Sir Bandelot

So the real enemy is finally revealed, then.

Maybe it does come from Saudi, but isn't it a double-standard to condemn it for that? Isn't it blaming all of Saudi Arabia for 9-11? And if you would do that, which I'm sure some will, then isn't Saudi Arabia considered a friend of the United States? I thought George Bush is personal friends with powerful people in Saudi. There wasn't any criticism of Saudi Arabia post 9-11, just mainly Afghanistan and Iraq. Not saying the Saudi's are not guilty, but seems like a double-standard to me. They probably funded other mosques.

Religion is like Irish whiskey. Not a bad thing, taken in moderation...

I now believe the mosque should not be built, only because of the amount of angry opposition to the mosque. I don't agree with this opposition. Ideally the mosque could have been a symbol of hope for reconciliation. But sadly various factions are not ready for that. Compunding the problem are the real bigots, who jump on this situation and use it as a platform to revile all muslims. They hate them now, and they hated them even before 9-11. It does not help the cause of those who have legitimate concerns about reforming islam. People like Rosa Parks make the conscous decision to fight, and are willing to take the hits. If they build the mosque, it will create a backlash against muslims who go there. As a community they have to ask if they're willing to take the hits, and if doing that is beneficial to muslim/ western relations. Sadly it isn't. So best thing now is to not build the mosque there, but move it slightly out of the way. Doing so would only show how ridiculous the oppositions stance truly is.

Go to a Biker bar and call them all fags. I bet they'll get mad. But it's not fair that they should retaliate. Why can't they take a few petty insults? Keep doing it.

I put three blocks away because, it's one block further than where it is now. So long as it's not in a building that was damaged by 9-11, that should appease the people who are against muslims. And it illustrates this point for the ones who are set against this mosque- it does not really matter where mosques are built. Muslims will still go there to pray to Allah. All kinds of muslims. So move the mosque one block, and there it is. Like the saying goes, if the mountain will not come to Muhammad...

Islam is antiquated, conservative and harsh. Most people would easily agree with that. I don't get how it equates to the debate on whether the mosque should be built at that site, or not. If we say Islam has no place in western society, then it should be banned, everywhere. Personally I now think they should drop their intention to build the mosque there. It's become too contentious an issue for them to safely build it on that spot. No point in fighting over what's essentially a non-issue in regards to the proposed mission of such a center. If they really want to build bridges of understanding between muslims and non-muslims, they can do that elsewhere as well. Just build the mosque a block or two further away.

Your point of view makes a lot more sense to me, than people like Pat Robertson's point of view. But on the intolerant side of this argument, there's always going to be people who either hate all muslims, or sympathize with those who hate them. And some muslims are scared now, they don't want too much attention brought upon them. If the mosque gets built, it's going to be trouble for everyone. There should be signs put up in the area around the WTC site, wherever the was debris that fell. The sign should say, "no muslim places of worship in this area." That's what these people want, but not because they're bigots.

Hmm, sounds kinda like you...

Your point is well taken. Yes, this is something we in the west disagree with. But it does not support the argument, to build or not build the mosque at this site. Unless of course, you want to make a stand and say, no mosques should be allowed anywhere, and no muslims should be welcome anywhere. But let me emphasize, not saying your views are bigoted...

Yeah. Plus, it's a cultural center with a mosque in one room. Plus, the building was used as an impromptu mosque before they announced they were going to renovate it. So muslims were going there up to 5 times a day, every day for probably several years already. But now they announced they want to build it up, what happens? Boom. Targeted by extremists. And their apologists. As well as those who don't agree with them, but merely "understand".

I don't care how you see me. But I'd rather not be seen agreeing with Newt Gingrich, Pat Robertson and Sarah Palin in this. Besides, my view is that the mosque should have been allowed, as long as it appeals to moderate people, muslim or non. But regardless of whether it gets built or not, that is almost secondary now, to what the debate itself reveals about the mentality of people. That much I understand.

So what? When you think about it, they're all basically the same.

Like I said, it's too delicately worded in political correctness for me to get it. The truth is simple.

I would have joined you in that, WIP, but I was not wearing my rubber boots and did not care to wade into such filth, with no hope of getting anywhere. But for the record now, I don't consider telling someone their religion "sucks" to be in any way tolerant or respectful.

You are not helping AW with these kind of claims. At least, I think you're not. But I don't know for sure. She never weighs in on it when you make claims like this. I mean, that since these guys are all muslim, that's why the muslims shouldn't build the mosque there. Oh I have to say that so carefully not to get it wrong, it's too politically correct for me to get it.

Dancer already weighed in on this thread a while ago. In classic Dancer style...

Yes, I see what you mean. Hence the statement "Listen what I say". And she did call anyone who doesn't get her views an ignoramus, etc. Kinda sad because, I used to think she was pretty cool. Now she just, blows her cool

On the point, will the Jihadists use the building of the mosque as a victory for their movement, or will theu use the cancelling of the mosque as a victory for their movement, the answer is probably, Yes and Yes. The inflammatory debate brings this up the highest level of attention, which is what terrorists thrive on. Pandoras box is already wide open, so hardly matters now either way wht the outcome is. Or maybe, the worst outcome for ordinary muslims, and best for the terrorists is that he mosque does get built, and gets attacked and blown up by muslim-haters. I say this because, there's already been threats of that happening if it gets built. You can bet it will be a security hotspot. For moderate people who just want to live an ordinary life, muslim or non-muslim, too late now.

Exactly. The fact that she can't seem to understand that she is incriminating herself with every statement is quite telling. Clearly I'm not the only one who can't figure her out on this. I've been trying for a while to see the light of her logic, but it still seems contradictory to me. Her association of muslim religion with the terrorists is inconsistent with her claims that she is not a bigot. Plus, whenever you ask about these inconsistencies she gets all mad and whiny. AW, I know you've answered the same questions about it at least a few dozen times by now, always giving the same answer, and claiming you're being misunderstood. But looks like people are not buying your explanation. You say a religion was responsible for 9-11? How's that again? You must get misunderstood quite a lot. I don't think you're really a bigot, but your views are all tangled up, too complicated. I think I know you mean a yes, but it's all wrong. That is, I think I disagree...

Lets not forget the whole Robert Dziekanski thing, and what the cops said happened, versus reality. Had there not been video evidence of his murder, we would never have known and written him off as just another nut who deserved what he had coming. Full details of the incident came to light because it was filmed by a member of the public, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Dzieka%C5%84ski_Taser_incident Oh and while I'm on this point, wondering what's up with the criminal charges. These folks are taking their sweet time deciding what to do next, while potential murderers still roam freely. "Three of the officers have been transferred out of province and are on administrative duties, while the one who remains in the province was suspended with pay pending his trial on an obstruction of justice charge in relation to a fatal car accident." Tough on crime, my &^%^$$

You can all me anything you want Dog, it's a free country. Just let me get my boots on, I don't like tracking shit in the house.

Read post #650, laughing girl. I'll stick with Bloomberg on this one. You guys can stick with Rush Limbaugh, Pat Robertson and Dog.

We all know the stuff about harsh muslim treatment toward their women, and we all want to se that changed. But people like Dog can't seem to differentiate between those types of muslims and the many other ordinary muslims who don't abuse their women. Their customs are backwards to us, including the way they separate of women in the mosque, or wherever else. I said, we still have some of those elements too. There are people who send their kids to those schools, because that's what they believe is right. In places like Britain this separation is even more obvious. It is still quite apparent in some christian groups, and in the bible. Eve is blamed. The example I gave is just one simple example. Ask a catholic nun more about it. Ask the ones who want to be able to give sermons in their own churches. That doesn't mean I am excusing the behaviour. Just illustrting it, to try and help the fearful see that they are not as different from us as we might think. The radicals certainly are though. Pat Robertson, sure has a lot to say. What's interesting is how quickly you, American Woman are to bring up the defects of Islam, which I do not deny but do you see that we have some of those same defects as well? And more importantly, is any of that good reason not to build the mosque in NYC. I thought the reason not to do it was out of empathy for the dead. Now it's because they abuse women. Next because they don't allow girls in school in Afghanistan, and they won't build a church in Saudi Arabia. Let's think up some more reasons, but remember, we're not bigotted, we just understand the reasons because, we are so wise.

Because it has nothing to do with the mosque issue in NYC whatsoever. But has everything to do with something else.