HELL NO to the 9/11 Mosque

[Sunni Man]

Sorry bout that,


1. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact.
2. If an religion or whatever will cause death and destruction, we need and have to eliminate that problem in order to protect the Constitution.
3. I don't mean round muslims up into camps, I mean ban the religion, bulldoze buildings, and send them to muslim nations.
4. This war is on islam, and its not even nearly half over.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

You are so silly.

 

[chesswarsnow]

Sorry bout that,


1. This is no joke.
2. And more and more Americans and Europeans are seeing the hand writing on the wall.
3. Islam is the problem, as more and more non muslom turn and face this problem, more and more people will join my side.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

 

[Ozmar]

I tend to agree with SirDipofShit on this one.

 

[Justin Buell]

We've been building ground zero's near mosques for decades, yet the outrage comes now.

 

[Sallow]

Anyone not from NYC...really doesn't get much of a say in what gets built here..

Except when it's a matter of national security and the construction will represent the dominance of Islam.

So fuck the people of NYC if they want it there. Which they overwhelmingly don't.

Naw.

You don't get a say.

But you are welcome to come stand by the WTC and yell out "So fuck the people of NYC if they want it there. "

In fact..I sort of double dog dare ya..

 

[Sallow]

Anyone not from NYC...really doesn't get much of a say in what gets built here..

the issue is bigger than you it is unconstitutional

No it's not.

It would be "unconstitutional" to stop it.

And it's funny all the "state's right" freaks now want a say in local matters.

This is a New York issue..and it's for New Yorkers.

 

[BlindBoo]

Sorry bout that,


1. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact.
2. If an religion or whatever will cause death and destruction, we need and have to eliminate that problem in order to protect the Constitution.
3. I don't mean round muslims up into camps, I mean ban the religion, bulldoze buildings, and send them to muslim nations.
4. This war is on islam, and its not even nearly half over.


Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Your proposal number 3 is, fortunantly, unconsitutional. So we'd have to break the constitution to save it!

This is not a war on Islam. It just so happens that many Muslims live on top of the vast majority of the worlds oil reserves.

"Ancient History": U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War II and the Folly of Intervention | Sheldon L. Richman | Cato Institute: Policy Analysis

"Ancient History": U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War II and the Folly of Intervention
by Sheldon L. Richman

As the United States finds itself in the aftermath of another crisis in the Middle East, it is worth the risk of opprobrium to ask why there should be hostility toward America in that region. Some insight can be gained by surveying official U.S. conduct in the Middle East since the end of World War II. Acknowledged herein is a fundamental, yet deplorably overlooked, distinction between understanding and excusing. The purpose of this survey is not to pardon acts of violence against innocent people but to understand the reasons that drive people to violent political acts.[2] The stubborn and often self-serving notion that the historical record is irrelevant because political violence is inexcusable ensures that Americans will be caught in crises in the Middle East and elsewhere for many years to come.

Sheldon L. Richman is senior editor at the Cato Institute.

After 70 years of broken Western promises regarding Arab independence, it should not be surprising that the West is viewed with suspicion and hostility by the populations (as opposed to some of the political regimes) of the Middle East.[3] The United States, as the heir to British imperialism in the region, has been a frequent object of suspicion. Since the end of World War II, the United States, like the European colonial powers before it, has been unable to resist becoming entangled in the region's political conflicts. Driven by a desire to keep the vast oil reserves in hands friendly to the United States, a wish to keep out potential rivals (such as the Soviet Union), opposition to neutrality in the cold war, and domestic political considerations, the United States has compiled a record of tragedy in the Middle East. The most recent part of that record, which includes U.S. alliances with Iraq to counter Iran and then with Iran and Syria to counter Iraq, illustrates a theme that has been played in Washington for the last 45 years.

An examination of the details and consequences of that theme provides a startling object lesson in the pitfalls and conceit of an interventionist foreign policy........

 

[eots]

Anyone not from NYC...really doesn't get much of a say in what gets built here..

the issue is bigger than you it is unconstitutional

No it's not.

It would be "unconstitutional" to stop it.

And it's funny all the "state's right" freaks now want a say in local matters.

This is a New York issue..and it's for New Yorkers.

So cities have the right to deny citizens freedom of religion ? what are you the NY " Taliban" or what

 

[Ozmar]

Of course, because NY is oppressing women and destroying ancient statues.

 

[eots]

of course, because ny is oppressing women and destroying ancient statues.

really ? Got a link to that ?

 

[beowolfe]

The idea that an ISLAMIC Mosque is going to be built near the ground zero is absolutely disgusting and nauseating to even think about. The terrorists who brought about the deaths of 3,000 Americans killed these people in the name of Islam, and now and group of Muslims wants to build a place of worship near the sacred and hollowed ground of where the Twin Towers once stood.

Does anyone else think there is something wrong with this??

Think how you would feel if you lost a loved one on 9/11 and when you go to the place where your loved one died on their birthday to honor their memory you have to see a mosque which honors the religion of the terrorists that killed your loved one. This mosque is a symbol that the Muslims have "conquered" that sacred ground.

What are your opinions?

My opinion, is that you're a religious bigot who can't discern between radical muslims and all other muslims. You are also apparantly an anti-constitutionalist, since you don't put any stock in the first amendment.

 

[sangha]

The idea that an ISLAMIC Mosque is going to be built near the ground zero is absolutely disgusting and nauseating to even think about. The terrorists who brought about the deaths of 3,000 Americans killed these people in the name of Islam, and now and group of Muslims wants to build a place of worship near the sacred and hollowed ground of where the Twin Towers once stood.

Does anyone else think there is something wrong with this??

Think how you would feel if you lost a loved one on 9/11 and when you go to the place where your loved one died on their birthday to honor their memory you have to see a mosque which honors the religion of the terrorists that killed your loved one. This mosque is a symbol that the Muslims have "conquered" that sacred ground.

What are your opinions?

My opinion, is that you're a religious bigot who can't discern between radical muslims and all other muslims. You are also apparantly an anti-constitutionalist, since you don't put any stock in the first amendment.

All wingnuts are anti-constitutionalists. They hate the constitution. They want to change all of it except the 3rd Amend, and that's only because they don't know what it is

 

[Ozmar]

of course, because ny is oppressing women and destroying ancient statues.

really ? Got a link to that ?

Yeah. Check it out.

fuck you by mike monteiro : the beholder - a marketplace for artists

 

[Ozmar]

The idea that an ISLAMIC Mosque is going to be built near the ground zero is absolutely disgusting and nauseating to even think about. The terrorists who brought about the deaths of 3,000 Americans killed these people in the name of Islam, and now and group of Muslims wants to build a place of worship near the sacred and hollowed ground of where the Twin Towers once stood.

Does anyone else think there is something wrong with this??

Think how you would feel if you lost a loved one on 9/11 and when you go to the place where your loved one died on their birthday to honor their memory you have to see a mosque which honors the religion of the terrorists that killed your loved one. This mosque is a symbol that the Muslims have "conquered" that sacred ground.

What are your opinions?

My opinion, is that you're a religious bigot who can't discern between radical muslims and all other muslims. You are also apparantly an anti-constitutionalist, since you don't put any stock in the first amendment.

All wingnuts are anti-constitutionalists. They hate the constitution. They want to change all of it except the 3rd Amend, and that's only because they don't know what it is

You're an anti-constitutionalist? Why am I not surprised?

 

[HinduPatriot]

The 911 Mosque must be built. The extremist Christian SCUM assholes must not get in the way of the mosque.

God bless Israel & India in the war against Islamic Terrorism. Jews and Hindus are heroes and true soldiers of God.

And may God defend Muslim Heros defending themselves from American Terrorism.

Screw Al-Quaeda and Screw the USA -- they are morally equivalent Bastards.

 

[Justin Buell]

The 911 Mosque must be built. The extremist Christian SCUM assholes must not get in the way of the mosque.

God bless Israel & India in the war against Islamic Terrorism. Jews and Hindus are heroes and true soldiers of God.

And may God defend Muslim Heros defending themselves from American Terrorism.

Screw Al-Quaeda and Screw the USA -- they are morally equivalent Bastards.

......what!?

 

[Sallow]

the issue is bigger than you it is unconstitutional

No it's not.

It would be "unconstitutional" to stop it.

And it's funny all the "state's right" freaks now want a say in local matters.

This is a New York issue..and it's for New Yorkers.

So cities have the right to deny citizens freedom of religion ? what are you the NY " Taliban" or what

Naw.

I couldn't care less one way or the other.

Unless some idiot from Texas..tells us what we can and can't do here.

 

[eots]

No it's not.

It would be "unconstitutional" to stop it.

And it's funny all the "state's right" freaks now want a say in local matters.

This is a New York issue..and it's for New Yorkers.

So cities have the right to deny citizens freedom of religion ? what are you the NY " Taliban" or what

Naw.

I couldn't care less one way or the other.

Unless some idiot from Texas..tells us what we can and can't do here.

you mean like that Bush guy did ?