Mosque On Ground Zero. An Act Of Aggression: Yea Or Nay?

[Sky Dancer]

Yes.

last i checked, conservatives supported property rights.

you may want to rethink your position, libtard.

Different argument. I never argued the legalities of this issue. Others started that argument. I just gave my opinion. I oppose this Mosque being built in that location. I think it's incredibly insensitive and a bit hostile. The legalities obviously favor the builders since it's their property. I never argued otherwise. Someone else brought up the issue of Eminent Domain and i gave my opinion on that too. I oppose Eminent Domain Laws. The legalities are obviously in the builder's favor but it doesn't mean that i have to agree with them building their Mosque in this location. They really should reconsider.

One, it's not a mosque. Two, it's not being built on ground zero.

 

[GWV5903]

Let's see if the Unions will build it, if not, which I suspect will be the answer, everything else is a mute point.....

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I oppose Eminent Domain Laws and i always have. I opposed these Laws whether it was convenient or not. That's much more than i can say for phony Liberals who are now on here pretending they opposed Eminent Domain Laws all along. They now oppose Eminent Domain on this particular issue. Gee i wonder why? What a joke.

On December 28, 2008 I posted up this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...-93-families-ask-bush-to-ok-land-seizure.html

Here were my comments on the topic:

Flight 93 was a terrible tragedy, there can be no doubt about that. But what right does the government have to steal that land from a private company?

My favorite quote from the whole article is, "White said Svonavec has not been willing to negotiate, and called that unacceptable." This company doesn't have to negotiate, it's their property!

So am I still just opposing eminent domain for this particular issue?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Many on this thread have gotten caught up in the legalities and ownership issues. Obviously they own the property and it would be perfectly legal for them to build their Mosque on their own property. Who argued otherwise? Some may have argued that Eminent Domain could or should be used in this case but i don't support that. All that being said,i still think it's wrong to build it there. I think it would be a wonderful gesture for these owners to build their Mosque somewhere else. Millions of Americans would rejoice over such a wise & compassionate decision. I guess we'll see how it all ends up. Time will tell.

 

[jillian]

Many on this thread have gotten caught up in the legalities and ownership issues. Obviously they own the property and it would be perfectly legal for them to build their Mosque on their own property. Who argued otherwise? Some may have argued that Eminent Domain could or should be used in this case but i don't support that. All that being said,i still think it's wrong to build it there. I think it would be a wonderful gesture for these owners to build their Mosque somewhere else. Millions of Americans would rejoice over such a wise & compassionate decision. I guess we'll see how it all ends up. Time will tell.

actually, i think i said, they had every legal right to build it, but it seemed very insensitive, especially for a group that says it wants to build bridges...

seemed very counter-productive.

but it isn't an act of aggression.

 

[WillowTree]

One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.

three) too bad the muslims of NYC can't relate to the families of the victims and ask that it be built way far away from ground zero, but I know that's just too much to ask. innit? the sad truth is a group of muslims boarded 4 jet aeroplanes on Sept. 11th 2001 and two of them flew into the world trade center and killed about 3000 people, the other one flew into the Pentago killing more, god only knows where the fourth would have landed except for the brave Americans who said "let's roll." and that's the truth of the matter and no matter how much you insensitive libturds are millions upon millions of Americans can still remember that day and think that mosque should be built elsewhere and that's the way it is. sensitivity is a two way street.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Many on this thread have gotten caught up in the legalities and ownership issues. Obviously they own the property and it would be perfectly legal for them to build their Mosque on their own property. Who argued otherwise? Some may have argued that Eminent Domain could or should be used in this case but i don't support that. All that being said,i still think it's wrong to build it there. I think it would be a wonderful gesture for these owners to build their Mosque somewhere else. Millions of Americans would rejoice over such a wise & compassionate decision. I guess we'll see how it all ends up. Time will tell.

Well it's about time you cleared that up. So, for the record, you wholly support their right to build a mosque on their own property, despite the fact that you don't agree with their decision to do so?

 

[saveliberty]

One, Cordoba House is not a mosque. Two, it's not being built at Ground Zero.

Please let our readers understand the symbolism of Cordoba House. Something to do with conquering and occupying for 800 years I believe?

No it doesn't. It has to do with 800 years of peaceful coexistence of Muslims, Christians and Jews. Cordoba House takes its name from the medieval Spanish city where Muslims, Jews and Christians lived in peace for 800 years. The developers promise to act in that spirit by bringing people together in peace, healing and collaboration at a center that would include a 500-seat auditorium, art exhibition space, a swimming pool and retail space. It would also include a place for prayer.

Way to overlook the 800 years military occupation! Nice spin. Revise history much?

" For much of its history, al-Andalus existed in conflict with Christian kingdoms to the north. In 1085, Alfonso VI of León and Castile captured Toledo, precipitating a gradual decline until, by 1236, with the fall of Córdoba, the Emirate of Granada remained the only Muslim-ruled territory in what is now Spain. The Portuguese Reconquista culminated in 1249 with the conquest of the Algarve by Afonso III. In 1238, the Emirate of Granada officially became a tributary state to the Kingdom of Castile, then ruled by King Ferdinand III. On January 2, 1492, Emir Muhammad XII surrendered the Emirate of Granada to Queen Isabella I of Castile, who along with her husband King Ferdinand II of Aragon were Los Reyes Católicos, or "The Catholic Monarchs". The surrender concluded al-Andalus as a political entity."


Al-Andalus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[bodecea]

Yes.

How sad for Conservatives for them to be saddled with you.

I can think of a much better reference to a horse, for Libocalypse.

Damn! Another opportunity missed! Doh!

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I oppose Eminent Domain Laws and i always have. I opposed these Laws whether it was convenient or not. That's much more than i can say for phony Liberals who are now on here pretending they opposed Eminent Domain Laws all along. They now oppose Eminent Domain on this particular issue. Gee i wonder why? What a joke.

On December 28, 2008 I posted up this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/law-a...-93-families-ask-bush-to-ok-land-seizure.html

Here were my comments on the topic:

Flight 93 was a terrible tragedy, there can be no doubt about that. But what right does the government have to steal that land from a private company?

My favorite quote from the whole article is, "White said Svonavec has not been willing to negotiate, and called that unacceptable." This company doesn't have to negotiate, it's their property!

So am I still just opposing eminent domain for this particular issue?

My apologies. It is clear that you are consistent and honest. There are so few like you that i guess i did jump the gun a bit. Hope you can accept my humble apology.

 

[ConHog]

Many on this thread have gotten caught up in the legalities and ownership issues. Obviously they own the property and it would be perfectly legal for them to build their Mosque on their own property. Who argued otherwise? Some may have argued that Eminent Domain could or should be used in this case but i don't support that. All that being said,i still think it's wrong to build it there. I think it would be a wonderful gesture for these owners to build their Mosque somewhere else. Millions of Americans would rejoice over such a wise & compassionate decision. I guess we'll see how it all ends up. Time will tell.

actually, i think i said, they had every legal right to build it, but it seemed very insensitive, especially for a group that says it wants to build bridges...

seemed very counter-productive.

but it isn't an act of aggression.

Yes you did say that, but you are one of the few on the left who have. See the difference here? a few loons on the right want to outlaw the muslims or at the very least this mosque, while most agree with you, they have the right but it's insensitive, while on the left, MANY loons are screaming that they by god have the right and damn right it would be great if they built it and you and maybe one or two other lefties are in agreement that its insensitive.

Jillian, would think make you a loony leftie in this situation for going against the herd? Could we nudge just a little bit and convert you to being conservative?

 

[saveliberty]

Yes.

How sad for Conservatives for them to be saddled with you.

I can think of a much better reference to a horse, for Libocalypse.

Balk! If you are going to step off the mound after starting a pitch, you better deliver.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Many on this thread have gotten caught up in the legalities and ownership issues. Obviously they own the property and it would be perfectly legal for them to build their Mosque on their own property. Who argued otherwise? Some may have argued that Eminent Domain could or should be used in this case but i don't support that. All that being said,i still think it's wrong to build it there. I think it would be a wonderful gesture for these owners to build their Mosque somewhere else. Millions of Americans would rejoice over such a wise & compassionate decision. I guess we'll see how it all ends up. Time will tell.

Well it's about time you cleared that up. So, for the record, you wholly support their right to build a mosque on their own property, despite the fact that you don't agree with their decision to do so?

Well i guess i thought that was obvious. That's why i never started any arguments over the legality of ownership rights. It's obvious they own the property and can build their Mosque there. Others started the arguments over the legality of them building their Mosque. Some brought up Eminent Domain and i said i absolutely oppose Eminent Domain Laws. I guess i didn't make myself clear enough on that. My bad. My argument was more about me opposing the Mosque being built in this location and not about ownership legal rights. The thread did seem to drift into the ownership rights direction though. That wasn't my intention. Their ownership of the property is not in dispute in any way as far as i'm concerned.

 

[Biggles]

HAHA!

yea.. as if you stupid bastards were *just about to* start liking muslims.

You are a disgusting human being. You show hatred towards Christians then ***** when people "hate" Muslims.

Hypocrite much?

FOAD

I'm not the one advocating a ban on christian buildings, you ******* chode. You are the one demanding the gov swoop in, ironically, and save the day by banning muslims from enjoying their Constitutional rights. When you can stop being so ******* ironic then maybe, MAYBE you'll have a reason to feel like a victim. Today is not that day, it seems.

Do you know what common sense is? Or common decency? Or respect for those who have perished at the hands of evil, disgusting, murdering pigs?

Common sense allows the government to make laws or decisions for the common good. yes many times the government is out of line. I am against too much government, against big government, and against over regulation. BUT, ground zero is a sacred spot now. Have you been there? The emotion is palpable. Allowing a mosque to be built next to or near ground zero is a slap in the face of the victims and their families, as well as America.

 

[G.T.]

Sometimes intolerance is a good thing. Use your head. You can't,shouldn't,and probably don't tolerate everything in life. Personally i believe these Mosque builders could show some compassion & understanding by building their large Mosque somewhere else. So yes i am intolerant on this issue. Like i said earlier,i don't care what labels are thrown at me by the usual suspects. They're just parroting what they have been indoctrinated on their whole lives. Their reactions are robotic & predictable. I am very proud to be intolerant on this issue. Tolerance really is over-rated.

Why would it be compassionate to build elsewhere? What did they have to do with 9/11?

Really, what did they have anything, at all, to do with it?

It would only be "compassionate" not to build there, if it were, you know, somehow related to 9/11, but only idiots painting with big giant brushes think that.

It's insensitive and you guys know it. Now you're just spinning more stale talking-points. You guys really are robotic & predictable. If these builders really wanted to show some peace,love,and compassion they would build their large Mosque somewhere else. I know Millions of Americans would be incredibly grateful for this. They have a chance to do the right thing. I guess we'll see if they take this opportunity to do that. But please stop spewing your tired "Tolerance" rants. Intolerance is not only right sometimes but it can also be necessary. It's that way in your own life. You're just too indoctrinated with PC insanity to understand this.

What an idiot.

It's not compassionate to reconsider if they have NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, you moron.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Why would it be compassionate to build elsewhere? What did they have to do with 9/11?

Really, what did they have anything, at all, to do with it?

It would only be "compassionate" not to build there, if it were, you know, somehow related to 9/11, but only idiots painting with big giant brushes think that.

It's insensitive and you guys know it. Now you're just spinning more stale talking-points. You guys really are robotic & predictable. If these builders really wanted to show some peace,love,and compassion they would build their large Mosque somewhere else. I know Millions of Americans would be incredibly grateful for this. They have a chance to do the right thing. I guess we'll see if they take this opportunity to do that. But please stop spewing your tired "Tolerance" rants. Intolerance is not only right sometimes but it can also be necessary. It's that way in your own life. You're just too indoctrinated with PC insanity to understand this.

What an idiot.

It's not compassionate to reconsider if they have NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, you moron.

Not sure who claimed they had anything to do with 911. Seriously,are you drunk or something? lol! Why don't you just stick to what you're good at,which is calling everyone a RAAAAAAAAACEEEEEEESST? You got that shtick down for sure.

 

[ConHog]

Why would it be compassionate to build elsewhere? What did they have to do with 9/11?

Really, what did they have anything, at all, to do with it?

It would only be "compassionate" not to build there, if it were, you know, somehow related to 9/11, but only idiots painting with big giant brushes think that.

It's insensitive and you guys know it. Now you're just spinning more stale talking-points. You guys really are robotic & predictable. If these builders really wanted to show some peace,love,and compassion they would build their large Mosque somewhere else. I know Millions of Americans would be incredibly grateful for this. They have a chance to do the right thing. I guess we'll see if they take this opportunity to do that. But please stop spewing your tired "Tolerance" rants. Intolerance is not only right sometimes but it can also be necessary. It's that way in your own life. You're just too indoctrinated with PC insanity to understand this.

What an idiot.

It's not compassionate to reconsider if they have NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11, you moron.

Oh but it is, when the perception is that Islam = terrorists. Now you can get mad all you want, but that is the perception, and it is that way for a reason. just as back in the 80's Irish Catholics were looked on with skepticism because of terrorism. Oh by the way, did you ever see any Irish Catholic come around after ten years wanting to build a shrine to their religion near the site of an attack done by those who used that religion to do so?

Look, it's obvious that perception means nothing to the left, as evidenced by the Obama's living the gilded life as Americans barely scrape by and not a word being spoken about it; BUT open your eyes and realize that to 80% of America perception DOES matter.

The perception is that if Iman Faisel gave a shit about American sensibilities he would not want to build this mosque in the face of so many not wanting it. The reality is if you read his books, you will realize that he in fact does NOT care. Couple that with the historical fact that Muslims like to build Mosques at the site of great victories and you SHOULD be able to understand why so many are against this mosque.


Put another way, take off the god damned partisan PC blinders for 20 seconds and just be an American.

 

[G.T.]

Perception means nothing, it's truth is all I'm concerned with and I'm not "the left," dude, that's a crutch for Conservatives to use when they are disagreed with. I'm "just a person."

And "truth," vs. "Perception," here, is that it's not right in any way shape or form to relate these individuals to 9/11 simply because they share something in common with the terrorists: Religion. Same way it's not right to paint any Religion with a broad brush.

You can hum-deelaa about perception all day long, but I'll take truth and have a nice day.

And Libo-geek..........stfu.

 

[ConHog]

Perception means nothing, it's truth is all I'm concerned with and I'm not "the left," dude, that's a crutch for Conservatives to use when they are disagreed with. I'm "just a person."

And "truth," vs. "Perception," here, is that it's not right in any way shape or form to relate these individuals to 9/11 simply because they share something in common with the terrorists: Religion. Same way it's not right to paint any Religion with a broad brush.

You can hum-deelaa about perception all day long, but I'll take truth and have a nice day.

And Libo-geek..........stfu.

Have you read any of Imam Faisel's books?

 

[G.T.]

Or, we can go with common sense even, instead of truth.

Person A is Conservative, and a Murderer.

Person B is a Conservative.

Person B = A murderer? NO. COMMON SENSE. LOGIC, WHATEVER. SAME GOES FOR THIS SITUATION.




9/11 HIJACKERS WERE MUSLIMS, AND TERRORISTS.

BUILDERS ARE MUSLIMS.

= BUILDERS ARE TERRORISTS? NO. COMMON SENSE.