Ground Zero: Mosque; or No Mosque
- Thread starter QueEx
- Start date
That's not even close to the same. Of those 3k, about 10% of them were Muslims, do they not have any say?
It's not a mosque, not parroting the dumbed down media pablum. It's to be a cultural center with a prayer room inside, much like they built in Ben Gurion International Airport in Israel.
Like Obama fixed it
All the Repubs gotta do is Shut The F*ck Up!
Immigration, this mosque sh*t, a healthcare mandate, 2 Wars, 9.5% unemployment, a false stimulus etc
Poll: Majority Now Disapprove of Obama's Job Performance
I don't know, you gave GW 8 years to fuck things up, you are not giving President Obama 19 months to turn things around.
I guess Ron Paul could change things in 3 months.
This conflict between East and West is at least 2000 years old. It's not about Al Qaeda, Taliban, Americans in the Middle East it is a religious war. In a perfect world maybe a Muslim cultural center could be built on that site and everything would be ok. This is not a perfect world.
I don't know, you gave GW 8 years to fuck things up, you are not giving President Obama 19 months to turn things around.
I guess Ron Paul could change things in 3 months.
So to turn things around, he is advocating the building of a mosque at ground zero, without feeling any compassion for the families directly affected by 9/11. People could care less about a mosque being built, people care about where it is built.
P.S., sh*t was f*cked before "W" got in office. Clinton laid the groundwork for a lot of what has recently played out. NAFTA, The Commodities Modernization Act, & the Repeal of Glass / Steagal determined our fate. Look no further than these 3 issues to understand why the 'manufacturing' jobs are gone, how the 'Enron' loophole has been exploited the last 8 yrs, & how banks basically pilfered much of the wealth from the middle class.
You remember in 2006, Democrats were elected to end Bush's Wars?
They didn't have the balls to impeach the most impeachable Pres in the history of the country. (well, Kucinich did!) Dems, Repubs - Two wings of the same birdStop believin the hype Thought!
More Wars
More prisons
More surveillance
More debt
Less freedoms - get used to it
This is emblematic of the disconnect the Pres has with the people! 27% of New Yorkers support this
Poll: NY Voters Opposed to Mosque Near Ground Zero
Don't believe the hype. There is very little religion involved in these modern day conflicts and none of them go back thousands of years. These same Arab/Muslim nations have their own issues with each other that don't involve the US and the West except in the most tangential of ways.
In this completely imperfect world, a Muslim cultural center will be built there and it will be okay. There's already a mosque a couple of blocks away with no incident. This will blow over like everything else in our attention-deficited collective mind.
The President isn't advocating for the building, he's defending the right for it to be built (as is his job). He can feel compassion and still say they have the right to build the cultural center. It's not like 9/11 families are united on this issue in the first place.
To say it's just about location ignores the protests going on in various cities against mosques and other Islam-centered sites being built.
[/QUOTE]P.S., sh*t was f*cked before "W" got in office. Clinton laid the groundwork for a lot of what has recently played out. NAFTA, The Commodities Modernization Act, & the Repeal of Glass / Steagal determined our fate. Look no further than these 3 issues to understand why the 'manufacturing' jobs are gone, how the 'Enron' loophole has been exploited the last 8 yrs, & how banks basically pilfered much of the wealth from the middle class.
You remember in 2006, Democrats were elected to end Bush's Wars?
They didn't have the balls to impeach the most impeachable Pres in the history of the country. (well, Kucinich did!) Dems, Repubs - Two wings of the same birdStop believin the hype Thought!
More Wars
More prisons
More surveillance
More debt
Less freedoms - get used to it[/QUOTE]
I agree with all this but I'd go back further to Reagan. Dude was a horrible President but he was a transformational icon who made "liberal" a dirty word. It's funny because if he was around now, he wouldn't survive a primary challenge because he would be too moderate.
- Wow, you are a mind reader ???
How do you know whether the President feels or doesn't feel compassion ???
- What the fuck does compassion have to do with the free exercise of rights protected under the Constitution ???
- I'm rather certain the KKK feels compasionately about me in a negative way. Does that mean I am not to exercise my Constitutional rights to do whatever it is the Klan vehemently opposes ??? PLEASE EXPLAIN.
QueEx
Rights are not up for votes. If he was as "weak" as some want to paint him as, he would have bowed to the public pressure but he didn't.
I wasn't attempting to paint him as weak, not my style. How is it, on yet another issue, there is a lop-sided majority of Americans that feel one way and the Pres disregards them?
I find it humorous when the govt tells me security is of the utmost of our national concerns, so much that they introduce the Patriot Act, FISA, checkpoints, naked body-scanners at airports, and pending internet censorship. Now, you wanna hide behind the Constitution?
(nothin personal, just the argument)Meanwhile, we are at War and our Southern border is wide open, with no intention of securing it. Also, the last 9 years, I hear about terrorist "sleeper" cells all around this nation! Our leaders advocate a mosque at Ground Zero and some don't understand the outrage, or should I say the ridiculousness?
Political Theater!
<font size="3">
What the fuck does what the press feel or a lop-sided majority of Americans feel have to do with the exercise and/or protection of one's rights ???
Public opinion was squarely against Blacks in the South prior to and at the time of the inaction of the Civil Rights Acts. Should Congress have acquiesed to the South's wrong-headed views ???
PLEASE ELABORATE and stop making straw.
QueEx
</font size>
[*]Wow, you are a mind reader ???
How do you know whether the President feels or doesn't feel compassion ???
touche
Same response I gave to UpgradeDave. After the Patriot Act, FISA, naked body-scanners, NOW, we wanna hide behind the Constitution?
If security was of the utmost concern, Wouldn't a thorough investigation be warranted, seeing that we have all these damn "sleeper" cells everywhere.
Of course you should exercise your con-rights & I will be right there with you! And I will not "comment on the wisdom" of the KKK if they wanted to restrict your con-rights
I really think this is an apples & oranges argument simply because the legislation between blacks & whites have been hashed out long ago, at the highest courts, whereas, this should be a local / religous / security issue
this is a different issue than what Blacks experienced. It's not only about one's constitutional rights, there is a 'security' factor involved. Or atleast thats what the govt is tellin us.
Look, my real stance is located at post 26. It should be a local issue. This public opinion poll was of New Yorkers (black, white, otherwise).
Last edited:
It really is but political opportunist have jumped in and the corporate media has made it a national issue because apparently there's nothing else to talk about.
It's no more a security risk than the mosque sitting a couple blocks away. New York, by it's nature, is full of security risks but I don't see anyone attempting to shut anything else down.
The Constitution, that old, outdated, pipe dream which isn't worth the paper it's written on, is the problem. The Muslim group is exercising their right to freedom of religion which means they can build mosques wherever they want even the 9-11 site where 3,000 Americans were murdered by Muslim extremist. The cynicism is so strong you can cut it with a knife. Can't blame them because white Christians used the same document to falsely invade Iraq. If that group really cared about the victims of 9-11 they would respect the people's feeling and build that Mosque where it's wanted, in some liberal's front yard.
What?? To the whole post.
The Constitution is the problem. If the Constitution said no Muslims can build a cultural center where Americans died due to Islamic terrorism we wouldn't even be talking about this. That document is outdated.
First, I note that you have consistently avoided pointed questions, i.e., what does how the press feel or a lop-sided majority of Americans feel have to do with the exercise and/or protection of one's rights. Nevertheless . . .
BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Why do you persistent with the ill founded notion that public opinion trumps the Constitution ??? I know you see how silly that sounds, and is. The central theme Bro, is that Constitutional rights are <u>not</u> dependent upon public opinion or, for that matter, a vote of the people on some local measure. The Constitution is at the very top of the "law" pyramid in this country (you keep sounding like you missed those days back in 3rd grade civics?).
SECURITY FACTOR. No one, not a single soul, has demonstrated why there is any more of a security risk posed by building a Mosque within a larger development blocks away from the 9-11 site than any other Mosque located anywhere else in the Great City of New York.
More importantly, however, there has been absolutely no evidence put forward which demonstrates that "the Mosque" poses any danger. On the contrary, if anything, there is evidence that segments of the American public pose a danger, to the Mosque. Hence, if action is required because of a security risk, it should be taken to protect the damn innnocent, not the gotdamn law-breaking public!
LOCAL ISSUE. It is a local issue and the local board has, thus far, ruled in favor of those who want to build the Mosque/development. Is that not local enough for you ???
If the local board ends up rejecting this development on sound legal grounds, let it be. If it approves of this development, based on the law, so let it be done.
QueEx
BASIC CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. Why do you persistent with the ill founded notion that public opinion trumps the Constitution ??? I know you see how silly that sounds, and is. The central theme Bro, is that Constitutional rights are <u>not</u> dependent upon public opinion or, for that matter, a vote of the people on some local measure. The Constitution is at the very top of the "law" pyramid in this country (you keep sounding like you missed those days back in 3rd grade civics?).
SECURITY FACTOR. No one, not a single soul, has demonstrated why there is any more of a security risk posed by building a Mosque within a larger development blocks away from the 9-11 site than any other Mosque located anywhere else in the Great City of New York.
More importantly, however, there has been absolutely no evidence put forward which demonstrates that "the Mosque" poses any danger. On the contrary, if anything, there is evidence that segments of the American public pose a danger, to the Mosque. Hence, if action is required because of a security risk, it should be taken to protect the damn innnocent, not the gotdamn law-breaking public!
LOCAL ISSUE. It is a local issue and the local board has, thus far, ruled in favor of those who want to build the Mosque/development. Is that not local enough for you ???
If the local board ends up rejecting this development on sound legal grounds, let it be. If it approves of this development, based on the law, so let it be done.
QueEx
So to turn things around, he is advocating the building of a mosque at ground zero, without feeling any compassion for the families directly affected by 9/11. People could care less about a mosque being built, people care about where it is built.
P.S., sh*t was f*cked before "W" got in office. Clinton laid the groundwork for a lot of what has recently played out. NAFTA, The Commodities Modernization Act, & the Repeal of Glass / Steagal determined our fate. Look no further than these 3 issues to understand why the 'manufacturing' jobs are gone, how the 'Enron' loophole has been exploited the last 8 yrs, & how banks basically pilfered much of the wealth from the middle class.
You remember in 2006, Democrats were elected to end Bush's Wars?
Stop believin the hype Thought!
More Wars
More prisons
More surveillance
More debt
Less freedoms - get used to it
You're really showing your stripes. I thought it was Al Qaeda that took down the towers not Islam. Al Qaeda mostly from Saudi Arabia. You don't have too much trouble accepting oil from them.
However you want to spin it, despite the Clinton administration's short comings. the 8 years under Clinton were by far better than the 8 years under GW. And he left him with a better economy and world. The towers were still standing!
You got that right, hypocrites such as yourself claiming we have less freedoms, but want to prevent others you don't agree with not to have first amendment rights.
P.S.
Insensitive? Where were you when racist members of your Tea Baggers were using racism against President Obama?
This is a joke right?????
If it's not we should be talking about your mental health....
My feelings are in post 27, all I'm pointing out is the hypocrisy. After supporting the Patriot Act, Warrantless Wiretaps, Wars of aggression, naked body-scanners, etc. Why is it you (not you personally) want hide behind the Constitution now? I call it "selective" interpretation.
Ultimately, if the local board approves the development, let it be. I'm cool with that.
You still fail to realize the fallout from the legislation Clinton passed?
post 27, I support their right to build. I'm just describing a scenario where you will see President Palin in 2013! I know you hate that sh*t, & I do too but I'm just sayin
I'm with the faction supporting fiscal responsibility & free markets. Yes Thought, there are blacks who support fiscal responsibility
Free markets would've sent Phil "let the banks regulate themselves" Gramm into the po house!
You still fail to realize the fallout from the legislation Clinton passed?
You fail to realize the fallout from Reagan to GW. Clinton was clearly the high spot in the corporate takeover era. He was not perfect. All of them had shortcomings.
Despite the media fetish with Palin only two of her endorsements have even won republican primaries. You must live in a right wing enclave.
So you are for expiration of the capital gains taxes.
[Quote}Free markets would've sent Phil "let the banks regulate themselves" Gramm into the po house!
...and FreedomWorks founder, Tea Party leader Dick Armey as well as many others
You like that one huh? I'm just sayin
No it's not a joke. Some people seem like they are basing their opinion strictly on the Constitutional rights of Muslims to build a center on that site. Never mind the fact AL Qaeda, the Taliban or airplanes didn't exist when the thing was written or that a majority of Americans don't want it there. But they're like 'the Constitution says it right so it's got to be right'.
I honestly dont think Muslims were the masterminds behind the whole 9/11 ordeal.
I think Zionist had more of a hand in the attack than Muslims. Hence the reason why Muslims are being the face of terrorism.
As for the Mosque....
The only problem im having is the fact that the chose to attach the word "Cordoba" to the project. Whats up with that? If anyone knows the History of the Black Moors in Cordoba, Spain then you all should know what im typing about.
Considering how gullible the American people are, especially extremist White folks that fear any Human with color, maybe they should consider moving it further away from ground 0. ...just to be safe.
I think Zionist had more of a hand in the attack than Muslims. Hence the reason why Muslims are being the face of terrorism.
As for the Mosque....
The only problem im having is the fact that the chose to attach the word "Cordoba" to the project. Whats up with that? If anyone knows the History of the Black Moors in Cordoba, Spain then you all should know what im typing about.
Considering how gullible the American people are, especially extremist White folks that fear any Human with color, maybe they should consider moving it further away from ground 0. ...just to be safe.
What this proves is that YOU have no idea what you're talking about.
The religious clauses of the First Amendment have absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Al Qaeda, Taliban or airplanes existed then or exist now. But, the First Amendment did contemplate this situation:
- Under the Establishment Clause which prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the government or the preference of one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion, --
- it was clearly contemplated that some people would urge the government to deny some people the right to do things based solely on their religious beliefs and to allow other people to do the same things, based solely on their religious beliefs;
- it was clearly contemplated that some loud mouth people, i.e., Christians, Jews, Athiests and Agnostics (whichever category you might fall in) would demand government to allow preferences (give them the right to construct a place of worship) -over - other loud mouthed people, i.e., the Muslims, to build a place of worship where they might choose, based solely on religious concerns;
Therefore, foreseeing these competing interests and views, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the City of New York, on its own or listening to the whims of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Athiests, Agnostics or whatever, from deciding whether either group, based on religious concerns, may or may not construct a place of worship at a given location or to decide who those people may or may not pray to or serve;
- Under the Free Exercise Clause - you, the Christians, Muslims, Jews, Athiests, Agnostics are free to worship OR NOT TO worship whomsoever you choose, hence, the government (in this case the City of New York) cannot allow or prevent the Christians, Jews, Muslims, Athiests and Agnostics from erecting a building on a particular site, for religions worship, based solely on what they believe;
AND
- The Freedom of Expression Clause gives you the right to believe and express your opinion, whether or not its an informed opinion.
There may be many situations which are arguably beyond the contemplation of the Constitution at the time of its adoption, but, clearly this situation is not one of them.
QueEx
You saved me the effort!
...and furthermore:
source: Yale University
The Barbary Treaties 1786-1816
Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796
Article 11:
Voted unanimously
Was there a ballot intuitive on this issue? Either way, majority opinion cannot trump constitutional rights.
Last edited:
I understand that point perfectly. Clinton continued the deregulation of the financial sector that Reagan started. He was a very pro-Big Business Democrat which is why Candidate Obama didn't call him a "tranformative" President as he did Reagan.You still fail to realize the fallout from the legislation Clinton passed?
I lose no sleep being concerned about a President Palin. Even Republicans don't take her seriously. If she were to survive the primaries, a large segment of Republicans would stay home and her nomination would energize Democrats to vote. The Republican Party and Fox News use her to raise money from the sheep but they don't really respect anything she says or does.
Where he should be.
Just as I was about to jump in...They rebutted that silliness much better than I could. Thanks.
Similar threads
