59 Replies to “Finally, A Compromise Solution!”

  1. Nice yarmulkes. Welcome back neocons!
    I guess they’re rested up from their vacation at Martha’s Vineyard.

  6. I’m glad to see Carlos Santana come out of retirement and step up to the plate for America!
    “…….cause she’s a black magic woman come to put a spell on me…..”

  7. Aah equality! “You can’t do that there ‘ere unless we can do that there, there”
    Onward to Mecca! We want a cultural center, swimmin’ pool, a statue of a brave Crusader. Of course we will require a “barbecue pit and a wet bar” for the faithful. Wet t-shirt contest at 11:00.

  9. I think the focus on ‘location’ is a key issue.
    Building the Cordoba/Obamamosque on the 9-11 site has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It’s astonishing that anyone even refers to that axiom. Obama and Bloomberg et al are ‘stuck on stupid’ for such remarks.
    After all, no-one is debating the freedom to practice one’s religion. The debate is about the location of the practice.
    It can’t be on hallowed ground. Simple.
    Of course, one can discuss the factual nature of this particular mosque, with its radical imam who rejects the reality of Islamic terrorism, who wants the US to comply with Sharia law, and the function of this mosque for Muslims only – no dialogue or interfaith agenda.
    Then there’s the factual reality that 9-11 was carried out in the name of Islam and against America. The factual reality that imams around the world are preaching open war as a requirement of Islam against ‘infidels’ and an open agenda of an insistence on Sharia compliance.
    The argument that ‘not all Muslims are terrorists’ and therefore we shouldn’t be rejecting their agenda is a red herring for that would be like declaring that ‘not all Germans were Nazis and therefore we should not have gone to war’ (fallacy of division).
    One can even question the source of the funds for its building, presumably the Wahhabist Saudi Arabia.
    But the key factor is – the physical site. No religious edifice can be built on hallowed ground. This is an ethical judgment and as such it is a VALUE judgment. Nothing to do with the law but with morality.

  10. Who has tons of US cash invested everywhere including giant media organisations? Saudi Arabia
    Who are the prime agents and pushers of Jihad around the globe? Saudi Arabia
    Who finances the building of mosques, Imans and muslim families to immigrate around the world? Saudi Arabia
    Who makes sure that oil prices stay high by applying pressures and obstructionist via climate change scare tactics and other methods so exploration/exploitation is limited to mostly their monopoly only? OPEC and Saudi Arabia
    Who finances large chunks of money to US politicians for their campaigns? Saudi Arabia
    Looking for truth? FOLLOW THE MONEY TRAIL…Enough said.

  11. Find the nearest billboard and put up a bunch of Mohammed cartoons.
    Then you’ll see all the moose-slims go ballistic over the right to express free opinions and expect toleration.

  13. Here’s an excellent commentary on the mosque by an American Muslim
    http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/from-an-actual-moderate-muslim-a-memo-to-the-msm-on-imam-rauf/#comments
    “As I write, nearly two thousand protesters are gathered outside the location of the future mosque — some having stood in the rain for hours — providing a clear indication that the campaign to stop this project is intensifying. The pollsters tell us that nearly 70 percent of all Americans oppose the structure, yet its sponsors say the edifice will somehow promote “interfaith dialogue” and “mutual understanding.” They must certainly realize at this stage in the process that the mosque will do no such thing, but will instead act as a permanent provocation to a huge segment of Americans who deem it completely inappropriate — if not outright sacrilege.
    Let us remember that the project organizers themselves created this controversy by announcing that the groundbreaking would take place on the ten-year anniversary of the attack, and that the exact site was selected because of its proximity to Ground Zero. Given that fact, the current media meme that this is not a “Ground Zero mosque” is dishonest spin.
    Even more dishonest — and dangerous to this country — is the outrageously biased work in Time, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Newsweek, and on NPR, PBS, MSNBC and CNN that has consistently portrayed popular opposition to this mosque and several other mosques around the country as evidence of bigotry and so-called “Islamophobia.” This is mass libel by these media institutions.
    The mainstream media has deliberately ignored the fact that there is legitimate basis for fear of mosques — as it is a demonstrable fact that mosques and Muslims have been disproportionately connected to terrorism in this country and around the world, a fact that the media won’t report. Moreover, in the examples of opposition to specific mosques chosen by the media as evidence of popular “bigotry,” the media has selectively ignored the openly available evidence showing unambiguously that these mosques or their officials are connected to or supportive of the radical Muslim Brotherhood (the parent of al-Qaeda), Hamas, and other radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations.”
    Again, freedom of religion is not the point. It’s the location. The other aspects, of the ongoing militant agenda of Islam, with so few Muslim moderates publicly rejecting this jihadism, is a vital aspect of the West’s interaction with Islam. The West ought to oppose any mosque on this hallowed ground, and then, it ought to oppose militant Islam anywhere and everywhere.

  14. ET has hit it bang on.GZ is hallowed ground.They want to build a mosque anywhere near it,may I suggest Turtle Bay?

  15. Oh.And Daisy Khan is a nutbar who thinks her hubby is going to allow her “freedom” from Sharia law and Islam.She is a poster girl for the leftie fembots

  16. re. the first Daisy Khan video – intro: “…the controversy has raised profound questions about religious tolerance and prejudice in the United States.” That’s what this is about, you see; tolerance vs. prejudice. Nice vs. mean. Fluffy bunnies vs. nuclear war. Simple as that. Thanks, objective newswoman Christiane Amanpour!
    And isn’t it cute @6:30 when the lefty very reform rabbi and Daisy start giggling and clucking about baby prams and shoes! What nice girls; anyone who doesn’t like their Community Centre is a big paranoid poopie-head! They should be hosting The View, these two.
    One other thing: Correct me if I’m wrong, but as I understand this a Mosque is technically slightly different from a church or synagogue or even a polytheistic temple in that it is not consecrated; it’s not considered “sacred ground” per. se. (the idea being I believe that the whole world is sacred). So whenever Daisy Khan insists on the term “prayer space”, and never “Mosque”, she’s being disingenuous. A prayer space is a mosque.

  17. Wouldn’t this be a little more relavant if you could build one at the Vatican?
    But no that would be a common sense and fair comaparison.
    So I guess a Mosque is ok with you guys at the Pentagon and it is only 80 yards from crash site.
    You idiots have been suckered into another wedge showing your true colours once again.

  18. Interesting comment, black mamba.
    To my understanding, the Islamic belief is that indeed, the whole earth is a mosque and the act of praying, essentially makes that space a mosque. And once a mosque – always a mosque. Oh, and the infidels can’t go in it. That’s from the Qur’an, in the ninth chapter on ‘Repentance’ which also declares that all Muslims must ‘slay the idolaters wherever you find them’. This chapter is nothing but ‘fight them, fight them’.
    Nothing like universalism. So much for the imam preaching ‘tolerance and dialogue’. Heh.
    As I’ve said, the stuck-on-stupid comments that one hears about ‘religious tolerance’ totally miss the point. The point is THAT hallowed ground is off-limits to, not merely any religious edifice but above all (and I mean above all) to the representatives of the religion that attacked America on 9-11, in the name of that religion.
    It is disingenuous for Muslims to refuse to acknowledge this responsibility – and they ARE responsible for 9-11. Read their Qur’an and hadiths. What must be done, by Muslims, is to openly reject these militant beliefs in Islam. Then – the dialogue can begin.
    It is equally disingenuous for Obama to declare that he’ll comment on the utterly irrelevant ‘freedom to build a mosque’ but won’t comment on the ‘wisdom’ of so doing. Is he the President of the US or not? If he is, then he MUST support the American grief at the 9-11 attack and MUST fight against the attackers. Instead, Obama refuses to acknowledge the reality of Islamic terrorism!
    After all, Obama only too readily apologizes for American ‘imperialism and wars’ to all and everyone around the world but he ignores, utterly, those who have attacked America. He reminds Americans of their ‘racism’ and attended a Black Liberation ‘church’ for 20 years, focused on white guilt and black power, but he ignores the guilt of Islam for its militant actions against America.

  19. which former president has extremely close ties to saudi bigwigs and as a former president has access to classified intelligence which use uses in those business dealings?
    george herbert walker BUSH.
    those Bushes are like cockroaches or something. why do they garner such immediate support from the right wing?
    http://www.moderateindependent.com/v1i18hwbush.htm

  20. The proposed mosque is said to be planned as an either 13-or-15-story structure, sure to cast a long shadow on an area where all remains of the victims of 9/11 have yet to be unearthed.
    Daisy Khan said the proposed mosque can’t be moved to another site, because there is too much at stake. Like what?

  22. Oh.And does Daisy mention that NOBODY except Muslim “men” can “worship” in the front of the mosque? That even she must be in the back? And that I as a worshipping Anglican am NOT allowed into the mosque? Ummmmmmmm….where’s the tolerance,Daisy? You can come into my church,any time,and sit wherever you chose,and listen to whatever the preacher/rabbi/minister is saying,but I am not allowed into the mosque?Ummmmmmm!

  24. // Wouldn’t this be a little more relavant if you could build one at the Vatican?
    But no that would be a common sense and fair comaparison. //
    Right. Or, of what religion is Lower Manhattan the Holy City.
    Soon the bald old guys with do-rags will be swept away for the appearance of the fair-haired boy of Islam watchers.

  25. Imagine for a moment this mosque was built. Does one really expect there to be reconciliation or dialogue? It has been nine years since the September 11th attacks. How have things changed for the better between Muslims and non-Muslims? Radical Muslims have been emboldened by the attacks and the milquetoast approach in dealing with Islamofascism. If not, no one would even THINK of putting a mosque anywhere near Ground Zero. I have no doubt in my mind that the instigators of this particular mosque have no sensitivity whatsoever. What are the useful idiots thinking? I don’t even think they are well-meaning, just jumping on the bandwagon.
    One day, radical Muslims will take away something these useful idiots DO care about and there will be no one and nothing to stop it.

  26. // Related: Who is Daisy Khan? //
    The person who turned Geller gelid by characterizing the islam-baiting movement as “metastasized antisemitism”.
    Numerous jewish observers have said much the same.
    And if one takes a look at the EDL in the UK, Pammy’s buddies from Belgium, etc., it begins to seem apt.
    Of course the person who thinks Obama is Malcolm X’s love child could hardly be expected to agree.

  27. [/quote]But the key factor is – the physical site. No religious edifice can be built on hallowed ground. This is an ethical judgment and as such it is a VALUE judgment. Nothing to do with the law but with morality. [/quote]ET
    ET, you are missing the “RIGHTS OF A COLLECTIVE” Muslim (Marxist) assertion by Obama. The First Amendment defines Individual property rights….. The honest Lawyers speaking to the subject are careful not to claim a Collective Right, only a traditional practice, but that is what Obama said & meant….. The individual Imam has a 1st amendment right, but Muslims as a Collective have “No rights” other than religious tradition.
    I refuse to except any Collective Right with regard to Individual Property Rights.. That includes interveners like Environmentalist’s
    A NYC Morality solution is often found floating in the east river…
    JMHO

  28. “Building the Cordoba/Obamamosque on the 9-11 site has nothing to do with freedom of religion”
    Hmmm, how so? I would say it has EVERYTHING to do with freedom of religion. How about the NRA’s decision to continue it’s tour through Columbine shortly after the high school massacre? Anything to do with the 2nd amendment? Would you say that they should have canceled or continued?
    “After all, no-one is debating the freedom to practice one’s religion. The debate is about the location of the practice.”
    Ok, then the debate is about private property rights. Are you arguing against the right of the individual to own property and do whatever they want with it so long as it does not break the law?
    “It can’t be on hallowed ground. Simple.”
    Ah, the word of the day…hallowed ground.
    ” its radical imam who rejects the reality of Islamic terrorism”
    The same imam who was interviewed on FOX news a short while back as a ‘moderate’ right?
    ” ‘not all Muslims are terrorists’ and therefore we shouldn’t be rejecting their agenda is a red herring for that would be like declaring that ‘not all Germans were Nazis and therefore we should not have gone to war’ ”
    Not quite, it would be like declaring that all Germans ARE Nazis and therefore all Germans should forever be labeled as such.
    “One can even question the source of the funds for its building, presumably the Wahhabist Saudi Arabia.”
    Wow, there’s a revolutionary idea! :S Hmmm, where have I heard that before? Oh right, you took it from DA’s post on that last thread about this subject.
    “Nothing to do with the law but with morality.”
    Sounds like a quote from Atlas Shrugged…from one of the antagonists! “It’s for society’s sake, Mr. Rearden! A matter of morality.” You are an Ellsworth Tooey, a Dr. Stadler, a collectivist. You are putting the collective ‘moral law’ before the individual’s rights and freedoms.

  29. phillip shaw – I’m not aware that groups, de jure, have rights. Only individuals have rights.
    That’s because a group is an abstract reality and I’m not aware that an abstract reality has a ‘right’, i.e., something that exists only in actuality.

  30. // phillip shaw – I’m not aware that groups, de jure, have rights. Only individuals have rights.
    That’s because a group is an abstract reality and I’m not aware that an abstract reality has a ‘right’, i.e., something that exists only in actuality. //
    How about corporations?

  31. Ignore the trolls.
    Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is a Sufi (which most leftyish westerners take to mean very peaceful, kind of Buddhist Muslim or something); his (just the one) wife doesn’t wear a headscarf, never mind a veil (unlike, say, the Muslim women I run into every time I go to the drugstore, in Halifax, which isn’t exactly Metropolis).
    Well now I don’t usually believe in conspiracy stuff on the grounds that most people can’t organize a trip to the movies, but this is a little too convenient. And the evidence exists that Rauf is not as irenic as he makes out; and then the financing of the Mosque seems more than dodgy… but frankly I wouldn’t care (Hitchens at the link @2:10 implies he would, which I don’t get) if Rauf and wife really were the World’s Coolest Muslems. No Mosque at Ground Zero.
    If NY construction workers and contracters strike on building this Mosque then my faith in humanity will be partially restored. I’d like to get behind a strike for once, frankly.

  32. “Ignore the trolls.”
    Right, ignore anything that doesn’t agree with your opinion…ignore anything that makes you unsure…ignore all other view points other than those that match your own. The strategy of the poor ignorant fools of this world.
    What’s the matter? Scared?

  34. dizzy – a corporation is not an abstract but a concrete particular and therefore indivdiual reality. It has a legal existence as itself, a concrete spatial and temporal existence as itself..and so on.
    You can sue a corporation; it can sue you.
    You can’t sue a group, i.e., ‘the Jews’ or ‘the Muslims’.

  35. I can’t help it. Every time the name Khan appears . I get the mental image of Ricardo Montalban as Captain Kirks arch enemy in the Star Trek narrative.
    Taking a second look she could almost pass as a female Khan. Dealing lies, & death to the infidel.
    JMO

  36. BTJ – no. There are several very unsympathetic-to-the-conservative-viewpoint commenters who post on SDA – Davenport comes foremost to mind – who are intelligent, well informed, and capable of engaging in debate. You ain’t that.
    Rev. – You mean:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRnSnfiUI54

  37. Yeah, she is kind of Ricardo Montalban in a wig, isn’t she? A distinct resemblance.

  38. “BTJ – no. There are several very unsympathetic-to-the-conservative-viewpoint commenters who post on SDA – Davenport comes foremost to mind – who are intelligent, well informed, and capable of engaging in debate. You ain’t that.”
    riiiight…good attempt, but you fell way short. I don’t need you to point out dissenting views, I’m here reading for myself and I can plainly see that any view that does not match the echo in here gets labeled ‘troll’.

  39. The guy holding the sign will be on the News Hour with Jihm Lehrer on your local PBS station.
    If you live west of Quebec it wil air again later.
    I will watch it in a few minutes on the Platsburg PBS station.
    From the previews he definitely seems to be the same guy.
    The topic is “perceptions of Islam in the USA”
    As if the problem was “perception”…
    PBS – despite being left leaning – is more fair and balanced than CNN,CBS and the rest,
    And Fox News is UNavailable here in Quebec…

  41. ET,
    We agree Re: Collectives don’t have Rights, but the Marxist’s have been busy redefining every word in the Constitution… Why do gays insist in changing the definition of Marriage? Strange! We fought through these issues in the 70’s but the New Generation want a New definition.. Why?
    The rights of a Corportion do not extend to the levels you claim.. Yes they can Sue and they can be sued, but they can not claim the same rights that are limited to an individual…In other words they are an functioning entity… I think lawyers must use a clever Non-deplume (like John Doe) definition when asserting Corporation rights….. They get rights through share Holders
    FACT:
    Obama is a Muslim by Birth Right… He is an Atheist Marxist by the teaching of his fathers thesis.. What’s to Know?

  42. Forget my comment above.
    Am watching PBS now and…
    That PBS piece is BIASED / BLATANTLY PRO-ISLAM.
    Dhimmitude is now televised…
    (((shaking head in disbelief)))

  43. my guess of the other sign–Building a mosque at Ground Zero is like building a statue of Hitler at Jerusalem.

  44. phillip g shaw – a corporation doesn’t have human rights ( ie right to life, pursuit of happiness); it has legal rights. A group doesn’t have legal rights since a group is an abstract reality.
    With a corporation, you legally know its human membership; with an abstract group, i.e., all New Yorkers, all black people, all Asians, you don’t know the exact individual count.

  45. Was that mosque/worship space in the Pentagon already before 9/11?
    Don’t get me wrong . . . I wish they wouldn’t build there, but I AM wondering why this is getting huge traction. Is it just that we never heard about the other mosques going up near other places the terrorists hit, and this one finally reached the public ear?
    As for my talk, they should be allowed to build, but they shouldn’t do it. It’s just SO not classy.

  46. “Was that mosque/worship space in the Pentagon already before 9/11?”
    Yes
    ” I AM wondering why this is getting huge traction.”
    Me too, probably because the US is going through a self-identity crisis.
    “As for my talk, they should be allowed to build, but they shouldn’t do it. It’s just SO not classy.”
    I don’t think that the world should be approached in terms of ‘what’s classy’…not a very objective means of judging value.

  47. Interesting discussion – but a total waste of bandwidth. Just heard that the $100 million slated for construction is being donated to the Pakistani flood appeal. So there, the muslims do have a conscience after all!

  48. Yeah built the mosque.
    And if I get depressed, it’ll be time for MY flying lessons…..

  49. Islamists have the religious and legal right to put a mosque on this property. No one doubts that. The question is, do they have the common decency to refrain from exercising that right, knowing a majority of Americans are hurt and offended. Are these folks really the “religion of peace” or are they the religion of confrontation, discord and power?
    So far as I know, Americans have welcomed mosques into their towns, cities and even villages without protest. That’s true religious freedom and its unheard of in the Islamic world.
    Just because you have a legal right to do something doesn’t make that something the right thing to do.
    Imagine the good will this Imam and his supporters would gain if they willingly abandoned this divisive project in a display of goodwill towards their fellow Americans.

  50. Islamists have the religious and legal right to put a mosque on this property. No one doubts that. The question is, do they have the common decency to refrain from exercising that right, knowing a majority of Americans are hurt and offended. Are these folks really the “religion of peace” or are they the religion of confrontation, discord and power?
    So far as I know, Americans have welcomed mosques into their towns, cities and even villages without protest. That’s religious freedom unheard of in the Moslem world.
    Just because you have a legal right to do something doesn’t make that something the right thing to do.
    Imagine the good will this Imam and his supporters would gain if they willingly abandoned this divisive project in a show of goodwill.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation