Obama For Mosque at Ground Zero

[Maximilian]

Originally Posted by BeenThinkin

Again, you start accusing when you don't know what you're talking about. I do not like Michael Savage and can only take a little of him at a time. You were the one that brought him up. What I've heard of him and what I've read of you just doesn't sound that much different.

If someone disagrees with you then they are blathering and irrational. So be it! You have spoken!

BT

Actually, I don't think Pel is blathering or irrational. I don't think Ferd is blathering or irrational. Guess that leaves you this time around

You aren't a Savage fan? Good for you! His Anger is off the charts. He cuts off his callers. His worldview is dark and cold. Definitely not a fan. He's an entertainer though... guess he does that well.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

You're response does not make sense.

No one is losing rights in this case.

He is simply affirming the rights of American citizens to build on their own private property in accordance with the pre-established laws and ordinances.


It's not even a Federal issue anyway. What do you want him to do? Use his Federal "powers" to sieze the land so that the developers won't do it?

That would only make what his very biased critics say about him being a commie true.


Truth is, he made a very unpopular stand. He exercised leadership in taking this stance publicly. He clarified that he questioned the wisdom of doing it, but in this case, President Obama is a defender of American freedom and of the Constitution.

The President stood up for the rights of all American citizens when he made his unpopular view public.

President Obama is the PATRIOT I'm not in this situation.



I bet my fellow conservatives will not acknowledge this. We can never allow anything a Democrat does to be painted in a positive light-- especially President Obama.

No, I don't see Obama in any positive light.

Darrell Issa's report "Analysis of the First Year of the Obama Administration:Public Relations and Propaganda Initiatives", has this to say about Obama:

The Obama Administration frequently used federal resources to promote the President’s agenda. In many cases, the Administration relied on the reach and resources of federal agencies and their personnel to promote certain of the President’s favorite programs.

During the first year of this Administration, there was the appearance that the White House is using federal resources to run a four-year campaign for the presidency in 2012.

The White House has failed to transition from campaign-mode to leadership-mode and is now inappropriately leveraging those campaign--trail relationships to unlawfully generate support for the President’s agenda.

http://republicans.oversight.house.g...andareport.pdf

[BeenThinkin]

Originally Posted by Maximilian

Actually, I don't think Pel is blathering or irrational. I don't think Ferd is blathering or irrational. Guess that leaves you this time around

You aren't a Savage fan? Good for you! His Anger is off the charts. He cuts off his callers. His worldview is dark and cold. Definitely not a fan. He's an entertainer though... guess he does that well.

Why do I have the feeling that if you could you would cut me off? I'm in good company when I'm in your company when I'm blathering or irrational and posting on your posts! And as far as Savage, I don't know that I would even call him entertaining. To me he's irritating like some on this post! What do I know? Have a good day!

Been Thinkin (too much!)

[Pressing-On]

I don't know who stated that there was a mosque at the Pentagon. Apparently, that is not true.

http://factcheck.org/2010/08/no-pentagon-mosque/

The truth is that there is no "mosque" in the Pentagon, according to Army spokesman George Wright. There is a chapel inside the Pentagon where Muslim employees can go to pray, as ABC News recently reported. It’s just not exclusive to followers of Islam.

The Pentagon’s non-denominational chapel was built and dedicated in 2002 in honor of Pentagon employees and passengers of American Airlines Flight 77 who died in the terrorist attack on the building on Sept. 11, 2001. The chapel was constructed at the site where the hijacked plane crashed into the Pentagon nearly nine years ago. Wright told us that the chapel, which can seat about 100 people, hosts services throughout the week for Pentagon employees of various faiths including Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Episcopalians, Hindus and Muslims. Wright said that the chapel’s schedule for the week of August 16 actually includes daily mass for Catholics; Bible study sessions for Protestants, Jews and members of the Church of Latter Day Saints; as well as a prayer service for Muslims.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Pel, Im concerned about the Imam and this story of the WH flying this dude around to raise money. That, if true, needs to be addressed big time

However is that a reason for legally forbidding the building of a Mosque?

When you say, "legally forbidding" you've got to keep in mind we're talking about a zoning committee here and not some gathering of enlightened philosophers.

And yes, it could be grounds. If a convicted felon applied for a permit to build a liquor store he would be denied in most parts of the country. Also, I know of one UPC preacher who tried to build a church in an established residential neighborhood but was ultimately shut down because he was "too controversial." One zoning official said after it was over, "That corner is no place for a church like that..."

The excuse was "traffic" - but the problem was really that the pastor in question had done things like put up anti-abortion "signs" in the area made out of 4x8 sheets of plywood, children's dolls, large butcher knives and lots of red paint.

Such zoning calls are made all the time.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

You're response does not make sense.

No one is losing rights in this case.

He is simply affirming the rights of American citizens to build on their own private property in accordance with the pre-established laws and ordinances.


It's not even a Federal issue anyway. What do you want him to do? Use his Federal "powers" to sieze the land so that the developers won't do it?

That would only make what his very biased critics say about him being a commie true.


Truth is, he made a very unpopular stand. He exercised leadership in taking this stance publicly. He clarified that he questioned the wisdom of doing it, but in this case, President Obama is a defender of American freedom and of the Constitution.

The President stood up for the rights of all American citizens when he made his unpopular view public.

President Obama is the PATRIOT I'm not in this situation.



I bet my fellow conservatives will not acknowledge this. We can never allow anything a Democrat does to be painted in a positive light-- especially President Obama.

For you to say, "fellow conservatives" makes no sense.

You err when you say, "He is simply affirming the rights of American citizens..." There is only one single American citizen involved, and he is only recently nationalized.

The other mosques in the area which actually serve the Muslim American community have denounced this plan - as I have already shown with a link in an earlier post.

No one is being denied "the right to build a mosque." The question is just about the appropriateness of the location. This particular location restricts the rights of those who lost loved ones on 9/11 to "pursue happiness" as they are otherwise empowered to do.

No mosque is needed on this site by any American Muslim, except one guy. The fact that he has literally tens of millions of dollars from foreign sources is the only thing that makes him significant.

As I said before, Obama simply committed a gaffe at dinner when he made a statement without his teleprompter present. Everything else that he's done has been to back track on those statements.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I don't know who stated that there was a mosque at the Pentagon. Apparently, that is not true.

And that (see PO's quote) is the way it should be.

[Pressing-On]

I just love Allen West!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFS5s...yer_embedded#!

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by pelathais

When you say, "legally forbidding" you've got to keep in mind we're talking about a zoning committee here and not some gathering of enlightened philosophers.

And yes, it could be grounds. If a convicted felon applied for a permit to build a liquor store he would be denied in most parts of the country. Also, I know of one UPC preacher who tried to build a church in an established residential neighborhood but was ultimately shut down because he was "too controversial." One zoning official said after it was over, "That corner is no place for a church like that..."

The excuse was "traffic" - but the problem was really that the pastor in question had done things like put up anti-abortion "signs" in the area made out of 4x8 sheets of plywood, children's dolls, large butcher knives and lots of red paint.

Such zoning calls are made all the time.

Yes but if a convicted felon solicited money from other people to give to a group to start their own liquor store, would there be legal grounds to say no?

[Pressing-On]

"We are in the planning stages," said Oz Sultan, spokesman for the center now called Park51. "We have just started the process of fundraising planning."

When asked if they would then turn to foreign donors, Sultan replied, "I can't comment on that."

Pressed on whether the developers were willilng rule out accepting donations from the governments of Saudi Arabia or Iran, he repeated, "I can't comment on that."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/Politics/is...ry?id=11429998

Robert Spencer puts it well, "No other religious system makes rules for people who are outside the religion. Islamic law does. And it mandates and institutionalizes subjugation of non-Muslims and so that is what Faisal Abdul Rauf is calling for."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCEpV...eature=related