Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Shovelbaby
2110 Followers
Shovelbaby
2110 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
David Sullivan
4984 Followers
David Sullivan
4984 Followers
sandylandersAug 18, 2010
FTA: "Sources tell CBS 2’s Kramer that Gov. Paterson is concerned that Mayor Mike Bloomberg, a staunch supporter of putting the mosque at ground zero, and President Barack Obama, might be advising mosque leaders to dig in their heels and insist on the present location."
Oh really? What is it about this dip s**t President that he is once again in the face of a clear majority that say build the damn mosque somewhere else. Just because Obama wants to bow to Muslims does not mean the rest of the electorate wishes to do the same. We bend over backwards to accommodate Muslim sensitivities but this band of Muslims is clueless about American sensitivities with regards to what happened on 9/11.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
captininsanityAug 18, 2010
Why do you intolerant pricks always think you're the majority?
gurukidAug 18, 2010
I agree that he's a prick but he is right about the majority, isn't he? At least according to CNN: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2010/08/poll-nearly-70-of-americans-op.html
Also, hasn't it been made clear by the opposing view point that it isn't a legal issue but a moral one? I think that they should definitely build a mosque wherever they want but it isn't completely illegitimate to oppose that position, is it?
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
captininsanityAug 18, 2010
WHAT THE HELL! *loses faith in humanity*
libertyprimeAug 18, 2010
The south and the midwest is a pretty huge area.
nipplashAug 18, 2010
To hell with the majority; Mob Rule is no way to govern, and the founding fathers knew this.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
@ GuruKid,
It's in the question and the question was " As you may know, a group of Muslims in the U.S. plan to build a mosque two blocks from the site in New York City where the World Trade Center used to stand. Do you favor or oppose this plan?"
Doesn't ask anything about legality, only whether they would favor or oppose the plan. A lot of people think it's not in great taste but protected by the Constitution.
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
because they dont know anyone in their real lives that are liberals because they live in a town of 300
tehpwnerofn00bsAug 18, 2010
1) It's not at Ground Zero, it's two blocks over.
2) It's not a mosque; rather, it's an Islamic community/cultural center.
3) There's another "mosque" five blocks over from the WTC site that has existed since before the blueprints for the towers was even drawn up.
4) While the "mosque" gets all the press, the area near Ground Zero is full of bars, porn, liquor stores, and salons. Somehow strippers have more of a right to freedom of speech than Muslims.
5) There's this little thing called The Constitution of the United States of America. I think people need to re-familiarize themselves with the 1st Amendment.
Really, anyone who feels the "mosque" shouldn't be built has more in common with Mao than Reagan (probably their supposed hero).
The thing about freedom of speech/religion is that either everything is okay, or nothing is. I can draw Mohammed all I want. Muslims build a place to practice their faith wherever they desire.
Besides, wouldn't this be the ultimate sign of the country's acknowledgment that we understand that it wasn't all people who follow the teachings Islam who destroyed those two towers, that basically no American citizen wearing a turban is a terrorist.
If you feel that it's in poor taste and want to segregate Muslims and where they practice their religion elsewhere then you're no better than the Klan.
There is something incredibly wrong with a country that preaches democracy/tolerance but the "clear majority" (citing SandyLanders' comment) wants an utterly Christian, one party nation that likens to the fascism. No, it IS fascism.
And, Sanman, there's a difference between freedom of speech and hate-speech that infringes on the rights of individuals. What you're spouting is protected by our Bill of Rights. The Klan crosses the line by threatening the rights of a great many other people.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
Do you realize that them not building it there makes us look bad? Other countries (and rightly so), are thinking that we can't even keep to our own Constitution anymore.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
(we've thought that for the last 9 years or so)
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
burzikak,
Anyone who actually read the Constitution and is familiar with almost any facet of the US law should have thought that much longer since it's been repeatedly violated since the civil war.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
ah so its like the bible...
dstzAug 18, 2010
>Other countries (and rightly so), are thinking that we can't even keep to our own Constitution anymore
Most of Europe is much more tense in regard to Islam, and religious (in the sense individual) freedom is not the strongest of our traditions to begin with. The US is still probably by very far the freest country in regard to freedom of religion and of expression (which do not extend nearly as far in France for example.)
Not to say this isn't bad. But just to put in context. You've still got some time before you arrive at our level of antagonism. But your on the right way! looks like the sense of history: 21th century; about like the 11th, but with attack helicopters.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
The presidency isn't about protecting the majority. it's about protecting the Constitution.
david90mAug 18, 2010
He's getting flak on this one because the majority of Americans are Islamophobes thanks to FOX, CNN and the like.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
He's getting flak on it partially because he backtracked partially after initially supporting it.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
If you're going to generalize. please know that Sunnis attacked us on 9/11 and this center will be Sufi. hardliner Sunnis and Shias do not like Sufis. They oppress and commit acts of terror against them just as much as they do against our interests.
bfogarty27Aug 18, 2010
@sandy- how do you even know how to use a computer with your level of stupidity
captininsanityAug 18, 2010
Apparently the same way 70% of Americans managed to vote on this poll:
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2010/08/poll-nearly-70-of-americans-op.html
I didn't realize I was living around that many assh**es...
bonestampAug 18, 2010
I wonder what the poll looks like where they ask people if they knew the mosque was being built two blocks away?
cakecakecake2Aug 18, 2010
Thats the biggest goddamn he say she say hearsay I've ever heard
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
how about a source for your baseless claim.
i counter your original question with this one: what about these dips**t conservatives that completely make up a story on the spot and then go one tirades about the story that they just created like it's reality?
things like "obama said this" and "we're a majority" and "the constitution is sacred to us"
10lbhammerAug 18, 2010
you know, sandy... I know you've been around since 2009, but I don't remember you until today. and you have been proof of intolerance since I first saw you 16 hours ago. can you stop? please?
bigviAug 18, 2010
After a family barbicue this weekend and having to deal with this stupidity for 5 hours Im conviced that you people are just using this as an excuse to ban this specific muslim site. This is an issue in multiple states, so dont lie that this has ANYTHING to due with 9/11. This is a fear of muslims. You do realize that by fighting this you are only raising the chances of another 9/11? To avoid insulting the victims of 9/11 the rest of us have to experience another 9/11? Bin Laden will only use this as proof that christians in the US are at war with Islam. Why is this place a threat? Because he said the SAME DAMN THING that Glen Beck said in April? Why is Glen Beck not dangerous but this guy is? Only real difference is one is a Muslim and the other is bats**t insane.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
Very bad. Paints the US in a hugely negative light - apparently we can't even follow the first amendment anymore (of course, that's been the case forever but still...)
worldofsmutAug 18, 2010
There is a difference between free speech and good taste.
pintomp3Aug 18, 2010
So the community center being blocks away from ground zero was bad taste? How about have Catholic churches near playgrounds?
coremanAug 18, 2010
Yes, but I don't think it means quite what it means.
"good taste" is about right up their with "neighborhood property values".
outlawsundownAug 18, 2010
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
It's not about the freedom of speech it's about the freedom of religion get your facts right.
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
good taste isnt covered by the constitution.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
@pintomp3, partly..
or churches near abortion clinics.
When the white settlers conquered a Native American tribe, they built a church!
sanmanAug 18, 2010
if the Klan wanted to build a headquarters or a shrine to James Earl Ray opposite MLK Jr's home, then would all the libtards be screaming to allow it because of the 1st Amendment? On the contrary, they'd be rioting to have it banned.
How come libtards scream for "hate speech" legislation to override the 1st Amendment?
Those are clearly curbs on the 1st Amendment, despite lib denials to the contrary.
What I see is that whenever libs see an opportunity to advance their own selfish agenda, then they'll call the 1st Amendment glass half full, but when they see an opportunity by going the other way, then they'll call the 1st Amendment glass half-empty.
Hypocrisy, no matter how pretentious, is still hypocrisy.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
Is the Klan a religion?
sanmanAug 18, 2010
straw-man argument - nobody has claimed that the 1st amendment doesn't protect Muslims
you can't legislate credibility - that's what Obama and the Left are seeking to do. Nobody is saying that it's illegal for Muslims to build near Ground Zero. But people are saying they have a right to take offense at Muslims for doing so. Disliking someone is a 1st Amendment right, too.
btw, it's funny to see so many diggers squealing over protecting Islam when they love to demand that Scientology be banned. Hypocrisy? You bet it is.
You'll never hear diggers saying, "Don't judge all Scientologists by the actions of a few. Don't damn the whole religion by a few over-hyped events"
Au contraire.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
"Nobody is saying that it's illegal for Muslims to build near Ground Zero. But people are saying they have a right to take offense at Muslims for doing so. Disliking someone is a 1st Amendment right, too."
If I point you to a guy I was arguing with just yesterday who did think it should be illegal, will you still say nobody is saying that?
"Why couldn't the Klan be declared a religion?"
Well, for one, I don't think they've applied.
"btw, it's funny to see so many diggers squealing over protecting Islam when they love to demand that Scientology be banned. Hypocrisy? You bet it is."
That's probably true in a sense, yes.
"You'll never hear diggers saying, "Don't judge all Scientologists by the actions of a few. Don't damn the whole religion by a few over-hyped events""
In their defense, Scientology is really only a few strong and they're all pretty bats**t crazy IMO but I do not think it should be banned for the same reason as this mosque. In short, it's far harder to argue that all of Islam is crazy because it has over a billion followers (some of whom I consider friends, and they're certainly not crazy and don't want to blow me or anyone else up).
identifiedlogoAug 18, 2010
People need to understand Islam and the Quran. People talk about the 1 billion Muslims in the world, but how many of those Muslims are against female discrimination, corporal punishment of rape, the Shria law, underage marriage, chopping of hands, killing of infidels.....or do you still think the constitution is violated by opposing building of this mosque or do you want an institution that supports all those horrible things built in the US. May be you are assuming not all Muslims are like that. Then I will tell you that they must be following a different book other than the Qura,. You need to understand the meaning of this mosque, its written in the Quran that Mosques are a sign of victory, like in being conquered. There are a lot of Mosques in the US, so the Constitution is not violated. But this one is an insult to all Americans. Muslims around the world are laughing at the stupidity of Americans for even thinking of building it.
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
Why is it an insult? It's probably not in great taste but aren't you going a little far? The Pentagon has a "mosque" inside it too, one that was started shortly after 9/11.
With regards to Muslims laughing, no, they're not. A lot of Muslims actually look at us allowing it (well..hopefully that's what will happen) and think "I wish I had this kind of freedom" because a lot of Muslim countries are extremely restrictive, and naturally most people do not like vast restrictions. If we don't build it, instead, all they'll think of "the US is just like *Muslim country here*, suppressing freedom of religion and speech.
Lastly, "There are a lot of Mosques in the US, so the Constitution is not violated" is a non-sequitur. A lot of speech is allowed in the US, so if we ban just one person from speaking out against say Obama, does that mean the Constitution is still followed?
brumbarAug 27, 2010
The Pentagon's Mosque as you refer to is an interfaith chapel. There are Jews, Christians and Muslims who worship in the same room at different times during the week.
bigviAug 18, 2010
You do realize that the Constitution is subject to whether or not it helps their argument right? Same thing applies to deficits, spending, morals, and pretty much everything else.
jimbodeenieAug 18, 2010
The first amendment is not in jeopardy if a better deal provides fruitful for all the parties. The government is not saying "you can't build it here", they are saying "here is a better spot, and we will provide state land for moving it".
worldofsmutAug 18, 2010
Wouldn't they have to fly some planes into buildings at the new location first?
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
no. but would you mind giving us your address?
alphachirawbAug 18, 2010
Reported. This is way more offensive than the mosque ever could be. Talk about bad taste.
rheaumeAug 18, 2010
What bill of rights?
yodanationAug 18, 2010
If the Tea Party and their sympathizers win this one, we might as well burn the Constitution.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
*221 years. Mixed my events up.
jdenzerAug 18, 2010
Whoa there, let not get carried away. The Tea Baggers don't want to burn the Constitution. They just want to singe the parts they don't like.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
If you subvert one part, you subvert the whole thing. It becomes just another piece of paper.
twistfingerAug 18, 2010
He was just making a clever joke. :D
tsk05Aug 18, 2010
They've got that in common with the Democrats and the Republicans.
mistysteeleAug 18, 2010
I dont think they want to burn it, just interpret it their own way. For example, in their view, the first amendment gives americans the freedom to pursue many different pathways to christ, etc.
goweigusAug 18, 2010
every year since it was written there have been reasons to burn it
anakastAug 18, 2010
Obama destroyed the run already.
kennykljAug 18, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
ldrummeraxAug 18, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
pika2000Aug 18, 2010
The "terrorists" have won way before this as we have things like the Patriot Act and naked body scanners. This is merely a distraction.
pintomp3Aug 18, 2010
They are just getting started:
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/local/news-article.aspx?storyid=156012&catid=3
kennykljAug 18, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
sanmanAug 18, 2010
Americans of Japanese descent were interned during WW2.
And yet nobody uses that to claim that Imperial Japanese won the war.
During US-led bombing campaign against Serbia, NATO warplanes pre-emptively bombed a local private TV broadcast new station, killing scores of innocent local journalists who had never harmed anybody. NATO's spokesman claimed it was a justifiable pre-emptive attack, because a TV station could potentially be used as a weapon of mass destruction. Back home in the West, the baying crowds of left-wingers were gleefully gloating over the bombing. Not one of them cared to lament that "the forces of intolerance have won"
Funny how when a cause is dear to certain self-proclaimed "liberals", they won't care about infringing on anybody else's liberties. But when they see somebody else doing the same even just a short while later, then all the laments come pouring out with saintly innocence.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ermac88Aug 18, 2010
That analogy doesn't work. America had declared war against Japan.
The attacking of the trade center was not an act of war by a country. It was what most would construe as an act of terrorism. In addition to the destruction its purpose was to incite terror and fear.
A knee jerk or fearful response to an act of terrorism, can be construed as a succession to terrorism.
Imprisoning Japanese Americans during war time, though illogical is not a succession to a deliberate act of terrorism
sanmanAug 18, 2010
the attack was destructive enough to have killed more people than at Pearl Harbor
claiming "oh, but they're not a country" is like saying "oh, but you didn't say Simon Says" - a ridiculous technicality
clearly AlQaeda is able to obtain safe harbor in an identifiable bloc of countries, just as there were various terror groups supported by the Communist bloc of countries
your labeling of a response as "knee-jerk" or "fearful" is your own subjective opinion, and attempts to suppress any meaningful response whatsoever. Certainly, an appeasement response is not the answer - Neville Chamberlain is not well-remembered for it
lioozherAug 18, 2010
From Wikipedia:
Radio Television of Serbia reported that the Croats and Muslims were raping nuns and killing babies. The media appeared to be escalating the conflict in Bosnia toward genocide.[4]
“ The things that happened at state TV, warmongering, things we can admit to now: false information, biased reporting. That went directly from Milošević to the head of TV".[5] ”
Yes, we were "gleefully gloating" and "baying". We may not be the Dogs of War, but we are the Hounds of Consonance.
ojxxAug 18, 2010
Make more enemies, The U.S. will.
cyrockerAug 18, 2010
O-K Yoda.
pintomp3Aug 18, 2010
If true, the bigots have one.
digthedougAug 18, 2010
Ha! But I have two!
ldrummeraxAug 18, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
This is all GOP related eh? I didn't realize Reid was a Republican....
StrutThatAssAug 18, 2010
Islamic scums are enforcing their Sharia behind closed doors. If they had their ways, they would replace our justice system for their backward oppressive Sharia.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
Look up the wife of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Her name is Daisy Khan and she doesn't even wear a hijab. Sharia law my ass.
Here's a picture: http://www.kqed.org/press/tv/muhammad/images/muhammad2.jpg
StrutThatAssAug 18, 2010
Nice try, but the reason is that old Muslim women beyond a marriageable age are allowed to give up their covering. I will turn your attempt at promoting your "religion of peace" by asking: Why did she not continue wearing the burqa? I thought women choosed to do so on their own, and were not forced to.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
Here's a video with pictures of her throughout her life. No burqa or hijab in sight until the end when she's praying (which some Jewish women and old school Catholics do as well). Since you're so voiced in the traditions of Muslims, you would know that burqas are not at all universal. In fact, they're rather rare.
Prepare to get truth f**ked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fu4um82flfs
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
wtf do you care about the justice system? you're already wiping your ass with the constitution.
porplemAug 18, 2010
Building the community center near ground zero proves that the terrorists did not shake us--that our Constitution is strong.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
“No, I wouldn’t mind because you know it’s freedom of speech in the country, but I object to it being here,” Goldberg said.
This is the quote they ran with? With this content and phrasing? Well played, article.
meribianAug 18, 2010
You don't see us leaving small versions of the statue of liberty when we're in their country.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
Military bases, thousands of troops, installed dictators, oil companies... Further back into history you have the Crusaders Kingdoms. Enough said.
smcallahAug 18, 2010
Their country?
Their country is the United States.
meribianAug 18, 2010
I meant the countries where their ethnicity comes from.
harris2004Aug 18, 2010
"I meant the countries where their ethnicity comes from."
looks like somebody failed high school. furthermore; your profile shows you are a Fox Republican. that explains everything.
meribianAug 18, 2010
I only learn about news through Digg. lol. I don't watch TV except for series that I torrent. Nice try, though.
particleman420Aug 18, 2010
the big statue of liberty is already in their country.
alphachirawbAug 18, 2010
No, but we've been leaving "ground zeroes" near mosques in Iraq since 2003.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
Zero forgetting mayan forever origenes anally digg.
oxidaneAug 18, 2010
He said anally.
fenririiiAug 18, 2010
Okay, seriously, WTF Merlin? I have seen your insane posts all over Digg. You either need to lay off the PCP or get a new translation program.
heliumflashAug 18, 2010
If the Muslims who planned construction of the mosque decided to move it because they realized that many Americans found it offensive and they realized that it probably isn't the best location to put it, then they should be commended for their actions.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
alphachirawbAug 18, 2010
I disagree that it should be moved, but at least you're being civil about it. Tell your brethren to lay off the hate.
baldboy7Aug 18, 2010
Shame on the U.S. for making them even consider moving. Just build it!
pika2000Aug 18, 2010
So, people are still being distracted with this? In the meantime, schools spying on your kids via webcam is okay, and nobody is outraged.
pika2000Aug 18, 2010
Great! The slaves acted very quickly. Let's see how low we can go.
gnixon70Aug 18, 2010
actually if memory serves, the case your referring to did meet plenty of outrage, press coverage, an investigation and several lawsuits. What else would you have them do, burn the school down?
stavrogin2Aug 18, 2010
Appealing to bigotry and fear works extremely well with a huge segment of voters. I think it's looking inevitable that the next time a Republican gets into the oval office, we're going to war with Iran. They have all the right qualities, they're brown, Muslim, they talk a lot of smack and they scare the s**t out of the uninformed voters of America. Maybe we'll even get to nuke them and start WW3. After all, what's the point of having a trillion dollar military budget if you can't have a little fun?
smcallahAug 18, 2010
This building at Park 51 used to be a Burlington Coat Factory before 9/11.
Is Burlington Coat Factory really sacred ground?
yodanationAug 18, 2010
They're trying to make the claim that anywhere ash fell is sacred ground. If that was the case, nothing in that area would have to be left exactly as it was and no memorial or new tower could be built and no business could keep operating in order to fall in with their argument. But, I think most people still think they're actually putting it on the former site of the twin towers. The talk-heads keep saying "at" ground zero for a reason.
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
Well, they're more than great coats...
david90mAug 18, 2010
If only the "mosque" could be located inside the new WTC complex itself, it would demonstrate American reason, understanding, tolerance, and commitment to the 1st amendment.
Ultimately, 9/11 happened because of extremism and prejudice. The same type of extremism and prejudice being demonstrated by the opponents of this Islamic community centre.
agenclaAug 18, 2010
This subject is pretty hot. On one hand there's the freedom of religious issue, but on the other the proximity of the mosque to ground zero is clearly upsetting a large amount of people (ignorant or not). If the developers are willing to move it to another location then I think that could be the easiest solution to make everyone happy. We have to protect our freedom of religion of course, but we also can't ignore those who are thrown into uproar because of the mosque. Their opinions, however you want to paint them, are still American opinions, and they have the right to voice them. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but at this point isn't the mosque a city issue? I'm not actually sure how the citizens feel about it, but if they are upset with it then i believe that they have a right to protest it, as one would protest a new Burlington coat factory in a location they didn't particularly want a Burlington coat factory. (not comparing the mosque to a Burlington coat factory here). I guess what I'm trying to say is that this issue is important to both sides, and that we can't immediately go into a GOP hating rage without at least attempting to understand where they're coming from, or we'll become just as ignorant and narrow minded. The mosque being built that close to ground zero unnerves a lot of Americans, forcing the mosque to move unnerves a lot as well. Not everyone is going to be happy, so it goes.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
Most aren't presenting the case that way at all. Many of them are calling for a complete ban on new mosque construction nationwide and a declassification of Islam as a religion.
ShovelbabyAug 18, 2010Submitter
Really, who? I haven't seen anyone presenting it that way. Everyone I've heard that is against it is against this location and questions who is behind this particular project. They point out the number of mosques that are already in NY and that the freedom of religion for muslims is not in question.
yodanationAug 18, 2010
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/08/11/conservative-group-calls-for-blanket-ban-on-new-mosques/
and just read a few articles at these pillars of knowledge:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
http://www.teapartypatriots.ning.comComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ShovelbabyAug 18, 2010Submitter
Okay, so you managed to find one guy, Bryan Fischer (whoever he is), who thinks that no more mosques should be built in the US (not to tear down any old ones). Your 2nd and 3rd link are the website homes and I didn't see at first glance anything stating what you claim and I'm not going to search through them to figure out what you are referring to.
Here is what several prominent voices in opposition are saying:
"The vast majority of the people in this country are against that mosque being built there. They're not saying they're against mosques. They're not saying they're against mosques. They're just against it being built there. There's all kinds of space, there are over a hundred mosques throughout New York City. Muslims don't even live in that part of town. It's a commercially zoned district. That's pure provocation. The intolerance here is being exhibited by the regime on virtually every issue, governing against the will of the American people. That, to me, is intolerant, in a representative republic, Ms. Dunn. Pat Buchanan was also on the panel and said, "What about tolerance for the views of thousands of families of those who died on 9/11, the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who were saying, 'Please, you got a right to move the mosque there, but don't do it, doesn't belong there,' what about tolerance for the vast majority of Americans and their opinions?'" Rush Limbaugh http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_081710/content/01125111.guest.html
"Every poll says the majority of Americans believe this proposed mosque is simply not a good idea. Nobody I know wants to violate religious freedom. Nobody wants to persecute Muslims. Nobody wants to cause trouble. What we do want is a sane country." Bill O'Reilly http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/transcript/you039re-bigot-if-you-think-proposed-mosque-near-ground-zero-inappropriate
"This leader of the free world has such power in his words,” Palin said. “And the overwhelming majority of Americans right now are saying, ‘Mr. President, no. This hurts.’ This is a slap to the innocent victims who were murdered on 9/11. Build a mosque, build it somewhere, join the other 100 mosques that are already there in New York, but somewhere else that’s less offensive and provoking of more pain and anger." http://www.thefoxnation.com/sarah-palin/2010/08/17/palin-ground-zero-mosque-stab-heart-americans
"But the issue here is not religious tolerance. There are a hundred mosques in New York City.
The issue here is the appalling insensitivity, if not calculated insult, of erecting a mosque two blocks from a World Trade Center where 3,000 Americans were massacred by Islamic fanatics whose Muslim religion was integral to their identity and mission.
It is no more religious bigotry to oppose the Ground Zero Mosque than it would have been religious bigotry to oppose building a Shinto shrine in 1950 on Ford Island in Pearl Harbor, next to the Arizona.
To Americans, the land on which the twin towers stood is hallowed ground, a burial site made scared by the suffering and deaths of all who perished in the horrifying minutes those towers burned and fell." Pat Buchanan http://townhall.com/columnists/PatBuchanan/2010/08/06/the_mosque_at_ground_zero
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/other-races/114325-sen-cornyn-this-is-not-about-freedom-of-religion-
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/regarding_ground_zero_bloomberg_misses_the_point.html
http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2010/08/09/ground_zero_mosque_is_a_mistake
I could go on and on....
meatball402Aug 18, 2010
Great, encourage these loud, intolerant, arrogant ignorant s**ts to do it again when something inflames their sensibilities. It's called positive reinforcement. You don't give in to children when they have a temper tantrum, it will tell them 'just do this again later and i get what I want' the same rule applies here.
The Constitution is literally going into the shredder (or is getting a price list attached to it) if a Republican gets into office. A Republican would have likely (it being an election year) not hesitated to denounce the building.
polartxAug 18, 2010
hey, nobody put a gun to their head...or strapped a bomb to their chest
Closed AccountAug 18, 2010
Strip away the thin veneer of developed society from America and our radicals would be just as violent.
Just look at Katrina, and its' aftermath.
Be glad for courts, bullhorns, blogs, and distractions like tv or videogames, because without them, guns and bombs would be just as prevelant.
alphachirawbAug 18, 2010
This is in bad taste. And you want to argue that the community center is offensive?
darkphenoxAug 18, 2010
Yay the bigots may win this one, that won't go to their heads and think they can control things!!!
soc7Aug 18, 2010
Hopefully the country can get this important issue resolved so we can get back to the illegal immigrant peril and that whole anchor baby thing that's going to destroy the country in 20 years. These are much more important issues anyway. /S
Bet the illegal aliens are happy to be out of the pinche norte American spotlight for a week or so.
mpd21487Aug 18, 2010
IT'S NOT A GOD DAMN MOSQUE, IT'S A COMMUNITY CENTER!!! GET IT STRAIGHT, WHERE IS THE f**kING MINARET?! I DON'T SEE ONE, DO YOU?!
Please, I am born and raised Christian, but don't label something a mosque if it's not strictly a mosque. The property may have a religious center structurally planned and be geared towards followers of Islam (you know, the second most popular religion in the world at 1.5+ billion followers), but its primary purpose is to be a community center (you know, like the Y). OP, keep in mind that there has been a mosque near Ground Zero for years. This new "mosque" should not be considered a slap in the face to us Americans who have lived through these recent tragedies. Our acceptance of this structure being built should serve as a symbol of our cultural tolerance and promote the fact that not only do we not wish to perpetuate the violence (whether it be verbal or physical) exhibited by the actions of and after 9/11, but that it should and will show our dedication to the First Amendment of our damn nation.
lioozherAug 18, 2010
It doesn't matter one bit whether it's a mosque or a community center, they have every right to build there.
mpd21487Aug 18, 2010
That wasn't my point, but I agree. I think that people are being sensationalist and overusing the word "mosque" because it elicits feelings of anger and hatred when heard by many Americans.
miamifrostAug 18, 2010
WIN!
seedypeteAug 18, 2010
So the gutless teabagging cowards who hate the Constitution think they've won a victory here? I wonder if these idiots realize they're Osama bin Laden's dream come true? Do you think they even care that they're doing his work? Probably not.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lioozherAug 18, 2010
f**k no don't move!
justin676Aug 18, 2010
Put the mosque there. As long as it's not ON ground zero, it shouldn't really be a sensitivity issue and they absolutely have a Constitutional right to do so.
That being said, if these guys start preaching radicalism (which is doubtful), claiming that America is the "great Satan", trying to make Sharia Law applicable in the US, and doing what some of the more dramatic opposers to the mosque are claiming they will, put in a gay bar and pulled pork stand next to it and see how many people bitch about insensitivity and free speech.
thetruthbringerAug 18, 2010
I marvel at the left's new found appreciation of religious freedom and private property rights. I hope they stick with it.
Mark this week in your calendars!
roguegeniusAug 18, 2010
If I were the ground zero mosque people I'd make it real easy. Since Republicans suck for all Americans, and since this is a completely Republican stupidity anyway. I'd simply figure out how much it would take to put the Republicans behind the Democrats in their fund raising and charge them exactly that much to move to a new location, no questions asked.
It's win-win-win.
Republicans win because there is not mosque there (that IS what this is about, right?), The rest of America wins because the some Republicans that might have been competitive will lose the election, thus keeping the nation in adult hands, and the Muslims make a buttload of money -- with that added bonus that they are Americans too and will gain the further benefit of less Republicans in office that the rest of us will.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
brumbarAug 19, 2010
It's been said that there are things between Heaven and Hell best left untampered with. Perhaps there is more than just a shred of truth behind the the 'Poltergeist' story and legends. If there is, let them build their victory mosque. Soon enough, it will stand vacant, because no one would be willing to be there. A few thousand restless and furious souls might be enough to do the trick.
reeds1999Aug 19, 2010
We are fortunate that we have something like some damn mosque to concentrate on and nothing important like a real unemployment rate of 18+%, 5 applicants for every available job, 25% of homeowners underwater, spending trillions on 2 undeclared wars, a broken health care system, or stuff like that to to worry about.
ronpauliskingAug 25, 2010
bread and circuses