Accepted Wisdom™ on the Ground Zero Mosque
(Accepted Wisdom™ is an occasional feature of this site, highlighting contradictory viewpoints held by the elite.)
It is Accepted Wisdom™ that:
It is not the Ground Zero mosque. It’s not at Ground Zero and it’s not a mosque.
And at the same time:
Having the mosque at Ground Zero is a testament to our religious tolerance.
P.S. In light of the AP‘s decision to school its writers not to say the mosque is at Ground Zero, let’s note two things. First is this post at Hot Air, noting how important it was to the builders to get as close to Ground Zero as possible. One fun fact among many:
A December 8th, 2009, New York Times article stated, “The location [next to Ground Zero] was precisely a key selling point for the group of Muslims,” and quoted Rauf as noting that they got a property “where a piece of the [9/11] wreckage fell.” ASMA then touted the piece in its 2009 Year End Report.
And let’s end with a visual, courtesy of Jammie Wearing Fool:
Comments fixed.
Patterico (c218bd) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:42 amLooks like Ground Zero to me. This hits close to home: my dad’s apartment building is in upper left of photo, on South End Ave. (along the Hudson, behind WFC). After 9/11, he was not able to return home until late November.
RB (12b1c5) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:51 am^racist.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:52 amTwo things. First how recent is that pic? Please tell me we are further along in fixing the place than that.
Second, I think the clearest evidence of bad intent was the name Cordoba house. They were building it there for its symbolism, as Patterico noted. Some believe that Cordoba references a victory mosque. Certainly it sends a mixed message to name it after a mosque in the capital of Islamic spain. And there was literally a whole world of better options. For starters, why not just name it for somewhere that is presently in the muslim world, such as “Medina house?” But if you are really going to play off the symbolism of it, and you want to honor the Muslims murdered by terrorists on 9-11, then why not name it for one of them? Or one of the Muslims who gave their lives fighting terrorism? Or I would even give you a mulligan for naming it for Michael Monsoor, who was Arabic, but not muslim. There are so many better names for the place, why pick this one?
Also at my site we have more GZM related stupidity. http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/and-gzm-stupidity-keeps-coming.html
And I take on the polls showing some Americans are confused about whether Obama is a muslim. http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/on-confusion-about-obamas-religion.html
Okay, link whoring is over.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:52 am(sarc, in case you didn’t get the context)
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:52 amdmac
it can be really hard to tell.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:53 amPlease post another aerial view of Manhattan with the appropriate mosque exclusion zone outlined in yellow. Thank you.
Martin Morgan (aaa550) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:06 amCall it what it is. A tribute to the murdering bastard terrorists whom muslims believe are now being attended by their virgins. ROP: ptui!
PatriotRider (17f47b) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:06 amFace it y’all, Allah reigns in America. May his holy name be praised. most merciful, most gracious.. How else do we show his power by building him a Mosque on ground zero that is not ground zero? Reason people. submit to his wisdom…
fish (3297ea) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:07 amThe Accepted Wisdom is correct, the proposed Islamic Center is an Arc de Triomphe!
ropelight (7a6598) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:08 amThere always seems to be one idiot who misses the entire point. Could you please wear clown shoes so, if I ever run into you on the street, I will recognize you ?
There is no point in rehashing the discussion of how this is not about a ban but about judgement and motivation. Some fools just will never understand.
Mike K (d6b02c) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:09 amComment by Mike K — 8/20/2010 @ 8:09 am
fish (3297ea) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:13 amHuh?
________________________________
That photo is surprising to me because I didn’t realize just how close the proposed mosque is to the ill-fated WTC towers. I thought it was a bit farther away.
Second, I think the clearest evidence of bad intent was the name Cordoba house.
Actually, I’d say the clearest evidence are the comments of the main sponsor of the mosque, who said 9-11 was due in part to the politics of the US. IOW, he was taking a line straight from Obama’s former close spiritual adviser, Jeremiah Wright. That’s the guy who proclaimed the collapse of the WTC was a case of America’s “chickens coming home to roost.”
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:54 amThis photo can be deceptive, lacking actual scale. I used to work in the skyscraper 2 blocks south (to the left) and one block east (i.e., down) of the block where the proposed “mosque” will be. I never told people I once worked AT “Ground Zero”. That would have been, quite simple, a lie.
As for the name of the house, Cordoba, that name represents more than just a famous mosque, but the place where that mosque resided — Cordova. During centuries of strife between Jews, Christians, and Arabs throughout Europe, Cordova (in Spain) became known for its religious tolerance. It attracted students of all religious persuasions, and was a symbol for religious cooperation. Not a bad name, really.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:57 amExcept the Jewish vizier of Cordoba was executed in 1066, nice try
ian cormac (8e4d9a) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:04 amHuh?
Comment by fish — 8/20/2010 @ 8:13 am
I believe Mike K was referring to:
A sentiment probably from a typical “progressive,” whose sense of the good and bad in people and situations often is quite screwed up and ass-backwards. But that’s okay in their minds. After all, their leftist ideology originates from a place of humaneness, compassion, love and sophistication. (Yea, right)
Or if the sentiment actually comes from a follower of Islam, then I have to congratulate such people for playing the left throughout the Western World for the patsies, suckers and fools that they really are.
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:04 amShould this mosque be built, all 100 million dollars of it, I wonder how soon the Adhan, the Muslim call to prayer will be heard by those at Ground Zero? Most will recognize its hypnotic charm as it’s the song Mohammad Atta and his 9/11 gang sang as they piloted their hijacked airliners into the Twin Towers.
Certainly Barack Hussein Obama will recognize it, he knows it by heart and according to the New York Times, “Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”
There is no subtly in the placement of this mosque within the perimeter of ground zero. It’s purpose built to announce a triumph over the future dhimmi’s of New York city.
whocares (f0fbe2) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:15 am______________________________________
Not a bad name, really
Yep, right. Then again, if your sentiments and politics are “progressive,” everything — or at least that which is filtered by the left and receives the “politically correct” stamp of approval — is coming up roses and lollipops.
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:16 amI don’t think people found Ground Zero sacred because the WTC towers stood there. They found it sacred because it was an destroyed, with many killed, in attacks on 9/11. The Burlington Coat factory building falls within that category, even if some people want to say it’s not the ‘real’ ground zero. Which it may not be, I guess. What matters is that it’s sacred to many people.
Ace pointed out that this is the inverse of the argument against a Confederate flag flying. That sensitivity thing the left has been using as an argument for ages has been that it matters how something will be interpreted. There’s no need to guess how most Americans will interpret this because they have explained that it’s incendiary. As I’ve said before, I support the mosque being built specifically because this kind of hostility to Americans is real and I want people to be as aware of it as possible. We’re in a long term conflict and a lot of people want to pretend it’s a criminal matter with a few dozen bad guys, when it’s really something broader.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:21 amMark
thanks for hammering my point home. if they really wanted it to symbolize healing they could have done so in a far less ambiguous manner.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:22 ambtw, for once and on-topic link. construction workers are now saying that they will not help it be built. i think it was at althouse where a guy claimed to hear from a guy who heard from a guy that said that the mafia would never let that happen.
So… um… yay organized crime!
Anyway, the less mafia link: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/08/20/2010-08-20_we_wont_build_it_hardhats_say_no_way_they_will_work_on_wtc_mosque.html
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:28 amokay tangential to the topic, Howard Dean… emerges as a voice of reason. i mean he writes in Salon today saying things like not everyone who is opposed to this is a right-wing hate monger.
I mean i don’t 100% agree with all of what he said, but… Dean is a voice of reason in this. Weird, huh?
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/you-know-democrats-have-lost-their.html
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:40 amI just get a feeling about old Dean.
You’d have to be outside the normal power circles of the dem party, and have your own group of loyalists to run in a primary against Obama. You’d probably also have to be an actual leader who is mad that Obama squandered what ‘should have’ been a long term democrat majority. A fiscally sane but otherwise liberal leader could be overseeing a recovery right now.
Oh, and it wouldn’t hurt to be crazy to run in a primary against Obama, because the knives will come out. Maybe Dean is staking out a place as a liberal who isn’t stupid, the run up to 2012? I’ve always thought of him as crazy but smart.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:49 amDustin
Mmm, i never thought of him as particularly smart myself. i mean he has some book smart, given, but he is normally really tin eared.
Well, either that or all the craziness is an act. i mean to be fair to him, consider him to Steele. Steele really seemed like a pretty good guy when he ran for senate. i watched it in nearby virginia, and he really did a good job. then he became RNC chair and went nuts.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 9:57 amWell, obviously — in retrospect — they could have picked a less ambiguous name. Although I suspect that even if they had named it the “We Really Hate Islamic Terrorists And Please Don’t Confuse Us With Them” House, it still wouldn’t have mattered to some people.
I don’t buy the argument that the former Burlington Coat factory is sacred to many people. I suspect that of the millions of “terrorist tourists” who visit Ground Zero every year, very few bother to walk the ten minutes to a rather non-descript street two blocks away.
Finally, I don’t see that as the inverse of Confederate flag flying controversy, if only because the state/local government isn’t the one putting up this mosque. That was the objection with confederate flag flying.
The more apropos comparison is the whole “Draw Muhammad” thing. With that, some Muslims needed to understand that — in this country — people have freedoms. And while it’s reasonable to ask that others respect your religion, that doesn’t mean that everybody must kowtow to your every taboo. In other words, you’re in a free society — deal with it.
To the extent that some people are rubbed the wrong way by the “Ground Zero mosque” (and I think much of the opposition is ginned up when the actual facts are laid out, by the way), I think that message applies. Deal with it.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:01 amI think the yeaaaaaaaaaaaaargh is real.
Comparing him to Steele makes him look even smarter than he is. I wish we could just pay him enough to put his politics aside to run the RNC (joke).
There’s no argument, in my opinion, that works like success. He was an awful candidate. His actual leadership of his party was something else. He sees things much more clearly than the rest of his political party, and he is the man who built the situation that allowed Obama to win… and Obama has kinda blown that up, IMO.
And I’m invested in popcorn futures, so let’s hope he runs.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:01 amIf buildings around the WTC 1 and WTC 2 were damaged by the attack, are they considered part of GZ or do we just consider the two buildings GZ?
It seems to me that since the BCF building was damaged in the attack it could logically be considered part of GZ. The shadows of the two 110 story towers would have covered the BCF building and it is logical to assume those trapped on the upper floors could have seen it before they jumped.
Just because the BCF building was not part of the WTC does not mean it has the same significance as a Burger King in Yonkers.
MU789 (4bfa87) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:03 am“I don’t buy the argument that the former Burlington Coat factory is sacred to many people.”
You deny the polls. You’re wrong, period. That building closed, for good, on 9/11, because of the attacks. It’s sacred and you’re messed up psychologically if you don’t also agree it’s sacred. You’re saying the planes hijacked aren’t sacred, since some of that material was in this building.
I agree that there is a distinction between this and the confederate flags. So? There’s always a distinction.
Liberals have often used the argument that it doesn’t really matter what someone waves a confederate flag for, because it’s insensitive and will obviously be interpreted a certain way. Do you just deny that, now? I could list many other examples of this precise argument.
In this case, the hard left is simply flipping. They do it so often that it’s banal to point out. Again from Ace, who I think has covered this well, this isn’t just about government behavior. It’s shamelessness for the mosque to build right there. They know what they are doing, now. Their reaction is to cry about tolerance while being extremely intolerant, insensitive, and shameless.
As Patterico proved, they went out of their way to be as close to ground zero as possible. They have gone out of their way to show insensitivity to gays. They know the only dialogue they are opening is that it doesn’t matter how Americans feel about the murder of their people.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:10 amYou know, I think I have the simplest solution.
Debris landed there. So we can easily declare it a historic site of national importance condemn the land, take it with just compensation and build a monument to 9-11 there.
Then they will have to find a new place to build, and in any case, if any of those places had debris fall there, we can do it again. End of story.
Of course that depends on Bloomberg wanting to end this fiasco. I think he enjoys the role of our national scold too much. He likes to tell new Yorkers what they can eat, he likes to tell the republicans they aren’t moderate enough, he likes to tell the nation they are all being bigots for opposing the GZM.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:15 amI think everyone realizes that the left’s talking point is to call this the ‘burlington coat factory’ building. It’s pathetic how a little talking point like that will get chanted in unison.
I like that name, though. The burlington coat factory was heavily damaged and shut down because it was part of ground zero. It was a place of death and destruction on 9/11, and that business… such an everyday and innocent place that many have shopped at, ended that day. The employees who survived 9/11 never came back to work.
That’s what the Mosque is opposed to. Faisal wants Sharia law. He blamed the Burlington Coat Factory and all Americans for 9/11.
I *love* that talking point. That building is a symbol of every day middle class America. It is being replaced with a much more expensive and fancy building representing ideas that *hate* us. These people have shown repeatedly that they do not care about our sensitivities. That’s their right in this country, and it’s our right to be outraged. And we’re even more outraged at the hard left. They have used this ‘be sensitive, even if your comments were intended well, they should also come across well’ argument for many decades. they drop it like a bad habit the second it hurts America.
Thanks a lot, guys. Like the Mosque, I’m happy to see America exposed to the ugly reality if the alternative is to be blind to it.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:18 amNo doubt, democrats have declared sites ‘nationally important’ for far less. They’ve done it just to prevent energy exploration. Your solution is perfectly sane… hell, it would give Obama a huge boost in the polls.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:20 am___________________________________
(and I think much of the opposition is ginned up when the actual facts are laid out, by the way)
Ironic coming from someone like you, since I bet you’re of the left. Liberals are notorious for creating outrage based on the guidelines of political correctness run amok.
Moreover, your implying that opposition to the mosque seems really “ginned up” the more one learns about the details behind it — when just the opposite is the case — makes me even more skeptical about you. IOW, I suspect you’re the type who’d sit in Jeremiah Wright’s church, hear him rave and rant about America’s “chickens coming home to roost,” and would shrug off the rhetoric. Even worse, you perhaps would nod in happy (or, at least, complacent) agreement.
Of course, your heart is in the right place. [insert snicker here]
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:21 amIndeed under the historic sites act, apparently the FG can do this, too:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/16/usc_sec_16_00000462—-000-.html
There is an old case that makes it clear that condemnation is available.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9922834053880419877&q=condemnation+historical+sites&hl=en&as_sdt=80000000000002
i can’t be sure it hasn’t been overturned, because i am not using the premium legal services, but the reasoning seems pretty solid, and some other sites have said this has been the procedure followed.
So Obama himself could condemn the land and take it and deal with it that way.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:25 am“You deny the polls. You’re wrong, period. That building closed, for good, on 9/11, because of the attacks”
That’s what makes it sacred? Because it closed? The only reason people call it sacred NOW is because of the controversy. But four months ago, nobody would have noticed the building or cared. It could have become a strip joint and you wouldn’t have heard a peep about “sacrilege”. Have you BEEN there?
“As Patterico proved, they went out of their way to be as close to ground zero as possible. They have gone out of their way to show insensitivity to gays. They know the only dialogue they are opening is that it doesn’t matter how Americans feel about the murder of their people.”
Who is “they”? The “they” you’re talking about are Americans. “They” includes the imam behind the project, who once said this:
“We are here to assert the Islamic conviction of the moral equivalency of our Abrahamic faiths. If to be a Jew means to say with all one’s heart, mind and soul Shma` Yisrael, Adonai Elohenu Adonai Ahad; hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One, not only today I am a Jew, I have always been one, Mr. Pearl.
If to be a Christian is to love the Lord our God with all of my heart, mind and soul, and to love for my fellow human being what I love for myself, then not only am I a Christian, but I have always been one Mr. Pearl.
And I am here to inform you, with the full authority of the Quranic texts and the practice of the Prophet Muhammad, that to say La ilaha illallah Muhammadun rasulullah is no different.
It expresses the same theological and ethical principles and values”
He said that at the memorial service of Daniel Pearl, the journalist killed by Islamic extremists. (Yes, the Imam was invited to speak).
So I don’t know who this “they” is.
I think you might want to realign your scorecard, because you’re going after the good guys.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:26 amKman, you’re a joke and you’re not rebutting my points… you’re simply rejecting them without any reasoning.
Sorry, the people behind this project are shameless assholes. There’s no way around it. your defense is laughable.
Is being upset with a beheading the standard of decency? Nope.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:28 ambtw, guys, Kman is still on my filter, but i will remind you that Kman has actually suggested that criticism of islam is racism, which is actually itself a racist statement.
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/07/another-liberal-accuses-others-of.html
Yes, he is “stalker-boy” in that post.
i suspect that should pull the rug out from under much of what he says.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:31 am“7.Please post another aerial view of Manhattan with the appropriate mosque exclusion zone outlined in yellow. Thank you.”
You are totally off-point….but I believe most people would say that yellow line is drawn where debris fell, a cloud dust completely blocked the view on that day, or anywhere near the vicinity where a Christan church can not be rebuilt ….all an area where a mosque should not be built at that site.
Sharp Right Turn (07ff8a) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:35 amAnyone who blames America for 9/11 is not, on my scorecard, ‘the good guys’. Anyone wanted to impose religious law, any religion, over my country is not ‘the good guys’.
And indeed, Kman has completely danced over the fact that I proved him wrong on the two points I was arguing. He’s making some point that isn’t relevant. The Government hires a lot of shameless assholes… sometimes they read scripts of PC talk.
How does that forgive them for their future conduct? It can’t and it doesn’t.
Do the American People find the Burlington Coat Factory building inside Ground Zero to be sacred? Yes. Does Kman have the right to reject that? No.
Is it wrong to do things that are extremely insensitive to others.. things that will be interpreted as horrible? The left used to say yes, until someone said something that hurt America at large instead of some interest group. Go figure.
And I repeat my original point. I’m glad this mosque is being built. Only the nutcases pretend they don’t understand what this is about. America, sadly, needs her eyes opened up to the scale and breadth of our conflict. Indeed, our conflict is with radical Muslims, and these people are radical Muslims.
I think there are many moderates out there, but these guys are not those people, what with blaming America for 9/11, and in fact, the left pretending they are is actually undermining my argument of potential moderate Islam.
KMan, if I recall, is the stalker nut, so I’ll stop giving him attention out of respect for the rest of you.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:36 amDustin, your argument is:
“Liberals have often used the argument that it doesn’t really matter what someone waves a confederate flag for, because it’s insensitive and will obviously be interpreted a certain way. Do you just deny that, now? I could list many other examples of this precise argument.”
I deny the premise of your argument. I’ve never heard the liberals use that argument with respect to the confederate flag. Maybe you are saying it oddly — so oddly that it is unrecognizable to me.
Anyway, I can’t rebut an argument that makes no sense to me.
“[Y]ou’re not rebutting my points… you’re simply rejecting them without any reasoning…. Sorry, the people behind this project are shameless assholes. There’s no way around it. your defense is laughable.”
“Shameless assholes”. “Laughable defense”. Got it. Thanks for a demonstration of your idea of what constitutes “reasoning”.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:41 am____________________________________
Of course that depends on Bloomberg wanting to end this fiasco.
Keep in mind that the guy originally suspected the attempted bombing of Times Square was the work of someone associated NOT with Islam but with the Tea Party.
Bloomberg is a fool, the essence of a phony-baloney limousine liberal. One of those who believes a bleeding heart makes up for a lack of common sense.
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:43 amBy the way, is nobody here bothered by the prayer room at the Pentagon where Muslims go to pray everyday — and have done so for at least the past ten years? Is that not “sacred ground” too?
And if not, why not? <=== serious question
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:43 amLOL. That would explain why you refuse to understand the argument.
I’m not bothering with you. You admit you can’t rebut me, so I win. Thanks for playing.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:44 am“You admit you can’t rebut me, so I win”
Kind of easy to “win” when you put words into “liberals” mouths to make an incoherent and un-rebuttable point. Where I come from, we call that “mast*rbation”, not “reasoned debate”.
But please, don’t let me rain on your victory dance, Dustin.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:47 amKman, everyone knows that the left used the sensitivity argument regarding the confederate flag and many other issues. You’re just lying that you don’t understand it. You noted you can’t rebut it, and pretend something we all know happened didn’t happen.
Why should I bother to prove it happened? I proved two other issues to you, and you instantly ignored them and moved on. Clearly, as soon as I prove another point, you’ll ignore it and move on. That’s what you’re doing with the disgusting comparison of the Military having worship for varieties of soldiers to worship for 9/11 supporters on Ground Zero (and indeed, Park 51 blames America for 9/11, denies Hamas is terrorism… they are 9/11 supporters, then). You’re a shill. All your points are simply repeating things you read elsewhere or denying points made here. You are not actually having a discussion.
I’m not going to keep bothering to engage you when you ignore any point that proves you wrong, just to make another point and demand it proven wrong. the burden of proof is on you, since the American people largely agree this mosque is wrong.
See you in November.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:52 am___________________________________________
“They” includes the imam behind the project, who once said this:….I think you might want to realign your scorecard, because you’re going after the good guys. Comment by Kman
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 10:55 amDamn, you’re a fool.
Even your strawmen are based on fabrications, Khalid-Man:
Dagwood (03075c) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:00 am“Kman, everyone knows that the left used the sensitivity argument regarding the confederate flag and many other issues”
I just don’t agree with what your characterization of “the sensitivity argument” is. Do people on the left say, in general, that people should be tolerant and sensitive to each other. Sure. People on the right say that, too.
But I’ve never heard anyone on the left arguing, say, that manufacturers stop making confederate flag bumper stickers or that people stop sporting those bumper stickers. The only time the left speaks up on the confederate flag issue is when some Southern state house — the government — choose to fly that symbol. But that factor isn’t in play here.
“That’s what you’re doing with the disgusting comparison of the Military having worship for varieties of soldiers to worship for 9/11 supporters on Ground Zero (and indeed, Park 51 blames America for 9/11, denies Hamas is terrorism… they are 9/11 supporters, then).”
Well, apparently, you’re just misinformed on so many levels. For example, the proposed plan for Park51 will contain a 9/11 memorial… for the victims, not the perpetrators. And Imam Rauf didn’t say that America was to blame for 9/11… in fact when asked that specific question, he said no.
If you want to oppose the cultural center based on wrong, incomplete, or out-of-context information, that’s fine. You’re entitled. But it’s not a fully informed opinion.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:05 amDagwood, my bad for assuming that talking point was accurate. Shoulda known.
I don’t mind if soldiers pray however they want and are supported by the military in doing so. That’s always been one of those Church and State bonds. My 2ID Bible is still my favorite one.
There’s a big difference between soldiers fighting the war on terror having a place to pray to Allah or Xenu or whomever they please, and 9/11 supporters (anyone blaming America for it) building a Mosque inside Ground Zero.
What’s funny is that the nutcases comparing the two concepts are the ones who are attacking moderate Islam. If you can’t draw a distinction between a Muslim fighting for America and a Muslim who defends terrorists (such as refusing to ID Hamas as such), then you’re a bigot.
It’s one thing to say even radical nutcases can build their mosque wherever they want, or that nothing on Earth is truly sacred (that’s what it means to deny Ground Zero being sacred, IMO). At least that’s rational. But saying you support this mosque because these people are moderates is lying.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:07 amKman, there is nothing “ambiguous” about the name to muslims. They know exactly what it refers to, the reconquest.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:07 amDagwood, I never said there is a mosque in the Pentagon. There’s a prayer room.
Which is what Park51 will have (along with offices, a swimming pool, library, basketball court, and auditorium)
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:11 amHey i expand on my idea of federal condemnation and seizure by eminent domain, here: http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-federal-government-could-prevent.html
i don’t expect Obama to intervene and stop this. but i think the law gives him some tools to do so, which is worth remembering when he pretends this is not his problem.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:12 amKman, that’s typical of your deception. The multi-denominational chapel at the Pentagon is just that multi-denominational.
The Park51 mosque is not.
Keep up the misrepresentations, it only confirms our opinion of you.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:14 am“Do people on the left say, in general, that people should be tolerant and sensitive to each other. Sure.”
OK, so you lied, then.
You obviously were lying before.
And it’s amusing how you keep pretending we’re ignorant, when you’re saying things that are not relevant but widely known. We reject the 9/11 memorial, since it’s coming from a man who blamed America for 9/11. You’re an idiot if you don’t do the same. Hell, many of your claims have been proven to be completely wrong in this thread.
I’m not surprised that you’re pretending we’re just stupid ignorant extremists. Extremists project a lot.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:15 amDustin:
It sounds like your issue then is with the specific people (particularly, Imam Rauf) behind Park51.
So let me ask you this “hypothetical” — what if a TRULY moderate Muslim-American imam (however you choose to define that) — one who abhors 9/11 as much as you or I — wanted to build the exact same thing on the exact same location? Would you have a problem then?
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:15 amNext, a Shinto shrine on the dock next to the USS Arizona …
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:16 amDustin
debating with Kman is like punching jello. he is mendacious in his core.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:17 amSPQR:
“Kman, that’s typical of your deception. The multi-denominational chapel at the Pentagon is just that multi-denominational.”
Would you object if it wasn’t multi-denominational? Suppose the Pentagon has a chapel just for Christian services, a “synagogue” room just for Jewish services, and a “mosque” room just for Muslim services. Would you have an objection?
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:18 amSo…tell me again how this character isn’t trolling?
Personally, I would take him more seriously if he was pushing the same groups he defends to build a remembrance chapel in Mecca. Because if they truly meant to build comity and understanding, that is what they would do.
Oh, but that’s different, of course.
Little trolls abound.
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:21 amI remember him snorting that he can’t involve himself in every little local land dispute. That was pretty amazing. Of course this concerns all Americans. It’s sacred ground.
I really like your argument. I think Obama detractors should publicly call on him to do as you suggest, so that there’s no doubt he’s part of the problem. It’s not ‘content neutral’, so I’m unsure if it would legally hold. I also think it’s a sad necessity that we see these kooks build their mosque.
They are on their best behavior now. And it’s not even good behavior. When their mosque is built, we’re going to see some really nutty stuff. This guy isn’t interested in local youth learning to swim (there aren’t any youth there anyway). He’s interested in political activism.
that’s a lot of egg on the left’s face, but that’s all it is. I think seeing a Ground Zero mosque argue for Sharia law, condemn the US, support Hamas… that kind of thing would really help folks understand that there is a wide conflict between the west and the hate.
We want to support moderate Muslims, and these assholes are pretending to be those people to take advantage of the goodness of an America they hate. You couldn’t be more shameless.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:22 amKman, I object to your dishonesty.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:23 am__________________________________________
____________________________________________
And Imam Rauf didn’t say that America was to blame for 9/11… in fact when asked that specific question, he said no.
OMG. LOL—and pathetic too.
A first-class contortionist couldn’t twist and turn his body as amazingly as you rationalize and excuse away harsh reality. If you’re so deluded about others then you have to be quite deluded about yourself. That’s why I’m even more convinced about the accuracy and meaning of this:
(And I won’t even mention Dagwood’s post detailing your question about a prayer room in the Pentagon—-in THAT case, the more one learns about the details of an issue, the weakness of a claim raised by a liberal regarding it comes to the surface.)
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:25 am“Next, a Shinto shrine on the dock next to the USS Arizona …
Comment by SPQR”
Maybe a Rebel Flag at the Lincoln Monument?
thing is, it’s hard to fight fire with fire, since Americans are generally good people and don’t have it in them to act like these monsters.
How much do you have to hate America to blame America for the thousands of innocent Americans murdered by terrorists? Or to obnoxiously refuse to admit Hamas is a terrorist org? Or to demand religious law of submission over the USA?
You have to hate America as much as Park 51. Who went out of their way to find a location as close to the WTC massacre as they could for a huge building, most of which is not a ‘community center’ or house of worship, but rather offices dedicated to pushing Sharia law. This guy is a well known political activist of the very lowest order.
I think the Mosque will be built, and this pose will cease instantly, and a lot of people will be saying ‘but I didn’t know!’ in unison. Every time the right gets bashed as extreme, it seems they are talking about something that actually does happen.
Iran getting nukes? the left bashed the right for this idea without mercy. North Korea breaking their treaty? Same. Death Panels? Same. Stimulus tanking the economy? Same. I could go on. We all know that the left will pretend they weren’t dead wrong about this mosque because they will be too busy called the right extreme about their next (accurate) prediction.
It’s like Kman in here. No shame at all that he said several things objectively proven false. Just a leap to the next false thing.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:31 amDagwood:
Again, Dag — never said it was a “mosque”. Just said it was a prayer room where Muslim prayer takes place every day. That’s entirely true. I didn’t realize that it is relevant to you that other non-Muslim services take place as well in that room. So now I’m asking, WHY is it relevant?
Within several blocks of Ground Zero, you have all kinds of churches, synagogues, etc. Now you’re adding Islamic prayer to the mix. So basically, it’s no different than the Pentagon (which by the way, covers more ground area than the Ground-Zero-plus area we’re talking about in lower Manhattan). So what exactly is the objection? Is it REALLY just a matter of whether or not these things take place in the same/different locations?
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:35 amvictory mosques are godawful tacky I think
happyfeet (71f55e) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:36 amYeah, memo to the stupid, Cordoba Center is already an affront to most who know.
Many Islamists view the expulsion of the Moors from Spain as the beginning of the downfall of Muslim influence and power.
The idea of a “New” Cordoba harkens to the romanticized image many Islamists have of time long gone in a land which truly was milk and honey in comparison to the dirt boxes they currently live in.
As insulting as when they called Operation Iraqi Freedom some name the muslims did not like because it harkened to the Crusades.
What was that anyway?
HeavenSent (ff0596) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:39 amIs Kman really claiming that US Soldiers are equivalent to people who blame America for 9/11?
I’ve seen some dedicated shills in my time, but wowee. What a joke.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:42 amDustin
if they take all of ground zero, it is content neutral. And anyway, that could tie things up in courts for years. that fact alone might drive them away.
my personal views is that when the war is over i really, truly don’t give a shit what is built there, as long as the actual spot where the towers stood have some kind of appropriate memorial. i mean you can’t preserve it like we did the gettysburg battlefield. it just can’t be done in a city like Manhattan. but i have long said, this is war, and this is different. you can’t have your victory mosque, until we have defeated the terrorists.
And its a very valid point about the confederate flag. i am a yankee long having lived in the south, enough so that yankees think i am a southerner. i know the Confederate flag waving type, and they really are convinced that the confederate flag is not about slavery.
Its very much like that south park where they parodied the issue. If you didn’t see the episode, chef was upset because the flag of south park was a picture of about 4 white dudes lynching a black dude. And Stan and Kyle come out in favor of preserving the historic nature of the flag. Which makes chef even angrier. So then they have a debate on it, and this is a bit from the script:
Kyle: Our main point is that the flag shouldn’t offend anyone, because killing has been around since the bieginning of time. All animals kill. And the animals that don’t kill are stupid ones, like cows and turtles and stuff. So people should not be so upset about killing.
Chef: [stands up] Whoa whoa whooaa! You just missed the point entirely!
Kyle: Huh?
Chef: I’m not mad because the flag shows somebody gettin’ killed, It’s because it’s racist!
Kyle’s Team: Racist??
Chef: Children, don’t you even know what this argument is about?! That flag is racist because a black man is being hung by white people.
Kyle’s Team: Ooooooohhh.
Chef: Ooooooohhh?!
Kyle: W-we really didn’t see it that way.
Chef: But that’s a black man up there!
Kyle: Y-yeah, but… the color of someone’s skin doesn’t matter.
Chef: Well of course it matters when- [catches himself] …Oh my God. Wait a minute. You children didn’t even see the flag as a black man being hanged by white people, did you?
Kyle’s Team: No.
Chef: Why, that is… that is the most beautiful thing I have ever heard.
Mayor: What?
Mr. Wyland: What?
Chef: Don’t you see? All this time I thought these little crackers had turned racist, when actually they were so not racist that they didn’t even make a separation of black and white to begin with. All they saw when they looked at that flag was five people.
And that is how southerners who fly the confederate flag really are. they don’t get what the south was about on any level, because they fundamentally think differently than they did. if they ever knew what they actually stood for, they would piss on Lee’s grave themselves.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:48 amFor what its worth, IF Obama were to declare everything within a two block radius of GZ as falling under federal domain (for historical purposes), the loudest objection would come from the right.
This is prime real estate – the most expensive in the country. A small vacant lot is worth tens of millions. NOBODY would be happy for government intervention and land seizure.
What people seem to not realize is: this is lower Manhattan. “Ground Zero” and the surrounding black already WERE an historical site. It’s where the Dutch bought Manhattan from the Indians. It was the site of a prominent fort. There are African slave burial grounds. The “wall” of Wall Street ran through the area. Washington was sworn in not too far away. The first American subway was here. Alexander Hamilton and Robert Fulton are buried there. And on and on…. and yet, no national recognition as an historical site.
Won’t happen as a result of 9/11 either.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:52 amNew Yorkers giving the arrogant crypto-jihadis “the business”? That’s a good thing.
Sure, you can build it. But it’ll cost ya. And I don’t answer for quality.
Frank Drebbin (8096f2) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:56 amK-pax heebie jeebied:
14. This photo can be deceptive, lacking actual scale.
— You can be deceptive, lacking actual facts and moral standing. That you would lead off your spew with such a lame statement (anyone with eyes can see a destroyed building 100 yards away from the site) shows your disingenuousness in spades!
I used to work in the skyscraper 2 blocks south (to the left) and one block east (i.e., down) of the block where the proposed “mosque” will be.
— Yeah, use the quotation marks, because you know that there won’t be any mosque-like activities taking place there. Nope. None at all.
I never told people I once worked AT “Ground Zero”. That would have been, quite simple(sic), a lie.
— The semantic difference of “at” versus “next to” is really the sticking point, is it? Talk about sim-ple!
25. Well, obviously — in retrospect — they could have picked a less ambiguous name.
— Well, obviously — in retrospect after Mark destroyed your “Not a bad name, really” comment — you’re backpedaling like Obama the Spineless Bimbo.
Although I suspect that even if they had named it the “We Really Hate Islamic Terrorists And Please Don’t Confuse Us With Them” House, it still wouldn’t have mattered to some people.
— Actions speak louder than words. Let’s see them prove that they HATE Islamic terrorists.
I don’t buy the argument that the former Burlington Coat factory is sacred to many people.
— Who EVER said that it is?
I suspect that of the millions of “terrorist tourists” who visit Ground Zero every year, very few bother to walk the ten minutes to a rather non-descript street two blocks away.
— If that building is there, the number will increase to each and every one of them.
To the extent that some people are rubbed the wrong way by the “Ground Zero mosque” (and I think much of the opposition is ginned up when the actual facts are laid out, by the way), I think that message applies. Deal with it.
— So, when the “actual facts” are laid out, THEN the opposition gets ginned up? They become MORE opposed to the project AFTER they know the facts? Maybe you’re the one that’s ginned up.
That’s what makes it sacred? Because it closed?
— No. That is what makes it close enough to be referred to with the words “ground zero”. Do try to keep up.
The only reason people call it sacred NOW is because of the controversy. But four months ago, nobody would have noticed the building or cared.
— I’m pretty sure that ever since 9/11 most people have cared. And again, WHO is calling it “sacred”? So far I count one person: you.
It could have become a strip joint and you wouldn’t have heard a peep about “sacrilege”.
— No, you would have heard “peep show”.
Have you BEEN there?
— And this is important because WHY?
I think you might want to realign your scorecard, because you’re going after the good guys.
— You might want to realign your tinfoil hat, because you’re now channeling MoDo (“this is the moderate Muslim we’ve been waiting for”).
I deny the premise of your argument. I’ve never heard the liberals use that argument with respect to the confederate flag.
— Therefore, none of “the liberals” (said that way in order to imply that you’re not one of them, no doubt) have ever used that argument; right? Maybe you just weren’t in that particular forest when the tree fell, Gumby.
41. By the way, is nobody here bothered by the prayer room at the Pentagon where Muslims go to pray everyday — and have done so for at least the past ten years? Is that not “sacred ground” too?
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 11:58 am— You mean that it was *gasp* in place BEFORE 9/11? Oh no! At this point JD would be ascribing to you the vaunted term of douchenozzle.
I’m mindful of the quote: “We defend democracy here in the military. We don’t practice it.”
Funny how some would flip that around. No problem with the military practicing democracy, but God forbid it should happen in America.
(Or is New York not America?)
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:00 pmIcy Texan:
(anyone with eyes can see a destroyed building 100 yards away from the site)
Actually, you CAN’T see the building from the site. More accurately, you can’t see ANY PART of the former Burlington coat factory from ANY PART of the Ground Zero site. Which is why I ask if anyone had actually been there. Anyone here know how to use Google’s Streetview?
The semantic difference of “at” versus “next to” is really the sticking point, is it? Talk about sim-ple!
It’s not even “next to”. Fact-impaired?
So, when the “actual facts” are laid out, THEN the opposition gets ginned up?
No. When the misleading facts are laid out, you guys get ginned up. Presumably you’ve been following this debate, and even now, you can’t accurately describe where it is in relation to Ground Zero.
“And again, WHO is calling it “sacred”? So far I count one person: you.”
You might want to review these comments more closely.
Wow… I thought I would have more to write in response, but everything else was ad hominem. (Yawn).
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:14 pmMore K-pax communiques with his e.t. friends:
If you want to oppose the cultural center based on wrong, incomplete, or out-of-context information, that’s fine. You’re entitled. But it’s not a fully informed opinion.
— Another intentionalist.
It sounds like your issue then is with the specific people (particularly, Imam Rauf) behind Park51.
— Thiiicckk.
[string of posts positing hypothetical scenarios deleted in the interest of not inducing sleep]
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:16 pm“No problem with the military practicing democracy,
Are you a bot? Is that supposed to mean something?
No, the military, the people who are putting their lives on the line to kill those who thought America should be attacked (anyone who blames America for 9/11 deserves to be lumped in with their enemies), is not practicing democracy. I’m sure some soldier is praying to Allah today. I actually know several. So what?
That is another absurd point of yours. People who blame America for 9/11, building a Mosque over ground cleared by 9/11? Yeah, you associate the two because you’re a nutty shill.
And like all moderate Muslims I know, they think this mosque is a disgrace. I only knew two Muslims in the military, and I won’t message them in facebook just to check, but I bet they oppose its location, too. You did know that, right? A lot of moderate Muslims do not want this mosque built at Ground Zero.
Only people supporting this Mosque are the real kooks. The truther level kooks. The ‘Bush stole 2 elections’ kooks. The ‘Iran will never build nukes’ kooks. The ‘chickens coming home to roost’ kooks.
That’s why I’m not bothering to do much more than dismiss you.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:17 pmAre all Catholic priests child molesters?
Are all Jews right-wing fanatics bent on expanding the borders of Israel?
Are all Evangelical Christians crazed abortion fanatics who will murder doctors?
Are all Muslims terrorists?
No, it’s NOT a strawman. Because that’s what this is really about. People who keep themselves apart and have weird customs. Who aren’t Western.
JEA (53fe4f) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:24 pmGiven JEA’s comments, let me propose another drinking game. every time a liberal ignores our arguments and claims we just hate all muslims, we take a shot.
Btw, JEA does Howard Dean think all muslims are terrorirsts? how about Harry Reid?
you know even if you were right, it is exceedingly rare for the argument “do what i say, you stupid bigots” to actually work.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:27 pmNo, JEA, they are not.
And since I posted a link showing that many Muslims want this mosque relocated, what’s your point?
THESE Muslims, the Park 51 ones, blame America for 9/11 and tried to build their mosque at this location specifically because they want this reaction. They love this attention. You can pretend this isn’t obvious, since I can’t link to a mind reader, but it’s still the truth.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:31 pm“Kman, you’re a joke …”
Comment by Dustin — 8/20/2010 @ 10:28 am
What do you expect from someone who doesn’t know East from West!
FYI, Kman, (“…the skyscraper 2 blocks south (to the left) and one block east (i.e., down)…”) in that photo, North is to the Left, and that blue streak at the top is the East River – which last time I checked, is found on the east side of Manhattan Island.
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:31 pm“No, the military, the people who are putting their lives on the line to kill those who thought America should be attacked (anyone who blames America for 9/11 deserves to be lumped in with their enemies), is not practicing democracy. I’m sure some soldier is praying to Allah today. I actually know several. So what?”
So why shouldn’t those same American soldiers — the ones praying to Allah — have a place to pray when they are on leave and visiting downtown Manhattan (just like their Christian or Jewish brothers-in-arms)?
In fact, why shouldn’t Muslim Americans who lost loved ones on 9/11 at Ground Zero have someplace to pray as well, even if they have to walk two city blocks to reach it?
That’s all I’m asking…..
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:34 pmAD:
“FYI, Kman, (”…the skyscraper 2 blocks south (to the left) and one block east (i.e., down)…”) in that photo, North is to the Left, and that blue streak at the top is the East River – which last time I checked, is found on the east side of Manhattan Island.”
Sorry, you’re just plain wrong. North (uptown) is to the right. That’s the Hudson at the top.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:36 pmSo, I argue that these specific people are offensive, and this specific location has significance to many Americans, and you ignore that argument, instead arguing that we shouldn’t oppress people merely for being non western?
That’s not a strawman? Can you define ‘strawman’, just to make sure you aren’t insane?
What do you say to the link I posted?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:37 pmDeborah Saunders nails it:
Dagwood (03075c) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:38 pmAnd so, Kman, under your reasoning, there should be a Shinto Shrine on Ford Island commemorating the losses of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team?
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:39 pmThat’s not the East River.
Martin Morgan (8d552b) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:42 pmDagwood
its amazing. Now suddenly the democrats believe that something is a local issue, a matter of states’ rights i suppose. these are the same people who passed obamacare mind you.
yeah, that is a great commentary.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:44 pmNorth to the right….
My mistake, you’re correct on that, but your reasoning otherwise is moronic.
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:44 pmGiven the strong bipartisan and moderate Islamic opposition to the GZM, I object to the far left’s politicization of the debate over the issue.
It smacks of rank hypocrisy given their consistent lack of regard for religious tolerance – see rage at the Mormon Church for its position on gay marriage and Proposition 8 and ongoing hatred of the Catholic Church for its policy on abortion, among other things. In fact, what needs to be aired is the left’s moral cowardice and silence in the face of Islam’s vast human rights violations around the world.
The community-based reality can continue changing its arguments from day to day, but this is not a First Amendment freedom of religion debate and the bipartisan and muslim opponents of the project do have a First Amendment right to express their views. Contrary to the opinion of Nancy Pelosi, such views do not represent thought crime and do not require investigation.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:45 pmdustin
> And since I posted a link showing that many Muslims want this mosque relocated
The only logical answer is that those muslims are bigoted against muslims. heh.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:45 pmMartin’s right. The road running Left to Right above Ground Zero is West Street (it actually runs north and south).
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:46 pmMartin Morgan – Do you think I’ll be able to wear a yarmulke and eat a bagel in the GZM…errr Islamic Victory Community Center?
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:50 pm“And so, Kman, under your reasoning, there should be a Shinto Shrine on Ford Island commemorating the losses of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team?”
Wow. Talk about a false analogy. That’s kind of dense with… uh… denseness.
But I’ll just go for the biggest reason why it is a false analogy. Park51 isn’t commemorating ANYTHING.
Well, I take that back. They will have a memorial to 9/11 victims. But I don’t find that inappropriate, do you?
But if you ask me if I have a problem of a Shinto shrine to cater to Hawaii’s Shinto population (assuming it has one — I don’t know), and that shrine being located near Pearl Harbor, my answer would be “no”.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:51 pm_________________________________
Are all Muslims terrorists?
I have to admit that my ignorance about the specifics and history of Islam did affect my reaction in 2001 to George W Bush saying that Islam was a “religion of peace.” IOW, I was quite naive or, at worse, neutral about the trappings of that religion.
Prior to that, I recall thinking the conservative cultural aspects of Islamism — as symbolized by black Muslims in America wearing suits and trying to observe traditional, non-self-destructive customs — did appeal to my rightist sentiments. But when I started to chip away at the surface, I realized there was quite a dark side to Islam. Namely, that its founder was a ruthless, bloodthirsty, vengeful warrior.
Liberals have long rationalized away the extremism and horrors of Communist Russia (aka, the Soviet Union), Cuba, China, etc, because of things like “free healthcare!, social equality! the poor being pushed up, the rich being pushed down!!!”
As a conservative, I don’t find myself rationalizing away the apparently corrupt underpinnings and nature of Islam. The fact there isn’t as much (or any) of a counterpart response similar to that among the left is another reason why I have such disdain for far too many liberals.
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:52 pm“Park51 isn’t commemorating ANYTHING”
Kman – In an earlier comment you said there would be a 9/11 memorial there. Patterico already demonstrated the importance to the developers of getting as close as possible to Ground Zero. Does it hurt to be so dense?
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:53 pmHow about two blocks away from the Arizona, with relatives of the dead sailors complaining about it?
Still okay with it?
And on the subject, how about a Confederate flag in sight of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s grave?
You are such a troll.
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:54 pmIt is not a mosque you knuckle dragging mouth breathing racist. It is a community outreach center, no different than a YMCA. If you weren’t such bedwetting pansies skeerd of Muslims you would be like Kman standing up for the ideals of our country.
Oh, Kman is a nozzle of douche. Stalkery too.
JD (d71a7a) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:54 pmAccording to Google maps there are at least five mosques in Manhattan. I applaud the freedom of muslims to worship at any of those locations, as well as their right to build a mosque/civic center in Manhattan.
However I take issue with their being so insensitive as to build one in the shadow of the location of the former WTC. Mind you, I’m not branding them as militant or as terrorist sympathizers based on their professed wishes.
But I believe that their stubbornness in the light of the expected reaction (and I would imagine that 70% opposition nationwide would necessarily include a lot of practicing muslims in this country as well as – gasp – Democrats), and their refusal to compromise in any way, or even to meet with officials who would gladly work with them on alternative locations, speaks much more harshly of them than it does of those who protest their plans.
Their stubbornness is second only to those on here who continue to mis-charactize this as a tolerance or freedom of religion issue.
Dagwood (03075c) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:55 pmKman – Could you please summarize your argument in favor of the GZM so that people understand why you support it, without reference to the arguments against it?
Thanks
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:56 pm“Now suddenly the democrats believe that something is a local issue, a matter of states’ rights i suppose. these are the same people who passed obamacare mind you.”
Land use? Yeah, I tend to think it is a local issue (except where federal constitutional issues are involved).
I don’t know many liberals or Democrats who were happy with Kelo by the way. (That said, the first one who says “there is more that unites us than divides us” is gonna get it).
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 12:57 pm“But when I started to chip away at the surface, I realized there was quite a dark side to Islam. Namely, that its founder was a ruthless, bloodthirsty, vengeful warrior.
Liberals have long rationalized away the extremism and horrors of Communist Russia (aka, the Soviet Union), Cuba, China, etc, because of things like “free healthcare!, social equality! the poor being pushed up, the rich being pushed down!!!””
Mark – It’s sort of like when you start chipping away at the facade of AGW and realize it is one ginormous fraud perpetuated by a cabal of scientists and the left to ensure greater government control over our lives.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:01 pm”
Martin Morgan – Do you think I’ll be able to wear a yarmulke and eat a bagel in the GZM…errr Islamic Victory Community Center?
Comment by daleyrocks — 8/20/2010 @ 12:50 pm
”
You know what’s really good on a bagel? Bacon. I know it’s a bit of a cultural contradiction. That’s what makes it so tasty. That and the bacon.
Gateway Pundit has a really good discussion of what the real problem is. If we can just ignore the screeching trolls for a second, who just want to make this about how the right is racist again, I think we can really discuss what seems wrong about this.
We’re seeing a mosque built over a huge hole in the ground. That hole in the ground says clearly that America is a nation in decline. We lost one of the grandest buildings in our history, built and used in a greater era, designed by a 2nd Gen Japanese American, in the 1960s (so much for JEA’s lie that America hates nonwesterners… we love them, arguably more than their home countries do in many cases).
These wonderful buildings were gone, and instantly the bureaucrats all clamored to make what replaced them into a big mess. The idea of rebuilding something as large, as bold, and with the same purpose… that’s not really been a serious contender. And the inability to summon the will to get something built has persisted for nearly ten years of my life.
So we’re seeing a Mosque next to a hole in the ground and the idea is disturbing. They are building bigger and better than ever, in our great city, over the crater of what we used to be able to accomplish.
I want more for America than this. If the Twin Towers had been rebuilt over a few years, this Mosque probably wouldn’t matter so much. This area wouldn’t be Ground Zero anymore.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:02 pmGood point, Dagwood, and again: where are all of our “freethinkers” writing to these people asking them to support, say, the distribution of Bibles in Saudi Arabia?
Or asking when the Jewish Cultural Center is being built next to a The Great Mosque?
I mean, it’s about understanding and a religion of peace, right?
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:04 pmComment by Kman — 8/20/2010 @ 12:51 pm
So, you have no idea where Ford Island is located, do you?
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:06 pm“If we can just ignore the screeching trolls for a second, who just want to make this about how the right is racist again”
Dustin – The racist argument is risible. Muslims are not all one race. Plus, the opposition is truly bipartisan and includes muslims.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:06 pmWhen FDR and Ibn Saud, made their deal in ’45, the rules were we may take your steel, but touch our
ian cormac (8e4d9a) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:06 pmfaith, and what we really are dealing with Wahhabism
It is not appropriate to call it the Ground Zero Mosque. You should refer to it as the 9/11 Debris Field and Body Parts not-mosque nut muslim community and cultural outreach and reconciliation dialogue YMCA.
JD (d71a7a) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:08 pm“So, I argue that these specific people are offensive, and this specific location has significance to many Americans, and you ignore that argument, instead arguing that we shouldn’t oppress people merely for being non western?”
How far away from Ground Zero does Cordoba House need to be to be acceptable to conservatives?
JEA (53fe4f) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:10 pmShort-hand for JD:
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:10 pmThat which shall not be built!
Comment by JEA — 8/20/2010 @ 1:10 pm
Five time zones to the East, works for me!
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:11 pmCompletely true. It’s so hard to avoid rebutting, partly because it’s easy to rebut but mainly because Kman and JEA are so nasty to say that.
I think it’s a shame they know they have this button they can push.
I think this is a good time to ask, what the hell is going on with Ground Zero that there aren’t two completed towers there? The area should be the World Trade Center, not Ground Zero beyond sad memories. Instead, it’s a sad present, and that’s part of why this mosque looks so victorious. It wouldn’t look so victorious in the shadow of gigantic towers, IMO.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:12 pmJEA is apparently hellbent on slaughtering strawpeople again today. He is learning from Barcky.
JD (f96a20) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:17 pm“what the hell is going on with Ground Zero that there aren’t two completed towers there?”
Dustin – First you had a hellacious dispute over insurance coverage for the towers that went on for years. Not all the contracts were signed before 9/11 and based on which broker’s binding slip was used, there was an issue over what policy language was intended to bind the insurers and reinsurers and also whether the attack was one event or two. Eventually it got settled, but I forget when. Don’t know what’s happened since, probably the typical liberal city government crap when they can’t get out of their own way.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:20 pm“How far away from Ground Zero does Cordoba House need to be to be acceptable to conservatives?
Comment by JEA”
Acceptable to conservatives? What the hell are you talking about? do you mean acceptable to all mainstream democrats, conservatives, Americans, New Yorkers, etc?
The answer to that one, extremist, is probably any building not screwed up and shut down on 9/11. I bet if they put it a mile up the road, in a building unscratched on 9/11, the issue would be considered resolved by us, the mainstream folks.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:21 pmI gotta admit the faux moral superiority and preening by the likes of kman and JEA is amusing.
JD (f96a20) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:23 pmdaleyrocks, there was a time in this nation’s history when those legal problems would have been resolved more quickly in the name of refusing to let this area be a hole in the ground, but I do understand that some questions needed to be carefully answered.
But as you note, that’s been done for some time. The proposed rebuilding is less than what was there before. I think that’s unacceptable. So is the pace. We could rebuild the twin towers, with some memorial aspect added, within a few years, if we really wanted to. That’s the America I want to wake up.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:25 pmMy question is not a strawman. A lot of conservatives have claimed their objections aren’t to the project but to it being on the sacred ground of Ground Zero.
So, how far away does it need to be before it is acceptable? Ten blocks? Twenty? A mile? Nowhere on Manhattan? Nowhere in NYC?
JEA (53fe4f) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:25 pmKman, however much we disagree on the issue I’ll give you credit for framing your debate in a civil tone and being fairly accurate in your posts. Or at least for debating with the facts as you perceive them, instead of resorting to labeling any and all opposition as racist or anti-Muslim.
Dagwood (03075c) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:26 pmK-pax phones home, or phones it in . . . or something:
70. I’m mindful of the quote: “We defend democracy here in the military. We don’t practice it.”
Funny how some would flip that around. No problem with the military practicing democracy, but God forbid it should happen in America.
(Or is New York not America?)
— Wouldn’t flipping it around mean that the military practiced democracy but didn’t defend it? And this has WHAT to do with the topic? Something about folks here not wanting to practice democracy? In what way, oh Imam with the tinfoil head-scarf?
Actually, you CAN’T see the building from the site. More accurately, you can’t see ANY PART of the former Burlington coat factory from ANY PART of the Ground Zero site. Which is why I ask if anyone had actually been there. Anyone here know how to use Google’s Streetview?
— Actually, I can see it right up there ^^^ (“Up there! Up there!”) with the little red rectangle drawn around it. Now you’re pulling out a line-of-sight argument? Maybe you should defend porn shops that want to build close to schools. You could use that argument (“the kids would have to turn at the corner and walk down the next street in order to actually see it”).
It’s not even “next to”. Fact-impaired?
— Is it even in Manhattan? Different neighborhood association?
No. When the misleading facts are laid out, you guys get ginned up.
— Thanks for correcting your stumble. You’re still wrong, of course.
Presumably you’ve been following this debate, and even now, you can’t accurately describe where it is in relation to Ground Zero.
— Actually, I carefully viewed the aerial photo and described EXACTLY where it is.
You might want to review these comments more closely.
— You might want to check the expiration date on your prescription bottle. The challenge remains: WHO labeled the site as being “sacred ground”?
Wow… I thought I would have more to write in response, but everything else was ad hominem. (Yawn).
— Your ad hominem responses make us sleepy, too.
So why shouldn’t those same American soldiers — the ones praying to Allah — have a place to pray when they are on leave and visiting downtown Manhattan (just like their Christian or Jewish brothers-in-arms)?
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:29 pm— 1) I thought that there already are mosques nearby; that’s one of the facts thrown out by you defenders, right? 2) I thought that this place isn’t going to be a mosque; that’s why you keep writing “mosque”, right? Ya know, it’s hard to keep up when the goal posts are constantly being moved around.
JEA, I answered your question. You did employ a ridiculous straw man and you owe us an apology for that, btw.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:31 pmJEA: A lot of conservatives have claimed their objections aren’t to the project but to it being on the sacred ground of Ground Zero.
— Same question I asked Kman: WHO said that this is “sacred ground”? You’re spouting the EXACT SAME talking point, and I’m calling you out on it. Cite examples. Go!
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:39 pm“WHO said that this is “sacred ground”?”
Dustin #19. See also #28.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:42 pmIcy, I don’t want to do this, but I used the word sacred. Really I was just using the term kman brought into it, but I do think it’s a special location. I think it would make more sense for people who blame America for 9/11 not to build their mosque on ground cleared by 9/11 shutting down many places. Just my view of it.
I agree, though, that the ‘sacred ground’ is a strawman. We shouldn’t have to prove the ground is religiously sacred to show that it’s an shameless place to put this mosque.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:43 pmEric
> Or asking when the Jewish Cultural Center is being built next to a The Great Mosque?
Ah hell, do you know how the second intifada started in isreal? Sharon visited the wailing wall. You get that, the man visited a holy site in his faith and that was cause to bring out the suicide bombers again.
And if memory serves, Kman blamed Sharon for his provocation. Which is typical. To the left those dirty Muslims (as they see it) can’t be expected to control themselves. But God forbid a Christian civilly protest and offense.
JEA
> So, how far away does it need to be before it is acceptable? Ten blocks? Twenty? A mile? Nowhere on Manhattan? Nowhere in NYC?
Ten works find for me. as for nowhere in manhatten, there are already 30 mosques in manhattan.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:44 pmKman, where did you get the sacred term, though. Not from me, since I was just reflecting your terminology. You got that from another source of conservatives, right? Or did you just repeat MSNBC or DU?
What’s your source for that claim?
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:45 pmAaron, I definitely get the impression from Kman that he truly thinks of Muslims and Arabs are subhuman. It’s the only good explanation for how he calls these Park 51 types ‘the good ones’. He’s probably projecting when he called others for this kind of problem.
If you really think Park 51 represents the best a Muslim can be, you must really think little of them.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:47 pmdustin
there are thousands of muslims who have given their lives to fight islamofacist terrorism. They represent the best of islam.
And each of their names would have been a better name than “Cordoba House” if these people REALLY wanted to send an anti-terror message.
Aaron Worthing (A.W.) (e7d72e) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:52 pmJEA – your question is silly. But, I will give it a go. I think that they should not choose to locate their not-mosque is a building that was damaged in the 9/11 attacks. The idea that opposition to this is “”conservative” is laughable. Have you quit buggering your goat?
JD (04ebf2) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:55 pmComment by Mark — 8/20/2010 @ 9:04 am
fish (799d0a) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:56 pmyou are right. You know what shocks me is why this is even an issue today. It’s disgusting that people are actually supporting this great insult on the memory of those whose lives were lost on that fateful day. 9/11 was brought about by those who want to build this Mosque. Islam is America’s worst enemy!
True. Very true. And you’re right that they should be honored.
The idea that soldiers having a place to pray is the same as a 9/11 supporter putting a mosque on ground zero is just plain insane. It reeks of the sentiment I found at an Iraq war protest many years ago, where some Socialist (I’d name him, but there’s no point) said that Middle Eastern people are not capable of having a democracy. That Saddam was one of the ‘good ones’, comparatively. I can’t tell you how angry that made me.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:56 pm“Kman, where did you get the sacred term, though. Not from me, since I was just reflecting your terminology. You got that from another source of conservatives, right? Or did you just repeat MSNBC or DU?”
Not quite sure why you think *I* brought up the term first. If you do a “find” (Cntl-F) on this web page, you’ll see you raised it first.
That said, I don’t specifically recall any conservative (or reports of any conservative) calling it “sacred ground”. On the other hand, I have heard it referred to (by conservatives) as “hallowed ground”. Was it Palin? Krauthammer? Not sure.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:56 pm“If you do a “find” (Cntl-F) on this web page, you’ll see you raised it first.”
I stand corrected and apologize for that. You’re still a nutcase, but I don’t want to be dishonest.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:58 pmKmart is quite fond of using ALL CAPS TO MAKE INOPERATIVE AND IRRELEVANT POINTS! Which says pretty much all we need to know regarding his confidence in his statements. Just a tad too defensive, yes?
A lot of conservatives have claimed their objections aren’t to the project but to it being on the sacred ground of Ground Zero.
Two recent polls put New York city citizens at 60% against the building of this mosque/communityoutreach/sharialaw/gaybeheading building. Please tell us how many New Yorkers are conservative, and what you think their objections are to this fraud. Then you can stop slaughtering the strawmen that you so furiously set up in every post you make here.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 1:59 pmIcy, don’t bother waiting for an actual cite for his inanity. He just ignores requests for proof of his assertions, preferring instead to preen with his awesome moral outrage at…who knows?
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:01 pm“I stand corrected and apologize for that. You’re still a nutcase, but I don’t want to be dishonest.”
My favorite comment of the day. I might steal it for future use.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:01 pmAnd with all due respect to Dustin, Kman & JEA are not spouting the term as a talking point because of those two uses of the words by one commentor on one blog. No way. The HuffPo-Kos-MediaMatters-TalkingPointsCentral(sic) machine is directing that usage. Has anyone checked to see if Madcow or Olbermonkey have sarcastically used the term “sacred ground”?
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:02 pmKman, you really should steal it. It’s no problem for me to simply admit when I’m wrong. This isn’t the first time I’ve admitted to a mistake. I just don’t see the problem with owning it.
Anyone can read this thread and see several examples of you saying things that are later proven untrue. That would be a great example of an opportunity for you to steal my comment and admit your errors. You would do this if you wanted an honest debate. Instead, you pretend your mistakes didn’t happen because you’re just shilling. that’s not what I’m here to do at all, so I don’t mind admitting fault.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:03 pmTrue. I am not ‘all conservatives’, either.
Damn straight. And in fact, you challenging my POV on this shows that many conservatives do not oppose this on ‘sacredness’ grounds. Fact is, there probably is some guy out there who opposes the mosque due to race. There’s probably someone who opposes it because it’s not extreme enough. One example doesn’t really show much about the general reasonableness of the opposition.
As dmac has shown, it’s a broad opposition. Oppositions this broad are not uniform on the details.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:05 pm“I stand corrected and apologize for that.”
— That’s the part that you need to stow away for MANY future uses, K-rations.
Icy Texan (2c6af9) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:06 pm“The HuffPo-Kos-MediaMatters-TalkingPointsCentral(sic) machine is directing that usage. Has anyone checked to see if Madcow or Olbermonkey have sarcastically used the term “sacred ground”?”
URGENT BNULLETIN to Huffington, Media Matters, TPM, Maddow, and Olbermann:
*** FOR YOUR EYES ONLY ***
We’ve been compromised!! Icy Texan has broken through our super-secret network! REPEAT: We. Have. Been. Compromised.
Someone please tell Soros. Oh man, is HE going to be pissed!
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:06 pmPatterico – Thanks much for doing this post.
Jim Miller (d77521) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:09 pmSadly, you’re right. I err more than I care to admit.
Kman (d25c82) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:10 pmI think dagwood gave it far too much credit.
JD (6ca166) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:12 pmHey, I faced off against JEA the other day. Kman is another Aristotle compared to some of the dissenters who drop by.
Dagwood (03075c) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:19 pm“Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” Obama said at a White House dinner celebrating the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41060.html#ixzz0xBQrrowO
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:20 pmComment by daleyrocks — 8/20/2010 @ 2:20 pm
Yes, dedicated to the stalwart individuals who attacked the Great Satan.
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:26 pmWe’ve been compromised!! Icy Texan has broken through our super-secret network! REPEAT: We. Have. Been. Compromised.
Please tell us your understanding of what the journolist blog entailed, and why the membership was composed of the leading lights of the (cough) mainstream media. Then please explain why they felt the need to check with each other on a daily basis regarding what their co – ordinated messages and editorials would be composed of for that day, and why every member of that list were self – identified liberals.
Or perhaps you’ve never even heard of it – your statement indicates that a big cluebat may be in order here. You could even check prior posts regarding this subject when it was discussed at length on this very blog. We’ll sit back and wait patiently for your concise response.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:32 pm““Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” Obama said”
heheheheheheheheheh
I think he has a point. And the reason it is sacred is not because of the location of the WTC’s former walls, but because a bunch of innocent lifes were ended and altered. How many burlington coat factory workers returned to their jobs at the building? Zero. 9/11 happened there, too. I’m tired of the hard left pretending it didn’t, or that people who say it did are racist. It’s ridiculous.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:36 pmWoah, this was just put on on Ace:
http://weaselzippers.us/2010/08/20/true-face-of-imam-rauf-to-be-exposed-by-newly-discovered-audio-tapes/
I can’t say I’m surprised in the least at this revelation, but it puts the MSM into the crapper for good, big – time. Another Iman posing as a moderate exposed for being a complete supporter of the Caliphate. Game over for our esteemed lefty commenters here, what a shame. Best line is where he called for the annihilation of Israel – that’s quite a beginning for your alleged “dialogue,” scumbag.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:50 pmHey, what happened to Kmart?
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:50 pmDmac, that sheeps clothing pose always looks like consciousness of guilt to me.
this imam knows he’s deeply wrong. That’s why he goes though all the machinations that obviously have the meaning we interpret out of them. This is a victory mosque for terrorists. Period.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 8/20/2010 @ 2:53 pmDid I do something wrong?
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 3:42 pmPretty hilarious that Kman objected to a “false analogy” after making a fraudulent one.
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/20/2010 @ 3:54 pm________________________________________
Woah, this was just put on on Ace:
Abdul Rauf already pretty much gave away his philosophy/theology when he was interviewed by 60 Minutes. But if Steve Emerson truly has found tapes that reveal Rauf to be, in fact, an Islamofascist, then even I will be stunned. Stunned because Rauf’s facade (per below) suggests someone who might be an Islamic version of a liberal Christian (compared with a fundamentalist Christian or Orthodox Jew).
Then again, maybe I’m still too naive about Islamism. The reason being that how can any person who becomes a follower of a theology attached to a ruthless, bloodthirsty, pro-assassination warrior (ie Mohammed) possibly be moderate, much less liberal?
By contrast, the history of Christ can easily be construed as touching liberal sympathies and therefore embraced by people on the left. But Mohamed and Islam? No.
Since I tend to discount conspiracy theories I’d have resisted assuming nefarious motives on the part of Rauf and the proposed building near the former WTC towers. But he apparently is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 3:59 pmThis controversy also makes me realize how very easy it was for the public to be totally in the dark years ago, before the Internet. Before the ability to surf the web and dig up the hidden nature of people, places and causes, including someone like Rauf. When everyone had to trudge over to the library to dig up pertinent information on their own.
Then again, how does that explain all the Americans who fell for the guy now in the White House?
Mark (411533) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:06 pmkman sounds familiar……..
fish (fc641a) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:08 pmYeah, he’s remarkably similar to “I work here is done.”
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:10 pm“… he founded the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), the first Muslim organization committed to bringing American Muslims and non-Muslims together…”
It’s successes are breathtaking!
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:37 pmOops…..”its”
AD - RtR/OS! (8308b7) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:39 pmEvery time I seen an overhead, it shocks me to think how much worse it could have been had the towers fallen over, how many more of our friends, neighbors, and loved ones would have been killed.
William Teach (2d1bed) — 8/20/2010 @ 4:42 pmUnmosqued* – Steve Emerson on Bill Bennett’s radio show talking about Imam Rauf.
*Shamelessly stolen from Ace.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 5:30 pmBtw, in related news, the first ever Muslim Miss U.S.A. Rima Fakih has said, gee, maybe the Mosque should not be so close to ground zero. Wow beautiful and smarter than our president!
But I for one agree with Miss Pelosi. She should be investigated, thoroughly. You can start by going to my site and seeing one pic, and a link to many more. Do you patriotic duty and investigate!
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/latest-anti-muslim-bigot-to-come-out.html
Aaron Worthing (f97997) — 8/20/2010 @ 6:46 pmA.W. – Did you put up her pole dancing video from earlier this year?
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:03 pm^Look at post #147.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:21 pmDmac – Look at #159.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 7:28 pmdaley, mm, no, but i probably should. investigation and all, right?
Aaron Worthing (f97997) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:15 pmA.W. – Maybe we can convince Patterico to post it for important journalistic purposes.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/20/2010 @ 8:25 pmK-Y leaked: We’ve been compromised!! Icy Texan has broken through our super-secret network! REPEAT: We. Have. Been. Compromised.
— Who EVER said that this network is a secret?
Icy Texan (93bbf5) — 8/21/2010 @ 3:24 amWell, they were building it there for its symbolism, as Patterico noted. Some believe that Cordoba references a victory mosque.
Mandy (a5f7d0) — 8/21/2010 @ 5:15 amThis is all part and parcel of the same mendacious two – faced behavior we’ve come to expect from so many of the alleged “Arab Moderates.” Arafat was the template for this kind hypocricy – talking about peace with the Israelis to the West while urging their annihilation to his Arab brethren.
Dmac (d61c0d) — 8/21/2010 @ 8:38 amColonel declare his
ColonelHaiku (60a24c) — 8/21/2010 @ 8:55 amchubwa on Ms. Fakih months
ago it still on!
Colonel
I could be wrong but i believe the commericals for Cialis tell you that you should seek medical attention at the four hour mark.
🙂
Aaron Worthing (f97997) — 8/21/2010 @ 9:13 amColonel must sign off
ColonelHaiku (60a24c) — 8/21/2010 @ 9:23 amnot enough blood go to head
getting hard to…typ…
Too funny, Colonel. updated my blog with those haikus.
http://allergic2bull.blogspot.com/2010/08/latest-anti-muslim-bigot-to-come-out.html
Aaron Worthing (f97997) — 8/21/2010 @ 9:53 amSo the site at Park Place has been conducting services since last May, without a certificate
ian cormac (8e4d9a) — 8/21/2010 @ 11:00 amThere is that church in Florida that is trying to build bridges and improve understanding with the Islamic world by burning Korans on September 11. The City of Gainesville will not give them a burn permit and for some reason the church has gotten some death threats and a lot of hate mail. Some of the morons over at Brad Blog were even suggesting Koran burning was illegal until they were corrected. Progressive pretzel logic on religious tolerance is a laugh a minute.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/21/2010 @ 12:32 pmWell, if they wrapped those Korans in American Flags, it might mollify the Left somewhat.
AD - RtR/OS! (cf05ff) — 8/21/2010 @ 12:40 pmOlbermannequin’s next Special Comment will be “What’s so bad about Sharia Law, anyway?”
Icy Texan (efe9a5) — 8/21/2010 @ 12:46 pm“Well, if they wrapped those Korans in American Flags, it might mollify the Left somewhat.”
AD – And bacon.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/21/2010 @ 12:54 pmHey, watch it with the bacon crap….
some things are just too important to be used for political statements.
Perhaps a little pig-fat smeared on as a fire-starter?
AD - RtR/OS! (cf05ff) — 8/21/2010 @ 12:59 pmGood grief, the first Muslim Miss U.S.A. is certainly an undeniable knockout. However, I really don’t see the need for any further journalistic investigation. Surely the LAT has just screwed something up requiring Patterico’s important journalistic attentions, which would doubtlessly enlighten, challenge, and intellectually stimulate readers – and wouldn’t involve cialis.
Olbermannequin’s next Special Comment will be “What’s so bad about Sharia Law, anyway?”
If, and when this happens, I will go full tilt conservabitch on his pathetic scrawny white ass. That statement would indeed be the last straw for him (or any other commentator).
Dana (8ba2fb) — 8/21/2010 @ 1:10 pm“I really don’t see the need for any further journalistic investigation.”
Dana – Heh. You never know, you might pick up some new moves.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/21/2010 @ 1:21 pm==Hey, watch it with the bacon crap…==
As someone who recently enjoyed the indescribably wonderful delicacy of dark chocolate dipped bacon at the Wisconsin State Fair, I find it rather sad to know that millions upon millions of “believers” world wide are depriving themselves of a taste of this amazing culinary masterpiece.
elissa (846f6f) — 8/21/2010 @ 1:31 pmOK, elissa, who’s boycotting dark chocolate?
AD - RtR/OS! (cf05ff) — 8/21/2010 @ 1:40 pmThis has got to stop!
Heh, heh, heh . . . “conservabitch”.
Icy Texan (efe9a5) — 8/21/2010 @ 1:44 pmThe parenthetical “next to Ground Zero” attributed to the NYT in HotAir doesn’t appear in the ’09 article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/nyregion/09mosque.html?pagewanted=all
The embellishment was unnecessary. The essence of the piece was about proximity.
steve (fce9c4) — 8/21/2010 @ 3:26 pmSpeaking of “Accepted Wisdom,” folks who think that “Cordoba House” is a sign of peaceful coexistence are guilty of letting their own PC attitudes run over historical facts.
Check this out:
http://bigpeace.com/abostom/2010/08/21/journalistic-malpractice-time-magazines-bobby-ghosh-and-cnns-ali-velshi-on-cordovan-ecumenism-in-muslim-spain/
If I wanted to work toward peaceful coexistence, I could have thought of some better names than that.
But when you have the press to defend you, well, why not?
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/21/2010 @ 4:21 pmHere’s the original source in that piece
http://www.archive.org/stream/spanishislamhist00dozy#page/238/mode/2up
ian cormac (8e4d9a) — 8/21/2010 @ 5:15 pmThank you, Ian.
The past is the past. But why name things after shameful events, and then claim that the events were about mutual understanding?
Fortunately, not many Americans know any history. And the bad people? They are usually quite up front with their plans.
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/21/2010 @ 5:45 pmEric – Those descriptions of Moorish Spain seem somewhat at odds with the paradise kishnevi was describing. Strange.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/21/2010 @ 6:14 pmWell this fellow, tried to misrepresent the state of history, most recently:http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/42700/why-cordoba/ it turns out
ian cormac (8e4d9a) — 8/21/2010 @ 6:24 pmthe story is more nuanced then either side
ian – Great link explaining the different schools of thought on the subject.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/21/2010 @ 6:45 pmI would just take Rauf a bit more seriously if he was openly pushing for religious plurality in Muslim countries. But he isn’t, of course.
It’s a one way ratchet.
Eric Blair (28f3dc) — 8/21/2010 @ 7:00 pmNews Corp’s number-two shareholder funded ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ planner
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100820/bs_yblog_upshot/news-corps-number-two-shareholder-funded-terror-mosque-planner
Xavier (31fcb7) — 8/22/2010 @ 6:58 amComment by Xavier — 8/22/2010 @ 6:58 am
Well, perhaps he was just looking for a continueing source of controversy to fuel O’Reilly, Beck and Hannity on FNC?
AD - RtR/OS! (84b2f2) — 8/22/2010 @ 8:22 amAD – Xavier has spammed that link and meme at multiple sites this morning.
JD (179c7a) — 8/22/2010 @ 8:34 amIslam isn’t a moderate doctrine. Followers of Islam who commit acts of terror and who otherwise act aggressively toward non-Muslims and fellow Muslims who don’t act out aren’t distorting Islam. This doesn’t mean, however, that the radical Islamist interpretation of the religion is the only feasible interpretation. Even though there are many moderate Muslims, moderate Islam doesn’t exist. It will have to be invented and by virtue of its being non-literal and its corrective intent, it will have difficulty contesting Islamist ideology which, however dangerously offensive it may be, has the benefit of being firmly embedded in Muslim scripture. Nevertheless, Islamist tenets are anti-freedom in many of their principles. If, instead of allowing people like Imam Feisel Rauf to characterize themselves as “moderate”, we force them to defend their beliefs, we relegate them to the sidelines (like leftwingers do to nearly all Christian evangelicals), this may help to empower true moderate reformers and hopefully facilitate the conditions and room they’ll need to strengthen an organized, rational Islam that shares common values with the West, including maintaining the separation of public life or “state” from privately held religious beliefs, or “church”.
GeneralMalaise (60a24c) — 8/22/2010 @ 8:37 amAl-Waleed has acquired stakes in many major corporations over the years. Unless Murdoch sold the shares to hum in a privately negotiated transaction, there is no way for him to control Al-Waleed’s acquisition of News Corp shares. Of more interest is Murdoch’s investment in Al-Waleed’s media company, but the left does not understand that.
daleyrocks (940075) — 8/22/2010 @ 8:57 amIslam isn’t a moderate doctrine.
I wonder how people into Islamism who consider themselves “moderate” square that with the bloodthirty, vengeful nature of the religion’s founder, Mohammed?
I know some moral relativists point to passages in the Bible and even a few sayings of Christ to create an analogy between Islam and Christianity. But that’s similar to claiming the history of, for example, Bill Clinton and that of Clarence Thomas makes them nearly identical in their exploits and mis-treatment of women (and I’m even disregarding Juanita Broaddrick’s allegation of rape involving the former).
Mark (411533) — 8/22/2010 @ 9:06 amColonel think “The 9/11 Debris and Body Parts Community Center” is kind of catchy…
ColonelHaiku (60a24c) — 8/22/2010 @ 1:10 pmCan’t see the “mosque” in these:
http://www.hotchickssmilingatgroundzero.com
geoff (ae4d0b) — 8/23/2010 @ 9:20 amComment by JD — 8/22/2010 @ 8:34 am
And it amply merits the sarcasm contained in my question.
AD - RtR/OS! (1f83e6) — 8/23/2010 @ 9:32 amWhat the hell is wrong with you, geoff?
SPQR (26be8b) — 8/23/2010 @ 9:45 am“Islam isn’t a moderate doctrine.”
Was Rumi a “moderate”?
geoff (3ac9fb) — 8/23/2010 @ 10:11 amgeoff appears to think he is making some brilliant point.
JD (3dc31c) — 8/23/2010 @ 10:50 am