath (defend the constitution) also includes freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly. And of respecting private property.

May I remind you that some of your fellow soldiers are Muslim, and some are buried in Arlington National Cemetary. Some of the 3,000 innocent workers and NYC citizens who died were Muslim. Some of the firefighters who bravely went into the WTC to save people, were, guess what, Muslim.

Why is that pertinent?
Don't make me answer. It should be obvious.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be draped in a flag'

Jesus, now those exercising their right to free speech are faschists?

Amazing.

 

[MobBoss]

Technically voluntary, but still wrong on the part of those who started it. I can annoy my neighbor enough to make him move, that doesn't mean I should.

Having moved because of bad neighbors, I can roundly asset moving was the best damn thing I did. Made my and my families life immediately better.

No, it is ridiculous.

Then we are simply going to have to disagree on that.

Legal =/= right.

Which brings us back to the mosque. Simply because it is legal doest make it right. Glad you agree with me that legal =/= right since I have been saying that for awhile now.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Jesus, now those exercising their right to free speech are faschists?

Amazing.

do you think this is genuine spontaneous opposition, or has it been stirred by politicians on either side?

 

[Tacitusitis]

They do have that right. But to use free speech to try to beat down freedom of religion is a terrible abuse of that right. It disappoints me that so many of my fellow citizens are doing it.

/thread, A+ VRWC

Now that the mosque opponents have started saying things like "They are building the next terrorist command center right next to the WTC" they have lost every right to be heard.

By all means, keep speaking freely, but GTFO my TV. You can rage against "the evil Islamic cult" within the walls of your crazy Jesus-Snake-believing churches.

I'm done with this thread.

 

[MobBoss]

do you think this is genuine spontaneous opposition, or has it been stirred by politicians on either side?

Considering that a majority of democrats, independents and republicans are all against the idea of it being build so close to Ground Zero, I am going to have to go with spontaneous. Opposition to this has wide bipartisan support.

/thread, A+ VRWC

Well, at least VRWCAgent is making the lefties happy with his comments.

Me...I am a bit more consistent than that.

Now that the mosque opponents have started saying things like "They are building the next terrorist command center right next to the WTC" they have lost every right to be heard.

Because 1 idiot comment automatically disqualifies the whole shebang right?

Yeah...right.

 

[Tacitusitis]

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

"Go home," several shouted from the crowd.

"Get out," others shouted.

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

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

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

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

Then we stopped you JUST IN TIME!

Naw, naw, I'm done with this thread.

 

[MobBoss]

Then we stopped you JUST IN TIME!

Naw, naw, I'm done with this thread.

Yup...sounds like that mosque is really bringing peace isnt it?

Or maybe this was the plan the entire time?

 

[useless]

It's actually the bigoted and somewhat racist views of the people that were opposing the building, during that specific protest that disrupted the "peace".

Obviously the Muslims want to be abused, much like women who wear clothes conservatives disagree!

 

[Defiant47]

MobBoss, you seem to repeatedly fail at making the distinction between FACTS and VALUES.

FACTS is whether these protesters CAN protest the building of this mosque - do they have a legal right to do so?

VALUES is whether these protesters SHOULD protest the building of this mosque - do they have a reasonable demand?

Everyone is spouting off values at you, while you keep churning out facts. So answer me this:

Do you think the protesters have a valid claim in their protests against this mosque-building? Or are they misguided people who have the legal right to protest, but have an insufficient case for their protests?

After all, I would likewise have the right to start protest against the building of Christian churches in my neighbourhood. But my protests would be far different than, say, protesting against slavery.

 

[bhsup]

Well, at least VRWCAgent is making the lefties happy with his comments.

Me...I am a bit more consistent than that.

I feel like I just got taken to the woodshed

I have always, and can back this up with old quotes, supported the religious freedoms of pretty much all religions (I may have said bad things about scientologists). I've defended Islam against comments that it is a violent religion. And I truly believe that to be opposed to this mosque is to be opposed to the very fabric of our society and the freedoms that it is founded upon. I think I've been totally consistent here with my history on CFC OT.

 

[useless]

America: Free and tolerant for everyone (Unless you are a muslim or happen to be an "undesirable")

 

[Truronian]

Maybe a tiny, TINY percentage of a percent, but most people simply feel that placing an Islamic building VERY CLOSE to a terrible event caused by Muslims VERY SOON after it happened is insulting.

Agree or disagree, racism isn't the reason.

So you'd no doubt agree that building any religious structure near to a site attacked by religious people would be insulting?

 

[useless]

No, because you see Islam = Terrorism...

 

[flamingzaroc121]

Considering that a majority of democrats, independents and republicans are all against the idea of it being build so close to Ground Zero, I am going to have to go with spontaneous. Opposition to this has wide bipartisan support.

Source?

 

[useless]

Strange, given that it's mostly Foxnews and Republican's who seem to be pushing for the building to not go ahead...

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Yup...sounds like that mosque is really bringing peace isnt it?

Or maybe this was the plan the entire time?

People who have done nothing wrong and bear no resemblance to the 9.11 hijackers, who already own the land which was going to waste, who will welcome outsiders into their facility because it is a community center which accepts non-Muslims:

You must answer somehow for the crimes of others. You must apologize for the actions some other jerkwads committed. You must bear the guilt of others, even though Muslims died in the towers, and there were Muslim first responders, and we have Muslim soldiers fighting overseas to put an end to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and training Muslim soldiers to battle those extremists. Even though America is fighting to liberate and protect Muslims abroad from radical militants, and America is not at war with Islam, you people building a community center a whole 2 blocks from the World Trade Center site, must pay for what others have done, and must apologize for it, and must not build a community center on your own property.

Never mind that other mosque that has been there for 40 years and is 4 blocks away, that's not relevant, because it isn't being built now. We must protest the new community center with a mosque, because these people are more responsible, guilty, or associated with the cruel events of 9/11, much more so than those at the other mosque 4 blocks away.

Somewhere between 2 and 4 blocks is the magical zone of comfort, where people are now able to experience religious freedom, and not be blamed for crimes they did not commit, not have to answer for them, and not have to be prejudged based on the actions of people who only resemble members of their faith in name, but practice a very different and violent, perverted interpretation of it.

Your own G.W. Bush said that Muslims (as a community) were not responsible for 9/11 and that Islam is a religion of peace. This was meant to stop this kind of intolerance right in its tracks, so people who are wounded from one event do not turn around and inflict other wounds in retaliation, against innocent people.

The irrational fear and contempt directed towards these people is unjustified. I mean I could see if they were a bunch of Klansmen or something, some group that actually preached hatred and were known to be actively against our society or elements of it, but it's not. It's a moderate, peaceful, tolerant, assimilated, independent Muslim group not connected to radicalism.

The reason there is any outrage whatsoever is because those who are outraged have wounded feelings based on a separate and unrelated event, and they do not have all the facts, and they are responding to certain people who make a living fanning flames for fun, political gain, and profit. Otherwise there would be no protest and no story.

Those who are told the facts may not understand or accept them, but the ones that do overwhelmingly support the people constructing the Mosque. Good people do not have to bow to ignorance and fear to appease the easily-riled masses.

Those masses could always take a chill pill and stop being so easily manipulated by powers that, nakedly, are just ginning up controversy so that Democrats who need popular support to retain their seats will be forced to comment on the matter in a manner that is unpopular, by supporting the right to build the mosque. It's an offensive election-year tactic, created out of whole cloth by a right-wing blogger, just like so many other fake controversies.

• Fake Controversy: Shirley Sherrod's "racist" comments

Source: Right Wing blogger

• Fake Controversy: Death Panels that aren't death panels.

Source: Sarah Palin

• Fake Controversy: Birtherism

Source: Right Wing bloggers

Certain folks can shout "fire" over and over again in order to provoke reactions from otherwise normal albeit naive people, but what amazes me is they continue to get away with it and people still believe them. And every time they pop up, Fox news covers it until people believe it.

When the same dog defecates on your head over and over again, you'd think people would learn to recognize what's about to happen when it squats down. Same poop, different day.

 

[useless]

Don't you see, they're only trying to "inform" us of the truth, that Obama personally prevents us from finding out!

 

[Bill3000]

Maybe a tiny, TINY percentage of a percent, but most people simply feel that placing an Islamic building VERY CLOSE to a terrible event caused by Muslims VERY SOON after it happened is insulting.

Agree or disagree, racism isn't the reason.

It's not tiny; it's about 30% of the population who believe that it is not appropriate to build it AND that they do not have the right to build it. That's 30% of America who don't believe in the first amendment.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Don't you see, they're only trying to "inform" us of the truth, that Obama personally prevents us from finding out!

No, no, they're "just asking questions", which allows them to pretend to be objective.

Terrorist mosque built near WTC! <----Lawsuits

becomes​

Terrorist mosque built near WTC? <----plausible deniability



http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200806060007


"A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist fist jab?"

Note the clever use of question mark.

Teasing a segment on the "gesture everyone seems to interpret differently," Fox News' E.D. Hill said: "A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist fist jab? ... We'll show you some interesting body communication and find out what it really says." In the ensuing discussion with a "body language expert," Hill referred to the "Michelle and Barack Obama fist bump or fist pound," but at no point did she explain her earlier reference to "a terrorist fist jab."

That's the classic part. Don't EVEN bother to mask the completely ridiculous lead to the story with, I don't know, some kind of pretense that they were attempting to discredit or even discuss the idea that a fist bump has something to do with terrorism.

Just say terrorist, and Obama, not tie the two together, but do it repeatedly and with several different stories. Obama pals around with terrorists. Obama might be soft on terrorism. Obama wants the terrorists to win. Obama bumps fists like a terrorist. Obama might be a Muslim terrorist. Obama supports terror mosque near WTC.

Fox News- "Your mother is a whore? Find out at eleven. We're just asking questions...."