WTC Mosque Part Four!!!

[ParadigmShifter]

Dude, it was clearly sarcasm. You need the Britain & Ireland improved sarcasm detector mod 1.0 installed.

 

[illram]

The last British comedy show I watch was Fawlty Towers, do I need an upgrade too? Where can I get one?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Identified as Omar Rivera, he had apparently been drinking for five days.

That man is a trooper.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

The last British comedy show I watch was Fawlty Towers, do I need an upgrade too? Where can I get one?

You need to find Peep Show on youtube somewhere. Times have changed.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Dude, it was clearly sarcasm. You need the Britain & Ireland improved sarcasm detector mod 1.0 installed.

I don't think I can find the proper power converter in this country.

You need to find Peep Show on youtube somewhere. Times have changed.

Just watched season 1 episode 1. Why doesn't the BBC channel have stuff like this on?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Because it's Channel 4

EDIT: Season 2 is probably the best.

 

[Traitorfish]

OMG!
Wait!
If you support the construction of religious buildings around ground zero, then maybe the entire area around could be filled of religious sites of all faiths.
That would be such a wonderful place that would please Christians like me, and perhaps be acceptable to secularists.

Throw in a "non-denominational meditation shack", or something, and that wouldn't be a bad idea at all.

Dude, it was clearly sarcasm. You need the Britain & Ireland improved sarcasm detector mod 1.0 installed.

Ah, but it's called "irony" when we do it, so you know to be appropriately impressed by our tremendous insular wit. Mere "sarcasm" is the domain of Americans, and other ogre-like creatures.

 

[useless]

You see, American comedy is not as sophisticated as British. Our crowning achievement is Chris Morris.

 

[Ajidica]

Ah, but it's called "irony" when we do it, so you know to be appropriately impressed by our tremendous insular wit. Mere "sarcasm" is the domain of Americans, and other ogre-like creatures.

You got it wrong. Americans tend not to get sarcasm. Instead we love our puerile humor(we had nearly 4 months of jokes about Tiger Woods last name and his numerous affairs) and general [female dog]-yness from our comedians toward everything. One of the few good comedians on TV, is actualy a Scot. (Craig Ferguson.)

 

[Traitorfish]

You got it wrong. Americans tend not to get sarcasm. Instead we love our puerile humor(we had nearly 4 months of jokes about Tiger Woods last name and his numerous affairs) and general [female dog]-yness from our comedians toward everything. One of the few good comedians on TV, is actualy a Scot. (Craig Ferguson.)

Yet again, even the lowest estimation proves beyond the reach of the American.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

I love you people, I really do, but what I think you Britons seem to be unaware of is that it's impossible to parody American right-wingers. In 2010 America, there is no statement that a conservative could make that would be so absurd as to be obvious satire.

Philosophers have proven this.

Cleo

 

[Ajidica]

Philosophers have proven this.

Reality has known this.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I disagree. I think the Daily Show and Colbert Nation parody right-wingers quite well.

And let's not forget the 60s British Show TW3 (That Was The Week That Was), which was very popular in this country back then and frequently spoofed US politics.

Warning: Gratuitous use of the N- word.


Link to video.

Full episode.

 

[useless]

Not well enough.

 

[I'm Cleo!]

I think the Daily Show and Colbert Nation parody right-wingers quite well.

The Daily Show isn't parody, unless it's a parody of the news media (which is their real target). It's tremendously enjoyable mockery of politicians, though (Both sides of the aisle; Republicans have just provided more material lately).

Colbert is very close, but even he has proven that true parody is impossible. For example, a running gag on the Report is that bears pose a threat to the nation (they're often in the Threatdown; they're on the "on notice board"). I recall seeing at some point after the gag had gone on for a while, some right wing writer / TV host actually talked about the threat of bears -- in the context of global warming, I think. Colbert has also described a plan he and the writers had concocted to have another running gag where they praise Glenn Beck for completely insane things he said, but they canceled it after they realized that whenever they'd start to write something for an upcoming episode, Beck would say something even more insane. They just gave up.

And I still think that if someone didn't know beforehand (difficult with the studio audience laughter and the jokes in the "Word" segment), they'd think Colbert was real. The character Colbert plays is completely within the mainstream of conservative media personalities.

Cleo

 

[I'm Cleo!]

Reality has known this.

You are, of course, correct. Forgive me. I was making an incredibly distant reference to a philosopher who used to post here who once tried to pretend he was a right-winger by posting completely insane things and several new left-of-center members of the forum, in completely good faith, didn't pick up on it. He couldn't do it.

Cleo

 

[bernie14]

How about a monument inside commemorating all the foreign policy blunders which led up to much of the world hating the US government so much. Blunders that eventually resulted in terrorist attacks such as 9/11. Appropriate?

yeah, like kosovo and kuwait

My "view" on this subject isn't "narrow" in the least. I suggest you reread the article again because it essentially refutes your argument here. It was quite clear that Sharia law isn't the great evil the reactionaries try to make it out to be to rationalize their enmity towards Muslims, especially in countries with existing secular laws and constitutions that directly prohibit much of these laws which only exist in a few backward countries.?

the article doesnt "essentially" do any such thing...the article presents points and counterpoints which u pick and choose from to fit your (narrow) viewpoint.....the FACT is that sharia law, no matter how "cute and furry" or extreme someone wants to view it, depends on the cleric dispensing it....how r governments going to now and in the future regulate these clerics?....or of course, since the future has always been so easily predicable, especially by the self-appointed “experts”, we can just discount any potential negative consequence as “patently absurd”. (was that obviously sarcastic enough?)

Once again, Imam Rauf is a respected moderate Muslim who has been venerated by both the Bush administration and the Obama administration for his peaceful views on Islam. If he is really so terrible as you keep insinuating, why hasn't any mainstream media picked up on it by now? Specifically, why isn't Fox News repeating it endlessly?

actually, i'm beginning to think he is either an extremely naive idealist, who actually believes that if we bargain with the "political" side of terrorist organizations,we could just convince "Muslim countries... to revise the penal code so that it is responsive to modern realities and to ensure that the balance between the three branches of government is not out of kilter" or as mentioned previously, a dirty hypocrite, personally, i dont know which is more dangerous, i tend to still believe the latter, given that he is talking about building brides, bla bla, pretending to be friends with rabbis, while calling for negotiations with an organization whose charter calls for the destruction of israel.

i'll tell u what..... i will fully support the mosque.....except that nasty cordoba name, another reason why i lean towards hypocrisy but then again, the silly idealism theory also fits ...so i will even give him the name as well, if he comes back with news that hamas will accept the right of israel to exist....actually, hamas and the palistinians have always broken their promises in the past, so nevermind

So you claim you did? Specifically, which book was that? And, specifically, what exactly did he say about bringing Sharia law to the US? The article you keep posting certainly doesn't mention it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT8s1a1E4nk

You mean like claiming above that I have "narrow views"?

If you actually think I have "smeared" or "insulted" you, I suggest you take it up with the moderators instead of me.

dont get your panties in a bunch....i was not talking toyou specificaly.....if u read the beginning of my post, i mentioned that i had missed a bunch of pages, so i did not know if anyone else had responded to any of my posts

 

[JollyRoger]

How about a statue inside to Ward Churchill as well? Fitting?

A scarecrow of him would be more fitting.

 

[MobBoss]

How about asking a "question" about a topic that is actually relevant to this thread regarding anything I have ever posted here?

As much of this topic is involved in regards to 9/11, I think the reference relevant.

And yes, I think you are insinuating that I am somehow like this person or have the same views by even asking me about it. It sounds like yet another attempt to attack my credibility instead of actually addressing the issues.

I am not insinuating anything actually, and am actually GIVING you the opportunity to have your views made plain.

Why are you objecting to me asking for you to clarify your opinion about him?

In Mobboss's defense (before your edit), it's really hard to figure out how that question could possibly be a strawman. The red herring is more obvious of an interpretation (in that one can see how it could be a red herring, even if one did not think it was).

However, since I think the question relevant to the topic as it is indeed part of the 9/11 issue, its not a red herring. A red herring would be something even further removed from the particular point I was replying to.......i.e. monuments for/close to Ground Zero as being appropriate or not.

Although I do appreciate you trying to educate on the use of the term 'strawman'. Good job!!

 

[Newbunkle]

Park51 FAQ

The Story: The Need For A Mosque in Lower Manhattan



We’d been looking for at least seven years to find a space to accommodate the growing population of Muslims in lower Manhattan. We had also been eager to contribute to the revitalization of lower Manhattan, in part because this is our area of business and also because as New Yorkers we wanted to give back to our city and help make it a better place to live.



Prior to purchasing our current facility at 45 Park Place, there were two mosques in lower Manhattan, although Park51 is not affiliated with either of these mosques. One was Masjid al-Farah, which could fit a maximum of approximately 65 people, and had to hold three or four separate prayer services on Fridays just to fit the crowds.

The second mosque, at Warren Street, accommodated about 1,500 worshippers during Friday prayers - people had been praying on sidewalks because they had no room. They lost their space around May 2009. 



We made the move to buy 45 Park Place in July 2009 in part to offset the loss of this space. Currently, our space at 45 Park Place accommodates around 450 people every Friday. We are also easily accessible from many different parts of Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Staten Island, which was an important consideration.



Perfectly reasonable.

Facilities
Park51 will grow into a world-class community center, planned to include the following facilities:
•outstanding recreation spaces and fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court)
•a 500-seat auditorium
•a restaurant and culinary school
•cultural amenities including exhibitions
•education programs
•a library, reading room and art studios
•childcare services
•a mosque, intended to be run separately from Park51 but open to and accessible to all members, visitors and our New York community
•a September 11th memorial and quiet contemplation space, open to all

This would be a great benefit to the community.