Outrage and affront

[Guest Truth Teller]

The outrage and affront in the ongoing circus regarding a proposed Islamic community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site is that:

Some people think they have a right to tell other people where to build their house of worship. The site is zoned for that use. Its sponsors cannot legally be forced to move it, not even so much as an inch. The fact that we are having the discussion for the reasons we are is an outrage and an affront.

Some people think a compromise should be reached. The very idea that law-abiding citizens should have to move their lawful community center in the interests of so-called compromise is an affront. The proposed center would harm no one. Its sponsors are being asked to move solely because some people are upset by the idea of an Islamic center near the WTC site.

The fact that people are upset by such a center is an affront. It says that some people are lumping innocent, law-abiding Muslims with terrorists. No matter how much people try to dress that up to justify their flimsy excuse for self-generated outrage, that is an outrage and an affront.

The outrage and affront in this situation is coming from the people who think they have any business forcing this center to be moved. I hope its sponsors won't move it an inch.

And you can be sure that if they do move it, the next time something like this happens it won't be good enough that the center is six blocks away or ten blocks away or a mile away. The opposition to this project is based on irrational fear and prejudice. The more we try to appease it, the bigger its appetite will be. It can never be satisfied because it craves what it cannot have: it wants the past undone and a completely new world put in place of this one, and then let's all turn the clock back to when we were young and beautiful and our loved ones were here with us. If we feed that beast, it will eat us out of house and home. Its appetite is insatiable, so the only appropriate response to it is to say no, gently but firmly and without giving an inch. We not should give in to the emotional blackmail. That's what this is.

[Guest Truth teller = spin Doctor]

The outrage and affront in the ongoing circus regarding a proposed Islamic community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site is that:

Some people think they have a right to tell other people where to build their house of worship. The site is zoned for that use. Its sponsors cannot legally be forced to move it, not even so much as an inch. The fact that we are having the discussion for the reasons we are is an outrage and an affront.

Some people think a compromise should be reached. The very idea that law-abiding citizens should have to move their lawful community center in the interests of so-called compromise is an affront. The proposed center would harm no one. Its sponsors are being asked to move solely because some people are upset by the idea of an Islamic center near the WTC site.

The fact that people are upset by such a center is an affront. It says that some people are lumping innocent, law-abiding Muslims with terrorists. No matter how much people try to dress that up to justify their flimsy excuse for self-generated outrage, that is an outrage and an affront.

The outrage and affront in this situation is coming from the people who think they have any business forcing this center to be moved. I hope its sponsors won't move it an inch.

And you can be sure that if they do move it, the next time something like this happens it won't be good enough that the center is six blocks away or ten blocks away or a mile away. The opposition to this project is based on irrational fear and prejudice. The more we try to appease it, the bigger its appetite will be. It can never be satisfied because it craves what it cannot have: it wants the past undone and a completely new world put in place of this one, and then let's all turn the clock back to when we were young and beautiful and our loved ones were here with us. If we feed that beast, it will eat us out of house and home. Its appetite is insatiable, so the only appropriate response to it is to say no, gently but firmly and without giving an inch. We not should give in to the emotional blackmail. That's what this is.

One question why is it so important to certain people within this Islamic group to build this mosque on that site? When they know it will add to the burden of all the people who lost family and friends on that horrible day at the hands of radical Islamic fundamentalists, why not move to a site outside the shadow of the WTC which now stands as sacred ground for most of the United States why not make a gesture to all the people slaughtered that day including Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Atheists, and every other group who died for an ideology of a twisted radical group and relocate. If they wanted to move towards healing they would understand the pain this is causing the people most affected by this genocidal act. Or is this just a monument of triumph for the radical Islamic world who has no care for healing or understanding just their own latest version of Islamic Crusades against the infidels? Now which one is an affront?

[Guest Truth Teller]

One question why is it so important to certain people within this Islamic group to build this mosque on that site? When they know it will add to the burden of all the people who lost family and friends on that horrible day at the hands of radical Islamic fundamentalists, why not move to a site outside the shadow of the WTC which now stands as sacred ground for most of the United States why not make a gesture to all the people slaughtered that day including Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Atheists, and every other group who died for an ideology of a twisted radical group and relocate. If they wanted to move towards healing they would understand the pain this is causing the people most affected by this genocidal act. Or is this just a monument of triumph for the radical Islamic world who has no care for healing or understanding just their own latest version of Islamic Crusades against the infidels? Now which one is an affront?

I don't think they expected people to be bigoted and stupid. There's no reason for this Islamic community center to cause pain to anyone. The upset is solely due to the bigotry of people who insist that all Muslims are somehow responsible for 9/11. You explain how else a center dedicated to healing and peace could cause pain. Comparing this center to the raising of the American flag on Iwo Jima is narrow-minded and disgusting.

The affront runs one way: against the people who are being threatened and intimidated against doing something they thought would be for the good. They can't back down now. If they do, it will give license to veto any initiative on the grounds that it might upset someone.

But you know what, let's assume you're right. Let's assume that Rauf intends to mock the victims. If he does that, he'll lose all his support. Give him a chance, because if you don't all you're proving is how small-minded you are. So the protesters should still stop it, right now. The Imam has a right to build the mosque. Be the bigger person and let it go up. Maybe it will be something good.

No matter how many times it's pointed out, people refuse to see it. It runs throughout our entire history and yet we don't see it. We are a nation of hypocrites and bigots. This is just the latest excuse. And I'm no Muslim.

[Guest 2smart4u]

The outrage and affront in the ongoing circus regarding a proposed Islamic community center two blocks from the World Trade Center site is that:

Some people think they have a right to tell other people where to build their house of worship. The site is zoned for that use. Its sponsors cannot legally be forced to move it, not even so much as an inch. The fact that we are having the discussion for the reasons we are is an outrage and an affront.

Some people think a compromise should be reached. The very idea that law-abiding citizens should have to move their lawful community center in the interests of so-called compromise is an affront. The proposed center would harm no one. Its sponsors are being asked to move solely because some people are upset by the idea of an Islamic center near the WTC site.

The fact that people are upset by such a center is an affront. It says that some people are lumping innocent, law-abiding Muslims with terrorists. No matter how much people try to dress that up to justify their flimsy excuse for self-generated outrage, that is an outrage and an affront.

The outrage and affront in this situation is coming from the people who think they have any business forcing this center to be moved. I hope its sponsors won't move it an inch.

And you can be sure that if they do move it, the next time something like this happens it won't be good enough that the center is six blocks away or ten blocks away or a mile away. The opposition to this project is based on irrational fear and prejudice. The more we try to appease it, the bigger its appetite will be. It can never be satisfied because it craves what it cannot have: it wants the past undone and a completely new world put in place of this one, and then let's all turn the clock back to when we were young and beautiful and our loved ones were here with us. If we feed that beast, it will eat us out of house and home. Its appetite is insatiable, so the only appropriate response to it is to say no, gently but firmly and without giving an inch. We not should give in to the emotional blackmail. That's what this is.

Sorry Charlie, the mosque won't be built on that site, patriotic americans will make sure of that.

[Guest Guest]

One question why is it so important to certain people within this Islamic group to build this mosque on that site? When they know it will add to the burden of all the people who lost family and friends on that horrible day at the hands of radical Islamic fundamentalists, why not move to a site outside the shadow of the WTC which now stands as sacred ground for most of the United States why not make a gesture to all the people slaughtered that day including Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Atheists, and every other group who died for an ideology of a twisted radical group and relocate. If they wanted to move towards healing they would understand the pain this is causing the people most affected by this genocidal act. Or is this just a monument of triumph for the radical Islamic world who has no care for healing or understanding just their own latest version of Islamic Crusades against the infidels? Now which one is an affront?

Wait a minute! You didn't respond to anything. You can't call someone else a spin doctor and then just ignore everything he said.

What matters to Muslims is not your concern. They want to build their mosque. If you bought a piece of land and wanted to build a house, how would you like it if someone told you, "oh, no, you can't built it there. You might block my view of the sunset."

Unless they're violating a law, they're entitled to do it. Why does it matter to you? They're not harming anyone.

I'm sorry, but there's a clear right and a clear wrong here. The Muslims are right and you're wrong. End of story.

[Guest Radagast]

One question why is it so important to certain people within this Islamic group to build this mosque on that site? When they know it will add to the burden of all the people who lost family and friends on that horrible day at the hands of radical Islamic fundamentalists, why not move to a site outside the shadow of the WTC which now stands as sacred ground for most of the United States why not make a gesture to all the people slaughtered that day including Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Atheists, and every other group who died for an ideology of a twisted radical group and relocate. If they wanted to move towards healing they would understand the pain this is causing the people most affected by this genocidal act. Or is this just a monument of triumph for the radical Islamic world who has no care for healing or understanding just their own latest version of Islamic Crusades against the infidels? Now which one is an affront?

Perhaps it is better to confront bigotry and hold your ground against it than to walk away.

[Guest Guest]

Sorry Charlie, the mosque won't be built on that site, patriotic americans will make sure of that.

Patriotic Americans honor the Constitution, repubs use it as a campaign prop.

[Guest Loki]

Perhaps it is better to confront bigotry and hold your ground against it than to walk away.

Not sure that you can simply reduce any and all opposition to bigotry. On the surface, some of it is guided by bigotry, but some of it is genuine shock that there is the appearance that they want to "dance on the graves:" so to speak.

Legally, they have the right to build the mosque; morally, I'm not sure it is the right thing. I'd like to think they would take these, very real, sensitivities into consideration. Perhaps if there was more outrage initially, from the moderate, (and more mainstream Islamic leaders), it wouldn't seem so bad. But, I felt those that publicly denounced the attack was not very prominent. Just my opinion.

[Guest Guest]

Wait a minute! You didn't respond to anything. You can't call someone else a spin doctor and then just ignore everything he said.

What matters to Muslims is not your concern. They want to build their mosque. If you bought a piece of land and wanted to build a house, how would you like it if someone told you, "oh, no, you can't built it there. You might block my view of the sunset."

Unless they're violating a law, they're entitled to do it. Why does it matter to you? They're not harming anyone.

I'm sorry, but there's a clear right and a clear wrong here. The Muslims are right and you're wrong. End of story.

[/qu

Well you are very astute aren't you, I did not respond. What I did was raise a question and nobody as of yet has responded to my question. Why is it so important to build it in the shadow of Ground Zero. And just because you have the right to do something dosen't always mean it's the right thing to do!!!

[Guest Guest]

Perhaps it is better to confront bigotry and hold your ground against it than to walk away.

I completely agree with you! If we don't nip this in the bud, it can easily grow into oppression against all Muslims, just like a little bit of discrimination against Jews and gypsies in Germany turned into the Holocaust, with six million deaths and a world war that killed millions more.

We are fighting a devious and dangerous enemy in radical Islam. If we are foolish enough to turn peace-loving Muslims against us, it won't justify another attack but we won't be completely innocent in it when it happens either.

[Guest Guest]

Wait a minute! You didn't respond to anything. You can't call someone else a spin doctor and then just ignore everything he said.

What matters to Muslims is not your concern. They want to build their mosque. If you bought a piece of land and wanted to build a house, how would you like it if someone told you, "oh, no, you can't built it there. You might block my view of the sunset."

Unless they're violating a law, they're entitled to do it. Why does it matter to you? They're not harming anyone.

I'm sorry, but there's a clear right and a clear wrong here. The Muslims are right and you're wrong. End of story.

Well you are very astute aren't you, I did not respond. What I did was raise a question and nobody as of yet has responded to my question. Why is it so important to build it in the shadow of Ground Zero. And just because you have the right to do something dosen't always mean it's the right thing to do!!!

Your question was answered. It's none of our business, yours, mine or anyone else's, why they want to put it there. They don't owe you an explanation. The fact that you think you have the right to ask for one is part of the problem. When that happens, they have every right to get their backs up and insist on putting it there.

Your question is like asking "Why is it important for those darkies to ride in the front of the bus?" The question misses the point, which is the attitude and the assumptions behind the question. It becomes important because people are questioning their right to do it, even though they have no business doing that.

If we take the Imam at his word, they're trying to do community outreach, to show people that most Muslims hate what happened on 9/11. That would make it a very good place to put it.

Treating these people like criminals is a disgrace. They've done nothing wrong, and yet they're being scrutinized in their private affairs. One politician said "let's examine their books." On what basis? We can't go nosing into private business for no reason. We're telling the entire Muslim community that we don't trust them.

Think of it another way. You and I have no control over what Imam Rauf and his group do. We can only control our own actions. We have no basis to oppose the project. That should be the end of it. Instead, we're getting a public debate over a private matter, and we're doing it on religious grounds. I can't believe people don't understand how wrong that is.

[Guest Guest]

Not sure that you can simply reduce any and all opposition to bigotry. On the surface, some of it is guided by bigotry, but some of it is genuine shock that there is the appearance that they want to "dance on the graves:" so to speak.

Legally, they have the right to build the mosque; morally, I'm not sure it is the right thing. I'd like to think they would take these, very real, sensitivities into consideration. Perhaps if there was more outrage initially, from the moderate, (and more mainstream Islamic leaders), it wouldn't seem so bad. But, I felt those that publicly denounced the attack was not very prominent. Just my opinion.

Honestly, that sounds like an excuse. How much outrage from how many Muslim leaders would you like to have seen?

And why is that the issue here? Imam Rauf has spent quite a few years not only denouncing radical Islam but working against it and in the cause of peace. The very fact that you want to judge him by the entire Muslim population suggests bigotry.

[Guest Guest]

Well you are very astute aren't you, I did not respond. What I did was raise a question and nobody as of yet has responded to my question. Why is it so important to build it in the shadow of Ground Zero. And just because you have the right to do something dosen't always mean it's the right thing to do!!!

Your question was answered. It's none of our business, yours, mine or anyone else's, why they want to put it there. They don't owe you an explanation. The fact that you think you have the right to ask for one is part of the problem. When that happens, they have every right to get their backs up and insist on putting it there.

Your question is like asking "Why is it important for those darkies to ride in the front of the bus?" The question misses the point, which is the attitude and the assumptions behind the question. It becomes important because people are questioning their right to do it, even though they have no business doing that.

If we take the Imam at his word, they're trying to do community outreach, to show people that most Muslims hate what happened on 9/11. That would make it a very good place to put it.

Treating these people like criminals is a disgrace. They've done nothing wrong, and yet they're being scrutinized in their private affairs. One politician said "let's examine their books." On what basis? We can't go nosing into private business for no reason. We're telling the entire Muslim community that we don't trust them.

Think of it another way. You and I have no control over what Imam Rauf and his group do. We can only control our own actions. We have no basis to oppose the project. That should be the end of it. Instead, we're getting a public debate over a private matter, and we're doing it on religious grounds. I can't believe people don't understand how wrong that is.

"None of your business" is not answering the question it is avoiding it. I can't believe you have little or no regard for the feelings of most of the people who lost loved ones on 9/11. You try to use the bigot card and it does not apply to anything i have asked or stated on this forum. Its obvious you have a personal agenda or affiliation with the people trying to build the mosque. A recent poll concludes 80% of people polled favored not stopping the building of the mosque but relocating It. You talk of healing and understanding but you show none in your disdain with anyone who does not share your opinion, talk of narrow minded you should take a hard look at yourself.

[Guest Guest]

Honestly, that sounds like an excuse. How much outrage from how many Muslim leaders would you like to have seen?

And why is that the issue here? Imam Rauf has spent quite a few years not only denouncing radical Islam but working against it and in the cause of peace. The very fact that you want to judge him by the entire Muslim population suggests bigotry.

You seem to know quite a bit about Rauf, so may I be so bold to ask you a couple of questions in regard to the Iman?

1. Has Iman Rauf defended Wahhabism?

2. Has Iman Rauf called for the elimination of the State of Israel?

3. Has Iman Rauf Denounced suicide bombings and the killing of innocents?

4. Is Iman Rauf a huge proponent and supporter of spreading Sharia law across the United States?

5. What is the significance of the name of the proposed mosque "Cordoba House", is this a reference to the city in Spain with the same name that after muslims sacked the city they tore down a Christian church and built a mosque on its footprint?

6. Would Iman Rauf in the spirit of religious tolerance and understanding support the building of either a synagogue or a Christian Cathedral in Mecca?

Can you answer these questions? America wants to know!

[Guest Guest]

Honestly, that sounds like an excuse. How much outrage from how many Muslim leaders would you like to have seen?

And why is that the issue here? Imam Rauf has spent quite a few years not only denouncing radical Islam but working against it and in the cause of peace. The very fact that you want to judge him by the entire Muslim population suggests bigotry.

No one is judging all muslims, by what happened on 9/11. People are saying it is insensitive to build a mosque on hallowed ground, just move it and show the world you really want to build bridges and be peace makers not warriors!

[Guest ko]

Honestly, that sounds like an excuse. How much outrage from how many Muslim leaders would you like to have seen?

And why is that the issue here? Imam Rauf has spent quite a few years not only denouncing radical Islam but working against it and in the cause of peace. The very fact that you want to judge him by the entire Muslim population suggests bigotry.

Well put. Loki, you're a F**KING clown.

[Guest ko]

How come nobody freaks out when they put up one of those little boy raping centers? What are they called again? Oh that's right, they're called Catholic churches. Why doesn't anybody freak out about those?

[Guest Guest]

"None of your business" is not answering the question it is avoiding it. I can't believe you have little or no regard for the feelings of most of the people who lost loved ones on 9/11. You try to use the bigot card and it does not apply to anything i have asked or stated on this forum. Its obvious you have a personal agenda or affiliation with the people trying to build the mosque. A recent poll concludes 80% of people polled favored not stopping the building of the mosque but relocating It. You talk of healing and understanding but you show none in your disdain with anyone who does not share your opinion, talk of narrow minded you should take a hard look at yourself.

I try to do that every day. I suggest you try it once. Put the shoe on the other foot. Assume you're a Christian and you want to build a church - anywhere - on your own property under existing zoning and other laws, a building that meets every zoning requirement. And you know that your motives are peaceful. Imagine being attacked and shouted at and intimidated because you want to build a church.

And imagine listening to the excuses. "Oh, maybe someday but not yet. Maybe in thirty years." Yeah, right, just like African Americans were told to wait for civil rights because it was "too soon." There's always an excuse because there are always people who fear and people who hate. And that's the only place this can come from.

"Just move it a couple more blocks away." Yeah, right, and when you do that, they'll want it at least ten blocks away, then above Canal Street, then no lower than 33rd Street; and pretty soon you won't be able to build it anywhere in Manhattan, or in the City of New York, or in the state . . . The protest is irrational. You're never going to satisfy it because it wants something it can't have: the undoing of 9/11 and the bringing back of people who died. And there will always be people who will look for someone new to blame because their hunger is never satisfied - and never will be until they move on, cold as that may sound.

So these good Islamic people, who have been working for America for years, are being singled out just because they are Muslims. Anyone who thinks that this center violates anything about 9/11 is a bigot. You have to be a bigot to think that. I don't care if that means 60% or 90% or any% of America. You can't feel that way unless you see Muslim as "other." If this were being done toward a church, you would be wondering what was wrong with those people, protesting like that about my church, my holy house, my sacred place of worship. Why can't they see that, you would ask yourself. And you wouldn't be able to find a good answer because there isn't one.

How would you feel? You would feel that you were being singled out because you're a Christian. And you would be right.

Only, you're not a Christian. Because you're not treating others as you would wish to be treated.

And if anyone treated you like that and asked "why do you have to build your church over there," you'd be mad as hell, and you'd say

IT'S NONE OF YOUR DAMNED BUSINESS!

And you would be right.

Sometimes

IT'S NONE OF YOUR DAMNED BUSINESS!

is the only acceptable answer to the question. And this is one of those times because the right of these people to build their center at this location should not be on the political auction block. That is un-American and a denial of our values. We look like hypocrites to the rest of the world, which is the last thing we need if we hope to defeat terrorism.

And you are dead wrong about me. I am not a Muslim and I have no connection with the Imam or this Islamic center or anyone affiliated with it. My only interest is as a human being and an American who wishes we would live our values for once.

[Guest Guest]

You seem to know quite a bit about Rauf, so may I be so bold to ask you a couple of questions in regard to the Iman?

1. Has Iman Rauf defended Wahhabism?

2. Has Iman Rauf called for the elimination of the State of Israel?

3. Has Iman Rauf Denounced suicide bombings and the killing of innocents?

4. Is Iman Rauf a huge proponent and supporter of spreading Sharia law across the United States?

5. What is the significance of the name of the proposed mosque "Cordoba House", is this a reference to the city in Spain with the same name that after muslims sacked the city they tore down a Christian church and built a mosque on its footprint?

6. Would Iman Rauf in the spirit of religious tolerance and understanding support the building of either a synagogue or a Christian Cathedral in Mecca?

Can you answer these questions? America wants to know!

1. It’s your accusation by insinuation. You back it up. Don’t ask me to prove a negative. Your question is like asking whether Obama defended Reagan because he called him a transformational president. Hillary tried the same stunt you and the right wing media are trying to pull it here, trying to stretch a person’s statements far beyond where they were intended to go.

2. Not that I know of. Back up your insinuation or don’t make it.

3. Yes, repeatedly and unequivocally.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/imam-feisal-...m_b_211838.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/23/m...-_n_690945.html

http://mediamatters.org/research/201008170...Latest+Items%29

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/19/635...-and-harsh.html

4. He espouses his view of Sharia, which he expresses as “the Koran's emphasis on protection of life, freedom of religion, one's property, family, dignity,” according to a statement from his wife.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith..._modernity.html

It’s the same as when Christians take hellfire and damnation and transform it into love and forgiveness.

5. Ask the Imam. The right wing hasn’t done that. They’ve done what they always do, which is to tell other people what they believe, and of course it’s always negative because their purpose is to attack.

6. I’m sure he would. Do you have a shred of evidence to the contrary?

[Guest Guest]

How come nobody freaks out when they put up one of those little boy raping centers? What are they called again? Oh that's right, they're called Catholic churches. Why doesn't anybody freak out about those?

Because they're hypocrites. They see some people as not like themselves. Some protestants still see Catholics that way. Most people have accepted Catholics. A large percentage of Americans do not accept Muslims. That's why the idea that Obama is a Muslim is seen as an accusation and an attack. And that's what this ginned up protest is about.

Ron Paul, of all people, has spoken out as a voice of sanity on this issue.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014453-503544.html

http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-08-20/ron-paul...the-nyc-mosque/

A significant portion of the American people are bigots and hypocrites. We've proved that time after time and we're doing it again.

[Guest Guest]

No one is judging all muslims, by what happened on 9/11. People are saying it is insensitive to build a mosque on hallowed ground, just move it and show the world you really want to build bridges and be peace makers not warriors!

How freaking blind can you be? They're opposing the project not because it's a mosque for militant Islam but just because it's a mosque, and as if that isn't bad enough they're trying to claim that a mosque that is intended for peace is really a hostile act. It's not right to judge others by assuming the worst but that's what the protesters are doing.

They wouldn't be opposing a church or a synagogue or a Buddhist temple or the meeting place of any other religion. They're opposing it because it's Islamic. Therefore the opposition is based solely on the religion, which makes it a judgment of and an attack on all Muslims.

If you want to spend your entire life in mourning, you can make anything seem like an affront to your sensitivity. A person who insists on wrapping himself in perpetual grief may find the very fact that the rest of us are moving on insensitive. This is not to diminish the horrible suffering of those who lost loved ones on 9/11; it is only to say that they have a choice to grieve perpetually or move on. I've known people who could never let go after a loved one died. They spin around in their little circle of grief, and in the end if someone was at fault for the death, they let the wrongdoer dominate the remainder of their life. It's said but they doing it to themselves.

So if people take offense at this Islamic center (not a mosque) on Park Place (not at ground zero), then they have chosen to take offense. It's their own doing. It's how they've chosen to look at it. They're no different from any of us. They have the same responsibility to honor the rights of others, and in this country that includes the right to build an Islamic center on privately owned land, so long as it conforms with zoning and other laws, which cannot be based on religious discrimination. They have not have the right to demand that the rest of us devote our energies to grieving in perpetuity with them. But that's exactly what they're doing. I don't mind if they grieve in their own time and in their own space. I do mind when they invade someone else's space and demand that they not live their lives.

[Guest Truth Teller]

No one is judging all muslims, by what happened on 9/11. People are saying it is insensitive to build a mosque on hallowed ground, just move it and show the world you really want to build bridges and be peace makers not warriors!

Ron Paul, darling of tea partiers, disagrees with you. I don't agree with his absolutism regarding property rights but his critique of the protests against the Islamic center are brilliant and compelling.

http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-08-20/ron-paul...#comment-126184

Is the controversy over building a mosque near ground zero a grand distraction or a grand opportunity? Or is it, once again, grandiose demagoguery?

It has been said, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Are we not overly preoccupied with this controversy, now being used in various ways by grandstanding politicians? It looks to me like the politicians are “fiddling while the economy burns.”

The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.

Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be “sensitive” requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from “ground zero.”

Just think of what might (not) have happened if the whole issue had been ignored and the national debate stuck with war, peace, and prosperity. There certainly would have been a lot less emotionalism on both sides. The fact that so much attention has been given the mosque debate, raises the question of just why and driven by whom?

In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.

They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars. A select quote from soldiers from in Afghanistan and Iraq expressing concern over the mosque is pure propaganda and an affront to their bravery and sacrifice.

The claim is that we are in the Middle East to protect our liberties is misleading. To continue this charade, millions of Muslims are indicted and we are obligated to rescue them from their religious and political leaders. And, we’re supposed to believe that abusing our liberties here at home and pursuing unconstitutional wars overseas will solve our problems.

The nineteen suicide bombers didn’t come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. Fifteen came from our ally Saudi Arabia, a country that harbors strong American resentment, yet we invade and occupy Iraq where no al Qaeda existed prior to 9/11.

Many fellow conservatives say they understand the property rights and 1st Amendment issues and don’t want a legal ban on building the mosque. They just want everybody to be “sensitive” and force, through public pressure, cancellation of the mosque construction.

This sentiment seems to confirm that Islam itself is to be made the issue, and radical religious Islamic views were the only reasons for 9/11. If it became known that 9/11 resulted in part from a desire to retaliate against what many Muslims saw as American aggression and occupation, the need to demonize Islam would be difficult if not impossible.

There is no doubt that a small portion of radical, angry Islamists do want to kill us but the question remains, what exactly motivates this hatred?

If Islam is further discredited by making the building of the mosque the issue, then the false justification for our wars in the Middle East will continue to be acceptable.

The justification to ban the mosque is no more rational than banning a soccer field in the same place because all the suicide bombers loved to play soccer.

Conservatives are once again, unfortunately, failing to defend private property rights, a policy we claim to cherish. In addition conservatives missed a chance to challenge the hypocrisy of the left which now claims they defend property rights of Muslims, yet rarely if ever, the property rights of American private businesses.

Defending the controversial use of property should be no more difficult than defending the 1st Amendment principle of defending controversial speech. But many conservatives and liberals do not want to diminish the hatred for Islam–the driving emotion that keeps us in the wars in the Middle East and Central Asia.

It is repeatedly said that 64% of the people, after listening to the political demagogues, don’t want the mosque to be built. What would we do if 75% of the people insist that no more Catholic churches be built in New York City? The point being is that majorities can become oppressors of minority rights as well as individual dictators. Statistics of support is irrelevant when it comes to the purpose of government in a free society—protecting liberty.

The outcry over the building of the mosque, near ground zero, implies that Islam alone was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. According to those who are condemning the building of the mosque, the nineteen suicide terrorists on 9/11 spoke for all Muslims. This is like blaming all Christians for the wars of aggression and occupation because some Christians supported the neo-conservatives’ aggressive wars.

The House Speaker is now treading on a slippery slope by demanding a Congressional investigation to find out just who is funding the mosque—a bold rejection of property rights, 1st Amendment rights, and the Rule of Law—in order to look tough against Islam.

This is all about hate and Islamaphobia.

We now have an epidemic of “sunshine patriots” on both the right and the left who are all for freedom, as long as there’s no controversy and nobody is offended.

Political demagoguery rules when truth and liberty are ignored.

[Guest Guest]

No one is judging all muslims, by what happened on 9/11. People are saying it is insensitive to build a mosque on hallowed ground, just move it and show the world you really want to build bridges and be peace makers not warriors!

So it's insensitive to build a house of worship on hallowed ground. Do you hear yourself?

Besides, the "hallowed ground" isn't even in sight of the Trade Center. You can't even see the one from the other. To get yourself good and offended, you would have to walk around a corner or two.

If it was a church, it wouldn't bother anyone, would it. Or a temple. But a mosque, well, we can't have that.

Oh, but is has nothing to do with attacking Muslims. Heaven forbid.

Bullpucky!

[Guest Guest]

You seem to know quite a bit about Rauf, so may I be so bold to ask you a couple of questions in regard to the Iman?

1. Has Iman Rauf defended Wahhabism?

2. Has Iman Rauf called for the elimination of the State of Israel?

3. Has Iman Rauf Denounced suicide bombings and the killing of innocents?

4. Is Iman Rauf a huge proponent and supporter of spreading Sharia law across the United States?

5. What is the significance of the name of the proposed mosque "Cordoba House", is this a reference to the city in Spain with the same name that after muslims sacked the city they tore down a Christian church and built a mosque on its footprint?

6. Would Iman Rauf in the spirit of religious tolerance and understanding support the building of either a synagogue or a Christian Cathedral in Mecca?

Can you answer these questions? America wants to know!

Which Muslim would it be OK with you to build it? Who do you think you're kidding?

Typical right wing garbage. "I'm not saying he's not a good person, I'm just saying . . ."

Yeah, right.

By the, did you know that George W. Bush was a Muslim?

If the left played that game the way the right wingers do, we could be arguing about that.

[Guest Guest]

Well put. Loki, you're a F**KING clown.

Another thought provoking post. Seriously, why do you bother to write posts that add NOTHING to a discussion. Another "keyboard commando."