Ground Zero Once Removed

I think at this point it is only reasonable to ask ourselves, What would Charlton Heston say about this controversy? Hum?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-19-2010/extremist-makeover---homeland-edition

 

I am glad to see someone around this site has some sense. BTW, did you see that this imam is now accusing the USA of killing 500,000 Iraqi children? Oh! And this guy is a moderate?

 

Again, what distance would be exactly the right distance for any type of Islamic center? The Right misquoted this Imama's for comment and I'm sure you are doing it with this comment too.

 

“We tend to forget, in the west, that the United States has more muslim blood on its hands than Al Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non-muslims.”- July 12,2005- Inam Raue

Raue wife has been on tv saying ALL Americans hate muslims.

Yeah they are moderates about as moderate as Jerimiah Wright.

Where should it be built? How about where the St. Nicholas church once stood. Would that be ‘in your face enough’? They have been trying to rebuild for years. The city can’t get together on rebuilding this church but can vote 9-0 to built this $100,000,000.00 mosque.

Or maybe rebuild where the Bronx Household of Faith is wanting to build. This small Christian group has been trying to find a small meeting space trying to rent out a vacant space in a school biulding on the weekends only to be denied by the city, in and out of court fighting this small group of Christians for 15 years. Yet the city is going to give money and incentives to build this mosque.


So how about those sites? Lets really stick it to those Christians and put the mosque where the St. Nicholas church once stood, since we can’t make a decision when they can rebuild…………..or how about letting the mosquers meet in that vacant school building on the weekends.

 

You don't happen to have a credible source for his comments do you? Fox News has a very flimsy relationship with the truth.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...osque-imam-america-killed-innocents-al-qaeda/

You still haven't answered what the exact geographical distance from ground zero is an OK distance to build and why that is the acceptable distance? You've thrown out some random sites but you must have an acceptable distance or you wouldn't be able to name these sites. Please let the rest of us in on it.

 

IMAM RAUF'S NEWLY DISCOVERED EXPLOSIVE AUDIO TAPES

Rauf is a "radical extremist cleric who cloaks himself in sheep's clothing."
Among the shocking revelations Emerson's team will reveal next week -- they found Rauf:
Defending wahhabism - a puritanical version of Islam that governs Saudi Arabia
Calling for the elimination of Israel by claiming a one-nation state, meaning no more Jewish State.
Defending Bin Laden's violence

Demonstrating that there is a lot more to this man than merely a cleric.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/...s-newly-discovered-explosive-audio-tapes.html

 

The St. Nicholas church stood right across the street from WTC's. Ground zero +50 feet. Is that close enought for you? How about putting it there? Willthat work for you?

 

Listen to Steve Emerson's interview with Bill Bennett at this website:


http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...dio-tapes.html

 

Oh Please, even Fox has more credibility that Pamela Geller. She the right wing nut case that fomented this whole non-story into a national controversy. She's been caught lying more than Glenn Beck and thats saying something. Here is a clue: Blogs aren't credible news sources.

MediaMatters wrote: And yes this is their opinion but true nonetheless...

Memo to media: Pamela Geller does not belong on national television
July 14, 2010 3:12 pm ET — 50 Comments
Numerous mainstream media outlets have recently hosted right-wing "Atlas Shrugs" blogger Pamela Geller to discuss the controversy surrounding a proposed Islamic community center set to be built blocks away from Ground Zero. However, Geller's history of outrageous, inflammatory and false claims, particularly when it comes to issues related to Islam, demonstrate that she cannot be expected to make accurate statements and should not be rewarded with a platform on national television.

Well said MediaMatters!

 

The question, as you plainly know and still won't answer, isn't whether it is close enough for ME, but rather what is the acceptable distance from ground zero that any Islamic organization is allowed to build in your opinion and WHY? But of course you and everyone else here knows that already but steadfastly refuse to answer.

You know why I am asking this question and that is why you have refused to answer it. We are at the point where you and the rest of the dodgers in this forum usually claim to have already answered the question because they realize I won’t quit asking and they have no good answer to a rather simple question of geographical distance.

Don’t feel too bad, you are following a rather predicable pattern I’ve become use to and I remain unsurprised by the very expected responses by this point. BTW I can feel your anger growing as you read this. I know that your anger is simply the result of the cognitive dissonance you are experiencing due to your long held beliefs being challenged and you being unable to rationalize them with the new information available. If you’re true to form, you ignore the new information and continue to believe as you always have. You simply have no choice but to remain on the path that has served you so well all these years. It’s more habit than logic, more instinct than intellect, more pattern than reason for you at this point. Just go with it.

 

Media Matters, are you kidding me. The place where all good little liberals go to get their talking points. The self proclaimed progressive, social justice, redistributionist, Marxist web site.

Talk about dodging. Why don’t you look into this Rauf instead of cutting and pasting from Media Matters. This has nothing to do with Geller. Steve Emerson has helped exposed what Rauf is, a radical.

http://www.billbennett.com/michaelm...0b3duaGFsbC9iZW5uZXR0L1N0ZXZlRW1lcnNvbjIubXAz

http://www.investigativeproject.org/maps/terrorism-map.php

 

Atlas Shrugged is Gellers blog. Don't try and say that she has nothing to do with this. You posted two links in two different posts to her blog.

and BTW you're still dodging the question. Man up and give me a geographical distance. You'll talk about everything else BUT!

 

6 blocks!

And "The Right" I listened to did not "misquoted this Imama's for comment". They played the tape of his speech. No, I did not misquote it. That is what the idiot said. Even UNICEF agrees. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/418625.stm

I give at least some references. You are calling everyone else a liar with no reference?

 

Great! Now the Why part of the question. Why is 6 blocks the proper distance? Why not 7 blocks? Why not 16 blocks? Why not 4.2 blocks away?
The truth is that it was never about "2 blocks" from ground zero. It was always about anti-Muslim sentiments. The Right wing can't pin their emotional response to this project on their real feelings of Islamophobia so they make it about a nonsensical distance issue from ground zero. My question exposes the truth by pointing out that there is no rhyme or reason behind the distance from ground zero would be acceptable.

 

I love the way you can read my mind. All you need now are some facts. BTW, where is the mosque?

Back on topic of truth, what does the man say here? http://dailycaller.com/2010/08/23/ground-zero-imam-says-u-s-worse-than-al-qaeda/

 

The new information coming out about this proposed mosque is questionable funding issues and sponsoring issues and now questionable developer. Also being brought to light, just how radical is Iman Rauf. A few points you chose to ignore.

The left wing media started this weeks ago by saying anyone opposed to this mosque would be labeled a racist, and it worked for a while. Repubs were shaking in there boots. The Rino’s heads are still in the sand. Even members of this forum would not touch it for days if at all. This “ginned up” racism bit may have come back to bite you lefties in the ass.

Typical Moen all you can do is resort to your personal attacks. Usually anger comes from the one that starts the attacks. I think I have read your last paragraph before in this forum (ok you changed a few words, what a scholar you are).

 

Moen,

Your focus on the distance issue is a red herring. The answer to you distance question from any individual should be I don't know. Everyone is different and if you polled 100 people, you would probably get 25 different answers to that question. What is important is that 70% of the American public thinks that 2 blocks is too close.

Furthermore, this has nothing to do with the right wing Islamaphobia. The issue was politicized by the right wing because they knew that they could exploit it for political gain in the midterm elections. And while you are correct that there is no rhyme or reason behind the acceptable distance, that is because the issue is being viewed emotionally by most Americans, not logically.

 

The mosque in ground Zero.
This is how the inside group rules this country.

They have a false flag terror attack on 911 to justify their war in Mid-east. The Muslim is wronged as terrorist. Then they build a Mosque in WTO site to show how tolerant and fair they are. That's a trick of propaganda.

Is that funny people flock to argue about "Allah", "victim of 911"....? The real mastermind of the 911 grins at the soap opera they directed.

 

Can you show me where the liberal media(I'm guessing you mean the top three networks)labels anyone who opposes this building a racist. Thanks. I thought you werent a fan of New Yorkers and their elitists ways. Maybe not. I just thought maybe I read about it in one of your earlier posts.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just think that if 2 blocks away from ground zero is too offensive, what is the acceptable number of blocks away that isn't offensive? It's the next logical question in what you have rightly defined as an emotional issue.

I can't even figure out why we are wasting time talking about this issue when so many other issues are so much more important except that as you say, it is for pure political gain. It isn't the first distraction that has been trumped up by the right to avoid talking about anything of substance this year and it won't be the last either. I like it when Republican leaders and conservative pundits say that Republicans have suggested substantive political solutions but can't actually name any when pushed to list them.