Sittin’ on the dock of the bay,

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Link?




Anything recent?

You want some more info on the radical Imam?

 

[Saint Peter]

Mexico —> Texas.

If you know COBOL, you know about math, right?

He knows the math.

The only one in class allowed to divide by zero. Cleans up messy equations in a heartbeat.

 

[Byron In Exile]

You might have a point if I wasn't in favor of monitoring and protecting cargo from crossing our land borders. Of course, since I am strongly in favor of it, I guess you don't. Again, one principle regardless of politics. I can see you are having a lot of trouble grasping the concept.

It doesn't matter what you think.

The border is open, and it's going to stay open — period.

Just try and close it, and see where that gets you.

 

[Saint Peter]

The question has been brought up before.

Do you support freedom of religion or not?

An answer would be very neighborly of you.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Mexico —> Texas.

If you know COBOL, you know about math, right?

We have a dock problem in Texas?



Must be the plumes...

You know, you could drive a bomb in on that thing, but not to worry!

Obama's sending a handful of men just in time for the election to keep us safe...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

11 terror attacks expressed shock this week after learning, via Fox News, that government officials had killed a deal to relocate the church.

The St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, once a tiny, four-story building in the shadows of lower Manhattan, was destroyed in 2001 by one of the falling World Trade Center towers. Nobody from the church was hurt in the attack, but the congregation has, for the past eight years, been trying to rebuild its house of worship.

Though talks between the church and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey stalled last year, church leaders say they've been trying to kick-start discussions ever since. But amid debate over whether a proposed Islamic community center should go forward near Ground Zero, government officials threw cold water on the prospect of any deal with the church -- telling Fox News the deal is off the table.

Confronted with the Port Authority's verdict, Father Mark Arey, of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, said it's the first he's heard that.

"Negotiations did break off last year. We were expecting to hear from their lawyers -- we never did. We're still expecting to hear from them," he told Fox News. "We're disappointed. ... 130 Liberty Street was promised to us."

Arey was referring to the address, about 100 yards away from the original site, where the government earlier proposed relocating the church. The Port Authority and the church announced a deal in July 2008 under which the Port Authority would grant land and up to $20 million to help rebuild the church -- in addition, the authority was willing to pay up to $40 million to construct a bomb-proof platform underneath.

Within a year, the deal fell through and talks ended -- apparently for good, according to the Port Authority.

The archdiocese and Port Authority now offer sharply conflicting accounts of where things went wrong. The Port Authority has claimed the church was making additional demands -- like wanting the $20 million up front and wanting to review plans for the surrounding area. They say the church can still proceed on its own if it wishes.

"St. Nicholas Orthodox Church has always had and will continue to have the right to rebuild on its original location. The question was whether public money would be spent to build a much larger church at a separate location on the site and ensuring that construction wouldn't delay the World Trade Center further," spokesman Stephen Sigmund said in a written statement. "On that question, we worked for many years to reach an agreement and offered up to 60 million dollars of public money to build that much larger new church. After reaching what we believed was an agreement in 2008, representatives of the church wanted even more public commitments, including unacceptable approvals on the design of the Vehicle Security Center that threatened to further delay the construction on the World Trade Center and the potential for another $20 million of public funds."

Sigmund said the "final offer" was made last year, which again included $60 million.

"They rejected that offer," he said.

But Arey said the original site is no good. And archdiocese officials disputed the Port Authority's claims, saying the church has complied with all conditions.

"It's not about money," Arey said. He expressed hope that the project can still be salvaged.

"This little church deserves to be rebuilt. It's symbolic, not just for Orthodox Christians, not just for Christians, but for all Americans," Arey said, calling the mosque debate "helpful" to the church's cause. "I believe that people around the country are asking themselves the question -- why all this talk about a mosque being built near Ground Zero? What about a little church that was destroyed on 9/11? ... This is basically a bureaucratic impasse. This will dissolve in the face of the American public consciousness."

Former New York Gov. George Pataki, who worked with the church as governor, told Fox News on Tuesday that the church should be rebuilt.

George Demos, a Republican candidate for New York's 1st Congressional District, also has drawn attention to the negotiations. He released an open letter to President Obama Tuesday urging him to, as he did with the mosque debate, weigh in on the church discussions.

"While we may disagree on the appropriateness of the mosque, we can surely agree that it is an issue of national importance that the only house of worship actually destroyed on September 11, 2001, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, be rebuilt," Demos wrote. "Mr. President, please stand up and defend our Judeo-Christian values, express your public and unwavering support for St. Nicholas Church, and ensure that it is rebuilt."

Father Alex Karloutsos, assistant to the head of the Greek Orthodox Church in America, Archbishop Demetrios, told FoxNews.com that the Port Authority "simply forgot about the church" at Ground Zero.

Fox News' David Lee Miller and Kathleen Foster and FoxNews.com's Judson Berger contributed to this report.

Clear and present danger

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...eclares-deal-rebuild-ground-zero-church-dead/

(Yesterday)

 

[zipman]

It doesn't matter what you think.

The border is open, and it's going to stay open — period.

Just try and close it, and see where that gets you.

*gasp* you mean I can't tighten border security all by myself? Or even do anything meaningful to see that it happens.

You should have given me some warning so I could have sat down before finding that out.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

So, zip, does the radical preaching and home-grown danger come from the radical HamasQues, or the Ports and Borders?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

So, zip, isn't it a little intolerant and insensitive to say Muslims can't be trusted with port security?





Does that mean we can't let any Muslims be deployed by Obama to the border?

 

[Byron In Exile]

*gasp* you mean I can't tighten border security all by myself? Or even do anything meaningful to see that it happens.

You should have given me some warning so I could have sat down before finding that out.

So... what does "political expedience" mean to you?

And why do you believe the border will remain open?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

zip's saying that he agrees with Friday Obama that they have a RIGHT to build a house of worship, but he sides with Saturday Obama thinking it might not be the right thing to do...




He agrees 100% with Reid, Pelosi, Dean, Bloomberg, and Obama.



Whatever we do, though, we can't let them have freedom of "business."

 

[Byron In Exile]

zip's saying that he agrees with Friday Obama that they have a RIGHT to build a house of worship, but he sides with Saturday Obama thinking it might not be the right thing to do...

He agrees 100% with Reid, Pelosi, Dean, Bloomberg, and Obama.



Whatever we do, though, we can't let them have freedom of "business."

Well, their "business" isn't business as we know it.

Their business is to sweat for half the minimum wage under the table ten hours a day and live eight guys to a bedroom in a single-wide trailer with no a/c.

That's "progress"!

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The real battle for religious freedom lurks beneath the Ground Zero mosque controversy. It is sadly ironic that our public debate presents the mosque proponents as the partisans of liberty: That includes everyone from imam Feisal Rauf, the project’s sharia-touting sponsor, to President Obama, Mayor Bloomberg, and the rest of the Islamist-smitten Left, to the GOP’s own anti-anti-terrorist wing. Yet, wittingly or not, when they champion this mosque and its sponsors, it is the agenda of an alien and authoritarian Islam that they champion — an Islam against which many American Muslims chafe.

When it comes to liberty, no one in this society has been given a wider berth than the Islamists, the purveyors of this authoritarian Islam, which is the mainstream Islam of the Middle East. Their vise grip on the American Muslim community has been cinched for two decades by the government, the media, and the academy. For our post-American ruling class, “Islamic outreach” means prostituting themselves for Saudi largesse; it means putting the “moderate” label on the Muslim Brotherhood — the Saudi-backed saboteurs whose American operatives boldly promise to “eliminate and destroy Western Civilization from within.”

The victims of this lethal charade include American Muslims. They, too, crave religious liberty and Western enlightenment. Our elites abandon them to the sharia-mongers. That freedom destroyers have been allowed to pose as freedom defenders ought to tell mosque opponents something: We have done a poor job of explaining the stakes.

In 1993, I headed up a prosecution team that was preparing to try the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven other jihadists for conducting a terrorist war against the United States. The case revealed this country’s Muslim divide.

On one side were patriotic American Muslims, without whom successful prosecution would have been impossible. Not only did they infiltrate the terror cells, they helped us shape the resulting evidence into a compelling narrative. On the other side were the Muslim Brotherhood’s satellites. These included outfits like CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations), which was formed in 1994 by the Brotherhood’s Hamas-support wing, with seed money from an Islamic “charity” — the Holy Land Foundation — later shut down for financing foreign terrorist organizations. These Brotherhood satellites purport to speak for American Muslims. In fact, they speak for anti-American Muslims, most of whom are outside the United States. They demagogued the case as a phobic criminalization of Islam itself, just as they have libeled America since 9/11 as being “at war with Islam.”

Translating evidence into English turned out to be a Herculean challenge during our trial preparation. Most of our evidence was in Arabic, because almost all of our defendants had immigrated here from Egypt and Sudan, hotbeds of anti-American Islam. The resulting mounds of documents, wiretap recordings, and inflammatory sermons overstretched the Justice Department’s thin Arabic-language capacity. To ease the strain, we tried to retain some civilians as private contractors. A number of local Muslims expressed interest, but in the end they turned us down.

BROTHERHOOD ISLAM VS. AMERICAN ISLAM
Mind you, they wanted to help. They were as offended as anyone by what the terrorists had done. These folks were Americans. They were the kind of Muslims you’re never exposed to, given the media’s preference for jihad apologists who, when not applauding him, claim Osama bin Laden was “made in the U.S.A.” But the would-be translators wanted ironclad assurance that their assistance to the prosecution would be kept confidential. It was an assurance I was not in a position to give, so they politely declined.

Here’s the most depressing part: It wasn’t really a matter of safety. There was surely some element of that — it goes with the territory in terrorism cases. But these people were mostly worried that they and their families would be ostracized in their communities as traitors to Islam.

In Muslim communities, I learned, many people — especially American Muslims — were supportive of our investigations. Of course they didn’t like the light of suspicion being shined on Muslims, not any more than Italian Americans liked the attention our mafia cases thrust on their communities. Yet they tuned out the CAIR chorus, just as most sensible people tune out the grievance industry. They reserved most of their resentment for the malevolent, anti-American actors in their midst. They understood that public safety is the government’s highest obligation. As long as they could do it quietly, they were willing to help.

Andrew McCarthy
NRO

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Why the HamasQue WILL get funded...

This new Cold War represents the current ideological division in the Middle East between the "revolutionary bloc," led chiefly by Iran, Syria, and more recently Turkey, and the "status-quo bloc," led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt. While most Sunni Arab states align themselves with the "status-quo bloc," there are notable exceptions in that Qatar and Oman back the "revolutionary bloc," while Libya simply sits on the sidelines.

The Middle Eastern Cold War has manifested itself in recent years in several ways, including the ongoing tension in Lebanon between Saad Hariri's coalition government and pro-Syrian factions like Hezb'allah, the contest between Fatah and Hamas for the Palestinian leadership, and the conflict in Yemen between Iranian-backed Shi'a Houthi rebels and the Saudi-backed central government of Ali Abdullah Saleh.

However, the most recent sign of this Cold War could well lie in Iraq as Saudi Arabia and Iran jostle for influence. With the ongoing political stalemate that has created a power vacuum, it is Saudi Arabia's hope that the current Shi'a Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki does not retain his position in power for fear that he will tilt Iraq towards Iran's regional bloc. Meanwhile, Iran not only wishes for him to remain as prime minister, but also hopes for Maliki's State of Law (SOA) coalition and the Sadrist Iraqi National Alliance (INA) to form the backbone of a new government, whereas the U.S. views a coalition between SOA and Iyad Allawi's Iraqiya bloc as the best option.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/08/iraq_and_the_middle_eastern_co.html

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

As the Soviet Union was collapsing, National Public Radio interviewed Barry Goldwater about the dramatic rupture of the Soviet socio-political system during the winter of 1989-1990. As a statesman who spent most of his political life fighting the evils of communism abroad and “statism” at home, NPR expected Goldwater to be unrestrained in his joy over the event.

He wasn’t.

Instead, Goldwater dismayed his interviewer and no doubt large segments of the liberal NPR audience by what he had to say. He spoke of the end of the Soviet Union as leaving a society without heroes and without symbols. He saw this aspect, although certainly not the collapse itself, as a tragedy, especially for the younger generation coming of political age. Every society needs heroes and symbols, Goldwater noted; it is part of the continuity and integration of a culture.

In this observation, Goldwater was echoing the sentiments of the celebrated Renaissance historian Jacob Burckhardt, whose The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy spoke to the use of public art to create political symbols in order to advance claims to legitimacy.

If there is one politico-religious movement that understands the use of symbols to advance its claims, it is Islam. No, I am not speaking of radical Islam. I am speaking of Islam.

The Ground Zero mosque is the manipulation of symbols. The very name “Cordoba Initiative” is an insult to the people of Spain, a reminder of their conquest by Islam and the creation of a society organized through the sharia concept of dhimmitude, a society that puts non-Muslims in the role of second-class citizens. The tolerant society of Islam’s Andalusia was as tolerant as Mississippi under the doctrine of “separate but equal.”

From the time of its inception, Islam has celebrated its victories by building mosques on the holy sites of the people it conquered. The al-Aqsa mosque looks down on the Wailing Wall of Israel’s sacred Temple. The insult is underscored by the denial of the existence of the Temple. St. Sophia’s Basilica in Istanbul was torn down and replaced with a mosque, and the original Cordoba mosque was built over the site of a Christian cathedral. The Koran (018.021) exhorts Muslims to build mosques on the places of worship of the people they conquer so as to symbolically affirm Islam’s victory.

If the Ground Zero mosque were indeed an attempt at creating reconciliation, the developers of the mosque would be willing to sit down with New York Governor David Paterson and discuss alternative sites. No alternative site will do because no alternative site will symbolize the destruction of the World Trade Center as a victory of Islam. No alternative site will cast a shadow over the tragedy of Ground Zero and transform it into a propaganda victory for Islam. The recent revelation that the Ground Zero mosque developers won’t rule out accepting Saudi and Iranian money underscores the true intentions of the developers.

So a prudent man would ask, why did President Obama support the building of the mosque? Why did Nancy Pelosi — in a consummate act of callous stupidity — demand an investigation of those who seek to prevent its construction?

The answer is as obvious as it is simple. We live in the age not of the post-racial presidency, but of the post-American presidency.

We are governed by elites who value the symbols of other cultures but not our own. This is why Obama does not stand firm and proud as the American president but bows to kings and dictators. This is why Pelosi, until she clumsily attempted to correct her stupid outburst, did not call for an investigation of those who were funding the mosque. This is why the ultra-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that stealing the valor of our servicemen and women is not a crime but a matter of “free speech.”

The extreme left of the Democratic base hates America as it hates itself. It demeans those who fight and die to defend our freedoms and it exalts those who would destroy us. In academia, anti-American radicals like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn find easy access to employment, while Vietnam veterans had to hide their service from the scrutiny of the faculty hiring committees. How else does one explain the unholy and unfathomable alliance between the self-proclaimed progressives and Islam, one of the most reactionary forces on the planet? Hatred, as Eric Hoffer noted, is indeed the great unifier of social movements.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/barry-goldwater-and-the-ground-zero-mosque/?singlepage=true
__________________
The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.
Eric Hoffer

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Why did the Left hate Islam under Bush, but then come to love it under Obama?

They could not be trusted to run the ports because they would try to blow us up, but it's in the Mosques where hate is taught and the soldiers sent out to kill us, via the airlines, the automobile, the firearm, and home-made bombs, not one of which needed to be imported...

And yet, now we hate those who would stop this symbol of Radical Islamic Pride are the ones who find ourselves hated.

 

[Saint Peter]

We do not like that bullshit the Catholics teach their kids or the Mormons, either.

Protestant. Maybe a little Evangelical, but none of that speaking in tongues stuff. Sounds too Catholic.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

I've taught enough kids to know at thirteen or so, they make up their own damned minds...

(At least I'm on the record as supporting Islam when it counts as it applies to moderate out-reach.)

... and unfortunately, their public education and peer pressure form more of their values than their parents when the message is that their parents are ignorant haters and bigots if they're conservative.

As you know, I now have THREE copies of Zinn given to me by college kids trying to get my mind Wright...

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Why did the Left hate Islam under Bush, but then come to love it under Obama?

They could not be trusted to run the ports because they would try to blow us up, but it's in the Mosques where hate is taught and the soldiers sent out to kill us, via the airlines, the automobile, the firearm, and home-made bombs, not one of which needed to be imported...

And yet, now we hate those who would stop this symbol of Radical Islamic Pride are the ones who find ourselves hated.

First of all Cap'n Misinformed, the left didn't hate Islam, that has been the purview of the right. The left harbored ill will toward the terrorists who attacked us and those who helped to fund and plan it. Not even close to the same thing.

Do you really think that subbing out our nation's port security to ANY foreign entity is a good idea? It wasn't about Dubai in particular but the idea that ANY foreign entity should be handed the responsibility to secure our ports. But that doesn't fit with your notion or the altered perception you're trying to pass off as reality.

Finally, a community center at the former site of a fucking Burlington Coat Factory isn't being built as a symbol of radical anything, again, you're pushing your altered perception as if it's reality. The "radical" Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf that is being drawn and quartered by the right is no more radical than he was when he helped the FBI with counter-terrorism efforts in 2003. The very same "radical" that was dispatched on speaking tours by the past State Department on multiple occasions to help promote tolerance and religious diversity in the Arab and Muslim world.

As far as his "radical" nature..

"Imam Feisal has participated at the Aspen Institute in Muslim-Christian-Jewish working groups looking at ways to promote greater religious tolerance. He has consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism, and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam. Some of this work was done under the auspices of his own group, the Cordoba Initiative. I liked his book, and I participated in some of the meetings in 2004 or so. This is why I find it a shame that his good work is being undermined by this inflamed dispute. He is the type of leader we should be celebrating in America, not undermining." - Walter Isaacson, head of The Aspen Institute

But that doesn't fit in with the picture the "right" is trying to paint, that picture being that all of Islam is responsible for the attacks and are busily fostering more terrorists to kill us all in our sleep.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Like Obama, he's simply smart enough to use the language and forms that put us at ease, as outlined in several places, radical Islam has abandoned the in-your-face approach of al Qaeda and decided to use the subvert and assimilate from within behind it facade. The Iranian faction is still in your face in this cold war, the Saudi faction uses money, oil, and bromides to lull us into war with each other.



Just picking the word CORDOBA is code for making the infidel submit.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Like Obama, he's simply smart enough to use the language and forms that put us at ease, as outlined in several places, radical Islam has abandoned the in-your-face approach of al Qaeda and decided to use the subvert and assimilate from within behind it facade. The Iranian faction is still in your face in this cold war, the Saudi faction uses money, oil, and bromides to lull us into war with each other.

Just picking the word CORDOBA is code for making the infidel submit.

So his words don't matter, his actions don't matter. What matters is what the "right" wants to believe about him.



What do you know about Cordoba? I'll refer you to the Catholic encyclopedia on the subject, 1917 edition and it's entry on Cordoba.

"In 786 the Arab caliph, Abd-er Rahman I, began the construction of the great mosque of Cordova, now the cathedral, and compelled many Christians to take part in the preparation of the site and foundations. Though they suffered many vexations, the Christians continued to enjoy freedom of worship, and this tolerant attitude of the ameers seduced not a few Christians from their original allegiance. Both Christians and Arabs co-operated at this time to make Cordova a flourishing city, the elegant refinement of which was unequalled in Europe."

Virtually every historian regards the period when Cordoba was under Muslim rule as a golden age of religious tolerance, at least until the middle of the 12th century, when Muslim Spain was taken over by Islamic fundamentalists.

It's easy to see why a group of Muslims creating a community center in the heart of a majority Christian country in a city known for its large Jewish population might name it "The Cordoba House" or call themselves the "Cordoba Initiative".

They're not, as Newt Gingrich and you hope that we would believe, discreetly laughing at us because "Cordoba" is some double-secret Islamist code for "conquest"; rather, they're hoping to associate themselves with a particular time in medieval history when the largest library in Western Europe was to be found in Cordoba, a city in which scholars of all three major Abrahamic religions were free to study side-by-side.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

"Virtually every historian regards the period when Cordoba was under Muslim rule as a golden age of religious tolerance, at least until the middle of the 12th century, when Muslim Spain was taken over by Islamic fundamentalists."

NO FUCKING SHIT SHERLOCK....

The Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens reminded readers that the press, like the deluded, lonely women who send mash notes to psychotic killers, regularly tag as moderate Moslems people who are anything but.

Take Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki, who, my friend Rick Ballard reminds us, is now justificably the target of predator drones -- part of the administration's "this hellfire's for you Moslem outreach program." Awlaki was the imam of the mosque attended by two of the 9/11 hijackers and spiritual mentor to Nidal Malik Hasan, the Fort Hood mass murderer, as well as two other would-be bombers of innocent Americans. Here's how, per Stephens, the press described him not so long ago:

The New York Times, Oct. 19, 2001: "Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki, spiritual leader at the Dar al-Hijra mosque in Virginia, one of the nation's largest. . . . is held up as a new generation of Muslim leader capable of merging East and West."

Or take Brian Williams, another great moderate Moslem-spotter, of whose judgement Stephens reminds us.:

NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams, Dec. 9, 2004: "It's the TV industry's newest experiment, 'Bridges TV,' billing itself the 'American-Muslim lifestyle network,' featuring movies, documentaries, cartoons. . . . It's the brainchild of Aasiya Hassan, an architect, and her husband, Muzzamil Hassan, a banker, who are disturbed that negative images of Muslims seem to dominate TV, especially since 9/11." [snip]

As for Bridges TV, the saccharine story told by Brian Williams and reporter Ron Allen (complete with scenes of the family's domestic bliss in their modest home in Buffalo, N.Y.), came to an abrupt end in February 2009, when Mr. Hasan beheaded his wife after she had filed for divorce, evicted him from their home, and won an order of protection. Last week, Mr. Hasan's attorney defended her client on the grounds that he was, of all things, a "battered spouse."

Looking for love in all the wrong places...
The American Thinker
(Doing the thinking the Know-It-All Left refuses to do)

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

"Virtually every historian regards the period when Cordoba was under Muslim rule as a golden age of religious tolerance, at least until the middle of the 12th century, when Muslim Spain was taken over by Islamic fundamentalists."

NO FUCKING SHIT SHERLOCK....



Looking for love in all the wrong places...
The American Thinker

If you want to see some real intolerance in conquest you only have to fast forward to the reconquest of Cordoba by the catholic Crusades. When they took the city shortly after the Islamic fundamentals took over Spain in the 12th century they immediately drove out all of the Muslims and Jews and converted the mosque directly into a cathedral.

Your personal opinion, spoon fed to you by the Thinker and good old Newt, seems to be that what they mean is "What we did in Cordoba we will eventually do in New York"

What? Get chased out by fanatical Christians? That is, after all, what happened in Cordoba.

If "their" putative goal is some kind of future all-conquering triumph, as you seem to imagine, naming the center after a place with an ambiguous, even tragic history is an odd way of proclaiming it.

The ironic part is that the role of the Catholic Archdiocese is now being played out here by the "right", and not just in New York, but in cities all across the country. Don't act as if an old Burlington Coat Factory near the WTC site is sacred or somehow different because of the attacks on 9/11.. It's being made quite clear that the "right" simply doesn't want Muslims to practice their religion.. At all.. Anywhere..

It seems the 14th Amendment isn't the only one the "right" wants to have modified.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The funny part is you'll do ANYTHING to protect Islam...







Answer me this...

Greatest threat comes from the dock or the Mosque?

Trade or Religion?

Trade builds bridges; Religion builds Trojan Horses...

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

The funny part is you'll do ANYTHING to protect Islam...



Answer me this...

Greatest threat comes from the dock or the Mosque?

Trade or Religion?

Trade builds bridges; Religion builds Trojan Horses...

You're mistaken, nothing new about that though is there Cap'n?

My aim is precisely to protect the rights of those who practice Islam, and Christianity, and Hinduism, and every other religion you can think of. I don't subscribe to the beliefs of any of them, but freedom of religion is one of the basic tenets of this country's founding. One of those that the right is more than willing to ignore when it's inconvenient. If one group can make another public enemy number one then there is little to nothing to stop another group from doing the same thing to the Jews, or the Hindu, or.. Well, you get the idea right? Probably not, but I'll assume you should.

Your question is short sighted. Threat can come from either as has been demonstrated repeatedly.

I'm not even sure where to begin since your assertion is so completely fucked it's tough to even begin to address. Dock security is not necessarily a restriction in trade, never has been. There is no shame is thinking that the sercurity and management of our ports should be handled by us instead of farming it out to ANY foreign entity. This in and of itself is not a slight against one group of people in particular. You keep insisting that the only reason any of those on the left were against the Dubai port deal was because it was Dubai in particular when it was actually against having a foreign entity responsible for our dock operations or security at all.

I'm not sure what you were getting at with the whole Trojan Horse thing other than you're a paranoid twit that sees Islamic Revolutionaries hiding behind every bush and pebble.

Religious threats from one group against another are usually predicated by the persecution of that religious group. You know, like refusing to let the believers of one particular religion build a place or worship simply because you hate and despise them. Trying to strongarm the government into blocking the construction (First Amendment? Pfft..). You know.. Like exactly what the "right" is engaging in all across the country this very minute. You idiots are playing right into the hands of the actual extremists by giving traction to their claim that we are waging a war against Islam instead of a war against terrorists. You are validating their claims of persecution.