Mosque in New York , This is all I will Say about This Period.

[BigAlOfMD]

Sorry BIG AL, but since you borrow my name Big Al, I'm borrowing you're headline 

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/38816495/ns/today-today_fashion_and_beauty/?gt1=43001

[Bobbo]

I think the main confusion over this topic is the mistaken belief that if you support government non-interference in this building, then you support building it in this location.  These are two separate issues.

[Serk]

I think the main confusion over this topic is the mistaken belief that if you support government non-interference in this building, then you support building it in this location.  These are two separate issues.

 

Wise words...

[big turkey]

You can be CIA.

Cheap Imitation Al.

Big AL

[big turkey]

What's mine is yours Al.

Al's are always honest, forthright, and generous.

Everybody should be like us.

Big AL

[JustJim]

I think the main confusion over this topic is the mistaken belief that if you support government non-interference in this building, then you support building it in this location.  These are two separate issues.

Excellent point. Plus the fact that it's not a mosque. And the fact that it is several blocks from Ground Zero. I can't figure out why this is getting so much attention. And I'd like to know exactly who started all the hubbub. Anyone know?

Jim

[Skinhead]

Click on the "freedom" hotlink in that article, it brings up a pretty cool Dodge commercial.

One of the United States’ most visible Muslim-Americans has taken sides in the debate on whether to build a 13-story community center and mosque near the site of the former World Trade Center in New York City. Lebanese-born, New York-raised Miss USA Rima Fakih said she is against the plan.

Maybe this is where the confusion originated.

[JimL]

Excellent point. Plus the fact that it's not a mosque. And the fact that it is several blocks from Ground Zero. I can't figure out why this is getting so much attention. And I'd like to know exactly who started all the hubbub. Anyone know?

Jim

I guess we could debate the meaning of several blocks, but I think most would agree that would be pointless exercise.  The proposed mosque appears to be approximately 2 blocks from ground zero.  As far as who started the hubbub... I honestly don't know.  I am sure that there are those who feel the Tea Party is behind it, others like Rosie O'Donnell, Sean Penn and Vance Jones probably have concrete evidence that George Bush launched this plot just before leaving the White House in order to build hatred toward Islam.  For all I know, they all may correct.  What I do know is that many of the people protesting are the ones who lost loved ones in the Twin Towers that September day.  

Following is a map of the location of the proposed mosque (marked as "A" on the map) and location where the Twins Towers used to stand.

[big turkey]

IT was me of Course.

Big Al

[KW]

I wasn’t going to bother weighing in on this . . . because of the futility of ‘internet debate’ in trying to change anyone’s opinion by expressing your own views via a faceless, voiceless medium. However, there so much misunderstanding about our Constitutional rights, and the responsibilities of a civilized society, being expressed here, I had to comment.

First; there is an almost unbelievable ignorance being perpetuated by the media when speaking of ‘freedom” of religion as it’s applied to the ‘building’ of a muslim mosque. I’m tempted to say that no such concern would be voiced by the Left if it involved a Christian Church, but I’ll leave that out of the conversation for now. 

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919 clearly limited free speech. Many of you have heard or read the quote about “you can’t shout fire in a crowded thearter.”  The actual opinion stated; “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent.”

In other words; our rights ARE NOT limitless, without restrictions, or void of responsibility. In fact, ALL of our rights have boundaries.     

As an example; we limit many activities which would intentionally or premeditatedly cause harm to another group. For example, we would not allow a group of neo-Nazis to enter a public Synagogue during a Bar Mitzvah. Or, a allow group of clansmen to burn a cross in a stadium holding a NAACP rally.  The notion is ridiculous.  (On the off chance anyone is going to refer to Skokie, keep in mind that was almost 40 years ago and they never did march.)

So, every American’s freedoms are restricted in one manner or another, usually in the name of the greater good.  This applies equally to groups and individuals. The notion that muslims – simply because they are muslim and we’re concerned with being tolerant – are exempt from the standard applied to everyone else is crazy.

There are many legitimate concerns about the true intentions of group wishing to build on that site. There are also questions about their funding that need to be answered. More importantly, there is a large group of people that will directly be emotionally harmed should this mosque be allowed to be built. On the other hand, there is no apparent harm done to the muslims should they simply move the site.

As to the validity of their ‘religion’ being one of peace, I will leave for another time.

[flatsixlover]

Good posting! 

[Sludge]

Nicely done KW!  VERY nicely done! 

[Tundra]

Wow KW...That was an intelligent well worded read. Nice job

[Robert]

What I find with liberals is you are guilty until proven innocent it feels just like a military court. They really dont have to present allot of counter points and you have to prove everything  10 times over and still wont believe. That being liberal is really a misnomer meaning they just have a different point of view but are not open nor accepting of others ideas or the idea that someone else may truly know the right way to go. That in liberalism I'm ok your ok mentality is ok till they get hurt by it then they scream foul. That some really just have a hard time accepting authority as a good thing yet wouldn't know what to do if things really became a anarchy. That some argue liberal points just to be humanistic ally correct but again if they trully got their way would be the first to cry. Think that laws can control people without moral values. Pave the way for confusion and more laws and more expenditures and eventually socialism. This is also another thing I think most would be very happy in socialism. That far reaching of laws and policies really dont figure into the equation unless on a limited point. Think that all have a valid point in society and should be heard and followed. That unless conservatives are behind it there are no conspiracy theory's. That there is no God so religion is just a personal expression of something going on inside that person. Open to any person making another religion. That there is no final judgment that things just end so live any way you want now and see what happens. You are not responsible for your fellow man but no one should be left out for fear of being non caring no matter their thinking on things nor why they are like they are. Its a personal choice but you just cant live without all the things in life we think you should have. That government has to be neutral in ruling but cannot look at the potential problem by profiling. I think liberalism is the new religion or the old one just brought forward by the lack of people to care and work and take the time to keep a firm control of things.I know liberals can say some of the very same things about conservatives but I think with a difference conservatives know the importance of having rules and regulations that may not be the best for some but ultimately will bring about strength unity and a stronger Nation. They know personal boundaries accept that sometimes they dont have the answers but know that looking inward to emotions is not the way to go.
Are not afraid to pay now for the results later, like men going to war. Are not afraid to try new ideas. Understand motives and ideals compel people to act in certain ways that may not show till they have the authority to act on them.
   I do not say that some conservatives dont have problems, but on the whole I think I like conservatives more than liberal. I can live in house that has a solid foundation and know where to go and what to do but the constant shifting of sands makes it hard to truly live in a comfortable manner. 

[Bobbo]

In other words; our rights ARE NOT limitless, without restrictions, or void of responsibility. In fact, ALL of our rights have boundaries.     

As an example; we limit many activities which would intentionally or premeditatedly cause harm to another group. For example, we would not allow a group of neo-Nazis to enter a public Synagogue during a Bar Mitzvah. Or, a allow group of clansmen to burn a cross in a stadium holding a NAACP rally.  The notion is ridiculous.  (On the off chance anyone is going to refer to Skokie, keep in mind that was almost 40 years ago and they never did march.)

So, every American’s freedoms are restricted in one manner or another, usually in the name of the greater good.  This applies equally to groups and individuals. The notion that muslims – simply because they are muslim and we’re concerned with being tolerant – are exempt from the standard applied to everyone else is crazy.

There are many legitimate concerns about the true intentions of group wishing to build on that site. There are also questions about their funding that need to be answered. More importantly, there is a large group of people that will directly be emotionally harmed should this mosque be allowed to be built. On the other hand, there is no apparent harm done to the muslims should they simply move the site.

As to the validity of their ‘religion’ being one of peace, I will leave for another time.

While I agree with the first statement, your examples fall short of demonstrating restrictions on constitutional rights.  Our Constitution’s amendments are mainly a set of restrictions placed on the federal government, and to some degree, the state governments.  They do not contradict other laws that restrict certain behavior.  In the Neo-NAZI example, they would only violate the law if they were trespassing, which could be easily ascertained.  The Klansmen cross burning would violate fire hazard and possibly trespass laws.  None of your examples are constitutional issues, only local or state law violations.  To my knowledge, this proposed Islamic center and Mosque violates no local or state laws.  If the building can pass zoning and building codes, and gets approval by the Port Authority, nothing in our Constitution can prevent it.

You mentioned questions about funding sources for this building.  What law restricts funding for a private building?

If Reverend Fred Phelps wanted to build a Church on that same location, and planned to use it as a center to demonstrate how God hates the US, we would have the same situation.  If no local ordinances are violated, nothing prevents that building either.

I’m somewhat bewildered that you would mention that peoples “feelings” would be hurt by this building. That is usually reserved for “Left Wing Liberal” thinking.

Again, my statements do not support the building of this center at this location, only that nothing can prevent it if it passes standard codes.

[DIGGER]

YOUR TAX MONEY IS ALREADY BEING SPENT ACROSS THE WORLD TO REVAMP MOSQUES......SEE THE SITE BELOW

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1135390

[JustJim]

What I find with liberals is ...

I don't understand why so many on here need to label ideas and individuals as either "conservative" or "liberal." As soon as you attach a label, a certain number of people close their ears and eyes. It works both ways. So we have two groups who never bother to listen to or seriously consider the points the other group is making.

I am liberal on many issues (social safety net). I am conservative on many issues (small government). I side with the Libertarians sometimes (individual responsibility, helmet laws). I side with the Green Party sometimes (environmental protection). So all the labels fit. And yet none do. And I suspect many of you are the same.

When I chime in on some of these non-Valk issues, I am expressing my opinions, not the pre-selected arguments of any specific group. And I hope to be treated with respect and acceptance for that ... just as I treat the rest of you. So how about it?
 

[Bobbo]

What I find with liberals is ...

I don't understand why so many on here need to label ideas and individuals as either "conservative" or "liberal." As soon as you attach a label, a certain number of people close their ears and eyes. It works both ways. So we have two groups who never bother to listen to or seriously consider the points the other group is making.

I am liberal on many issues (social safety net). I am conservative on many issues (small government). I side with the Libertarians sometimes (individual responsibility, helmet laws). I side with the Green Party sometimes (environmental protection). So all the labels fit. And yet none do. And I suspect many of you are the same.

When I chime in on some of these non-Valk issues, I am expressing my opinions, not the pre-selected arguments of any specific group. And I hope to be treated with respect and acceptance for that ... just as I treat the rest of you. So how about it?
 

+1   

[Bobbo]

YOUR TAX MONEY IS ALREADY BEING SPENT ACROSS THE WORLD TO REVAMP MOSQUES......SEE THE SITE BELOW

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1135390

…and Christian Churches, Buddhist temples, as well as museums, forts and palaces.  While I may not agree with this policy, you should at least include all the things in the article you linked to.  To do otherwise suggests you are intentionally cherry picking content to inflame the reader.

[KW]

BoBo,
This is what I was talking about when I mentioned the futility of internet debating. Please re-read my post – if you’re so inclined – because you totally missed the point I was making.  While I did mention constitutional rights, I was talking about the cultural perception of ‘freedoms’ and the necessity of limitations and restrictions. It’s not merely semantics. The difference between “Freedom” and “Rights” are important. You may have the “liberty” (Freedom) to do something, like speed through a school zone at 120 mph, but you don’t have the “privilege” (Right) to do so because of the potential harm it could cause others.  In this case; Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is premeditatedly, with forethought of malice, and extreme prejudice speeding through a school zone.  . . and thumbing his nose while doing it. It’s that simple. I can’t explain it any clearer.  . . And frankly, I’m just not inclined to even try. 

I’m done with this thread. Have at it. I’ve no desire to engage via the internet with my left-leaning Valkyrie brethren. Ride safe.  Perhaps someday we can meet in person and have a lively debate about the Islam and what the Quran (Koran) requires of its followers (I’ve read it twice.) I suspect you’d be astonished

[Bobbo]

BoBo,
This is what I was talking about when I mentioned the futility of internet debating. Please re-read my post – if you’re so inclined – because you totally missed the point I was making.  While I did mention constitutional rights, I was talking about the cultural perception of ‘freedoms’ and the necessity of limitations and restrictions. It’s not merely semantics. The difference between “Freedom” and “Rights” are important. You may have the “liberty” (Freedom) to do something, like speed through a school zone at 120 mph, but you don’t have the “privilege” (Right) to do so because of the potential harm it could cause others.  In this case; Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf is premeditatedly, with forethought of malice, and extreme prejudice speeding through a school zone.  . . and thumbing his nose while doing it. It’s that simple. I can’t explain it any clearer.  . . And frankly, I’m just not inclined to even try. 

I’m done with this thread. Have at it. I’ve no desire to engage via the internet with my left-leaning Valkyrie brethren. Ride safe.  Perhaps someday we can meet in person and have a lively debate about the Islam and what the Quran (Koran) requires of its followers (I’ve read it twice.) I suspect you’d be astonished

At the risk of you not even reading my reply, I’ll respond again.

Your analogy of speeding does not work.  You have confused “Liberty and Freedom” with ability.  Liberty and Freedom imply lawful behavior.  Since speeding is unlawful, you may have the ability to do it, but not the freedom (unless you don’t get caught!    ).

The Imam requesting this building permit is not breaking any laws, like in your speeding example.

If standing up for constitutional rights, and the rule of law is “Left Leaning”, then that’s what I am.

[G-Man]

Bobbo.....you do keep playing games of semantics.  I believe that you are getting the point he is trying to make, but will pick at his examples for reasons I'm not sure of.

Nobody is questioning the right for this Imam to build this mosque wherever he wants to, as long as the laws permit.  This is not in dispute and you have heard dozens of us say this over and over again.  So we are all in agreement with you. 

What we are all opposed to, it this particular guy, who has been shown to be anti-American, by his views and statements, building it in this particular location.  Yes, yes, and yes.....he is within his rights under the law......we all just feel it is in poor taste and we question the motives, knowing what we know of him and radical islam.  He is the one that stated that this was designed to bring people together, to build bridges, etc.  Well, it is having the complete opposite effect, yet he is still pushing and pushing.  Yes, yes, and yes......he has the right to push, however, even with the opposite effect acheived, he refuses to budge.  This makes people even more upset and truely makes sensible people question his motives.

I can't understand your arguments to this.  You keep knitpicking at what people say, even though we all agree when it comes to constitutional rights.   There is a real difference between Rights and what is Right.  I believe this is the point KW is making, you know this because you do come across as highly intelligent, so why play the word games?

[Bobbo]

G-Man:

Yes, I know we all agree that this Mosque isn’t a good idea at this location, and that government cannot stop it if local laws are followed.

KW’s post compared this issue with unlawful acts.  I am pointing out that his examples don’t properly represent the situation.   If he had made a comparison to Westboro Baptist Church, for example, we all might agree that the best thing to do is ignore them.

[fstsix]

G-Man:

Yes, I know we all agree that this Mosque isn’t a good idea at this location, and that government cannot stop it if local laws are followed.

KW’s post compared this issue with unlawful acts.  I am pointing out that his examples don’t properly represent the situation.   If he had made a comparison to Westboro Baptist Church, for example, we all might agree that the best thing to do is ignore them.

WRONG AGAIN BO! some may think you are intelligent some of us don't at all, and if you were part of the motorcycle community you may have asked your Common sense to kick in before posting such a stupid remark! not sure what branch of service you were drafted in, Not Volunteered, or if your children have served but I have stood up to them as well as many others have also on this Board....can i offer you some Crayons and a coloring book ?   

Westboro Baptist neutralized by the Patriot Guard Riders	powered by Aeva

[KW]

(Yeah. . . I know. I said I was done, but I can’t stand being misquoted.)

Bob, what I was saying was; if there’s a potential for harm, the government has a lawful responsility to act premeditatedly. It’s been a long time since I had a constitutional law class, but preempted action stopping acts which could bring about the “substantive evils” is an accepted, long standing precedent. The Westboro Baptist church is a good example. The courts upheld their freespeech rights, but limited their access from being directly in the graveyards where the grieving family members of our brave Solider are. The bastards (FYI - Biblical word) still show up, but they can’t come into the graveyard.

In otherwords, their “rights” were limited to prevent injury, or more accurately, EMOTIONAL HARM. (or to misquote me as you did; “feelings”)

The Schenck v. United States case I quoted was also concerning freespeech. Most of that ruling was – rightfully so – narrowed in future cases, but the examples I put forth were legitimate. You wouldn’t wait – as you suggested – until a group of clansman lit a fire in a stadium full of African American, civil rights advocates because they (clansman) violated a fire safety law. Would you? Good grief man! Do you REALLY believe that?


The ONLY position you can take to support what you’re saying is that the growing evidence & facts are wrong in regards to this Imam Rauf. If that’s your position, then I respect it, even though you’d be wrong . . . again.

PS – I’ve been a member of the Patriot Guard since its inception. I WILL NOT ignore any group who denigrates the memory of Heroes!  

[Bobbo]

The courts upheld their freespeech rights, but limited their access to the graveyards where the grieving family members of our brave Solider are. The bastards (FYI - Biblical word) still show up, but they can’t come into the graveyard.
 

I’m having trouble finding an online reference to this.  Can you provide a link to where a ruling was made?

[Sludge]

KW and Bobbo, I commend the both of you.  I have enjoyed reading your posts on this.  Im not learned enough to even chime in here but I find both arguments to be thought provoking.

Fstsix, while you and I see things largely the same way on alot of stuff, I gotta call ya on that last post.  That was a bit below the belt man.  Bobbo and KW both agree that they dislike the thing being there.  They just differ on what is constitutional to stop it.

Bobbo did mention one thing earlier that caught my attention and that was about funding.  If the funding could be found to be tied to a terrorist group or terrorist promoter etc... then I think they may well have the ability to do something about it... hopefully after the transfer of money takes place so they can seize it LOL

Anyway, well done lads on a thought provoking exchange I look forward to more.  So long as it stays civil. 

[Bobbo]

Bobbo did mention one thing earlier that caught my attention and that was about funding.  If the funding could be found to be tied to a terrorist group or terrorist promoter etc... then I think they may well have the ability to do something about it... hopefully after the transfer of money takes place so they can seize it LOL

Good point!    If an association is found to known groups that are banned on our Homeland Security list, maybe those laws would apply.

[fstsix]

Sludge....Fstsix, while you and I see things largely the same way on alot of stuff, I gotta call ya on that last post.  That was a bit below the belt man.  Bobbo and KW both agree that they dislike the thing being there.  They just differ on what is constitutional to stop it. So i am going to have to agree with KW with this ....PS – I’ve been a member of the Patriot Guard since its inception. I WILL NOT ignore any group who denigrates the memory of Heroes! Here is something that is Constitutional that works...lets keep the wars on foreign soil as These young men and women have gave their lives  for all these years.....This is What my Son in law does for a living and we have worried many times for his safety, As the the father of my Grandchildren he would much rather keep them at large over There! To live by the Sword is to die by the Sword,,,I do not see anything civil about the innocent people who were Murdered in 911-01

Lockheed AC-130 Gunship USAF Aerospace Power	powered by Aeva

[Bobbo]

PS – I’ve been a member of the Patriot Guard since its inception. I WILL NOT ignore any group who denigrates the memory of Heroes!

If you are referring to Fred Phelps’ group, you are falling directly into his well crafted trap.  I’ve been on many Patriot Guard missions, and we have a pre-ride meeting.  We discuss the dos and don’ts regarding his group, mostly the DON’TS!  Although his group has failed to show at any funerals I’ve attended, we are instructed to ignore them while forming a barrier to shield the family of the soldier.  If you do something beyond ignoring them, you are putting yourself at risk of his many lawsuits.

[Sludge]

Yup Bobbo, thats what they want.  They are trying to elicit a response.

PS – I’ve been a member of the Patriot Guard since its inception. I WILL NOT ignore any group who denigrates the memory of Heroes!

Im a patriot guard member too.  More importantly im a Marine.  Like the saying goes... Not as mean Not as lean... well, im probably meaner now, but im certainly not Lean anymore.  However, my heart is still 100% Marine.   You dont think that I dont get hot under the collar over these things?  You dont think I want to take the fight to our enemies?  Ive got no moral problem with snatching the life outta folks.

Ya see, while I hate the idea of this Mosque, and in my heart would like to do many dark things to prevent it from being built, I also swore an oath to defend the constitution once upon a time. Not being active duty the government doesnt hold me to it anymore, but in my heart im still that Marine and when I said that oath, I meant it.  By that same oath, if I support a policy or political action, that would weaken or brake the constitution, then ...  ive broken the oath.   

NEVER confuse my support of the constitution and the founding principals for a lack of conviction against seeing this thing built.

Legally, it appears they have every right to build this damn thing.  I dont support it but I dont see anything legally to stop them.  All I can hope for is that if we the public yell loud enough, long enough and perhaps yell at what ever construction company works with them and at what ever building suppliers they buy from  etc... and cause enough of a pain in the ass, they will move it elsewhere or abandon the project all together.

[bilks]

  From across the Pond.

And more elequently than i could ever say...!

No mosque at Ground Zero	powered by Aeva

[Sludge]

Well said. Ive seen that before, but thanks for posting it 

[fstsix]

PS – I’ve been a member of the Patriot Guard since its inception. I WILL NOT ignore any group who denigrates the memory of Heroes!

If you are referring to Fred Phelps’ group, you are falling directly into his well crafted trap.  I’ve been on many Patriot Guard missions, and we have a pre-ride meeting.  We discuss the dos and don’ts regarding his group, mostly the DON’TS!  Although his group has failed to show at any funerals I’ve attended, we are instructed to ignore them while forming a barrier to shield the family of the soldier.  If you do something beyond ignoring them, you are putting yourself at risk of his many lawsuits.

WRONG AGAIN......I was referring to KW's Post in agreement with him! Look......CLASS is not something you can BUY....DRIVE...Or...WEAR it is how you act and treat people in life, Most try to buy it, Hahahahahahah.....that's amusing as if i have NOT seen their actions or their intent,,, You can take YOUR SOCIAL JUSTICE and SHOVE IT !!!! and your POLITICAL CORRECTNESS LOL!!!! WE already have A LAWYER as President How is that working for us so far    

[big turkey]

Good Topic Al.

I guess I can exspect more topic thievery from you in future Right.??????????

Big AL

[DIGGER]

YOUR TAX MONEY IS ALREADY BEING SPENT ACROSS THE WORLD TO REVAMP MOSQUES......SEE THE SITE BELOW

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1135390

…and Christian Churches, Buddhist temples, as well as museums, forts and palaces.  While I may not agree with this policy, you should at least include all the things in the article you linked to.  To do otherwise suggests you are intentionally cherry picking content to inflame the reader.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.....I DON'T WANT ONE CENT OF MY MONEY SPENT ON ANY MOSQUE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD!

[JimL]

I don't normally post stuff that I have not validated (possibly someone else has already posted it).  That having been said, I won't get a chance to validate until later this afternoon.  If anyone has time to validate this morning, please share your research (especially if you don't agree with what was presented in this article).

http://www.torenewamerica.com/gingrich-ground-zero-mosque

[Jess from VA]

From across the Pond.

And more elequently than i could ever say...!

No mosque at Ground Zero

Excellent!!

[fudgie]

If NY dont want it cant it be denied at the building dept when they apply for a permit? There, that was easy.

[Bobbo]

I don't normally post stuff that I have not validated (possibly someone else has already posted it).  That having been said, I won't get a chance to validate until later this afternoon.  If anyone has time to validate this morning, please share your research (especially if you don't agree with what was presented in this article).

http://www.torenewamerica.com/gingrich-ground-zero-mosque

The article starts off on the wrong foot by comparing our secular freedoms to religious dogma.  I consider our Constitution and it’s Amendments far superior to theocracy-based governments, and to suggest that we emulate those inferior governments with the same intolerance is offensive.

Continuing with the old schoolyard adage of “My God will beat up your God” by spouting on about how some building was used for a different purpose is nonsense.

Suggesting that this building is the first step in a takeover by religious zealots is baloney as well.  Jerry Falwell tried something similar with his “Moral Majority” movement, but our robust nation repelled him too.