CANADIEN

One just need to take a look at the way Catholics, for example, were treated in the past to see that there are an unsignificant number of people to whom freedom, religious or other is fine as long as it applies only to them.

And I am sure all those women who are been told on a regular basis that their duty as good Ghristians is to obey their husband share your enthousiams.

Actualy, no

(mandatory disclaimer, that will likely be ignored: the term "some people" used below does not refer to the opponents to the Cordoba Project, th majority of the opponents, or aw) The primary reason why the project is not ahcieving the goal of building project is because some people are hijacking legitimate concerns about some of the symbolism of the site to foster controversy, if not intolerance. The problem is not the 83% of Americans who think it's a bad idea. Not it is the promoters of the project. It's those people who exploit this issue to sow division.

And what if he thinks that a climate of peace and tolerance may result in a few converts? The goal of any woman and man of faith, whatever their faith is, should be to bring people to their faith through the example of a peaceful and oving life? What counts, the only thing that counts when gauging his intentions if whether or not he wants to build bridges, not what he thinks may be the results in terms of the numbers of Muslims in the United States ten or twenty years from now. But I suspect this will be lost on you, because I get the growing feeling that the simple fact that we are talking about Muslims is sufficient for you o come with any argument you can find just to keep them up, like the incredibly inane "he`s exploiting 9-11" argument. I am surprised I don't see any flying sink yet.

Who cares if he is a traditionalist or Libral? As long as he intents on building bridges (and I have yet to see proof to the contrary) and as long as he will obey the laws of his country...

Err... I may be wrong here, but I fail to see how kimmy was playing an ethnic origin card.

Then don't celebrate it. But nice going from "the Centre is a bad idea because Islamists may use it as a symbol" to "the Centre is bad because it,s Muslim"

And news to you. I have never said that was the case.

As I expected... I set a trap and you fall right into it, making a fool of yourself... not the first and last time you do it, News to you. Disagreeing with hate-mongerers, ignorant and idiots and saying that what they so and do is morally offensive is NOT opposing thier freedom of speech or their right to protest. Like it or not, your freedom of speech includes the freedom to be spoken against.

Oh my... the candal... a chain of restaurant that sells a mstly halal menu... The French language is about to disappear from France... Those idiots are free to go eat elswhere.

I am not as sure as you are on that. What I am sure though is that Al-Quaeda benefits more from anything they can pass out as exemples of Western intolerence than from the opposite.

Oh well... nobody would dream of accusing you of being in favour of freedom of religion anyway.

You may have a point. After all, logic is utterly missing from your posts.

If anybody is (unwittingly in most cases, very much on purpose is others) giving any ammunition to Islamists, it's the opponents to the project. "They hate us so much that even gestures of openings are rebuked" is a much more potent recruitement tools for any hate-mongerer than "we have a building on a site of our victory". Far, far more.

Feel free to give any importance to what a bunch of murderous thugs think. I won't, beyond saying that what they think is not even fit for my toilet.

Indeed.

Actually, yes some people will still see it that way, because what they will see beyond the voices of the nutcases to those of those who are actually promoting the project. Not to worry, I don't expect you to graps that simple of context. But let put it an other way. Scr*w the Islamists... I will not let them decide how I am to view the efforts of Muslims who are making it clear that they won't accept their message.

Some people will see it at this... some people will see it at that. How about seeing it the way the promoters of the project see it? But hey, I am trying to talk common sense to someone who thi nks I have been defending people by calling them idiots.

By that "logic" (and yes, the brackets are intentional), the Centre should be built where planned because otherwise its non-presence there would be used by Islamists as a symbol of the so-called hatred of the West towrds Muslims. Guess why I think it does not make sense? Because it doesn't.

There are other boundaries to be set... The site is special... So how should it be treated. (madatory statement that will likely be ignored: the term "some people" below does not refer to the opponents to the Cordoba Project as a whole, to the majority of opponents, or to AW) Some people havestated they view Ground Zero as a sacred site, and that for this reason no mosque should be built there. Fine, then if it's a scared space, I'd expect those same people to argue that office towers shoul not be built on a sacred space.

The "some third world scumbags will see it as a symbol of a Muslim victory" argument is as relevant as "not building the Centre there will bolster Al-Quaeda's claim that the West as a whole is Islamophobic". That is, not bery relevant at all.

I go away for a few days to do things FAR MORE interesting and usefulthan bing here, and when I get bored and come back, it's to the same... well.... absurdist argument. (mandatory disclaimer, that will of course be ignored: the term "some people" as used below does not refer to the opponents to the Cordoba Project as a whole, not even to a majority of them, and not to AW) Never mind the weak argument that "that piece of propoerty woukd not have been available if not damaged by 9-11" - there is a number of other ways the property could have become available, so that argument is not even remotely logical. As for more often it needs to be repeated... it will not be a valid argument even if repeated over 10000 pages. If there had been a msque on that precise site on the morning of September 11, tehre some people would still object to it being there, some people would still cry foul at any attempt to use that mosque as a statement for peace, some people would still use legitimate concerns andd and opposition to further their intolerant agenda. Period.

As unproven as the conspiracy bit.

Well... it was fun.