A Mosque On The Twin Towers Site?

[Mills 0]

Actually your side's refusal to acknowledge that the land is relevant to muslim terrorist who killed 3,000 people for no reason but to try to destroy our way of life is the only claim made by either side.Constantly lying about the physical lands relevance by trying to dilute it with references to a strip club being nearby shows that deep down even you guys understand that once you admit that there were muslims flying those planes, you would have to face the fact that the action to build a mosque there is a slap in the face to America.But your side doesn't need truth or facts to pat yourselves on the back. The problem is you are willing to sell out your country in order to feel good about yourselves.

...Who hasn't 'admitted' that Muslims were flying the planes? I thought that was pretty much an indisputable fact.the rest of this is just your typical crazy, i think this is one of those threads where you are just trolling...

[Balloon guy 158]

...Who hasn't 'admitted' that Muslims were flying the planes? I thought that was pretty much an indisputable fact.the rest of this is just your typical crazy, i think this is one of those threads where you are just trolling...

Fell free to show me where your side of this argument hasn't gone out of their way to discount that the building site in question was damaged by 9-11 hijackersMaking reference to a strip club being nearby does what for the argument about a specific building that was damaged directly because of the muslims who flew the planes into the twin towers?The only thing it does is dilute the meaning for the purpose of obfuscation.Having this pointed out dozens and dozens of times has not reached into the feeble minds who want to pretend that they are not Neville Chamberlain wanna-bes.Having France..the bastion of liberalism and forward European thinking declaring burkas illegal must be a crushing blow to your side who refuse to accept the reality that muslims are becoming a real problem in every country they grow to significant numbers and capitulation hasn't worked so far.Maybe they just didn't capitulate the right way though... maybe this time it will work out different?

[vbnautilus 48]

What about the Declaration of Independence? Should we cut out the references to God there too?

Does that document have any legal consequence at this point?

[Balloon guy 158]

Does that document have any legal consequence at this point?

Ah..the foundation of our legal system has been usurped and therefore it's relevance to the current system is inadmissible.It's alright, stealing the best parts of my side's beliefs and then pretending that we are the problem is a repeating theme.

[Mills 0]

Fell free to show me where your side of this argument hasn't gone out of their way to discount that the building site in question was damaged by 9-11 hijackersMaking reference to a strip club being nearby does what for the argument about a specific building that was damaged directly because of the muslims who flew the planes into the twin towers?The only thing it does is dilute the meaning for the purpose of obfuscation.Having this pointed out dozens and dozens of times has not reached into the feeble minds who want to pretend that they are not Neville Chamberlain wanna-bes.Having France..the bastion of liberalism and forward European thinking declaring burkas illegal must be a crushing blow to your side who refuse to accept the reality that muslims are becoming a real problem in every country they grow to significant numbers and capitulation hasn't worked so far.Maybe they just didn't capitulate the right way though... maybe this time it will work out different?

You keep bringing up the strip club thing, if you'd care to notice I haven't mentioned that once, but I realize that you like generalizing and lumping people together, so I guess I should have expected it.But I do take my marching orders from the country of France.

[Balloon guy 158]

Let's get a little focus.My side: Building this mosque on the site that one of the plane's damaged during the 9-11 attacks is so offensive and insensitive that we should demand they not build it. Sure they have a legal right, but it's still wrong for them to build it there.Your side: Oh, but there is a strip club down the street.My side: Don't care, we are talking about this particular location, and exact place that had the dubious honor of being destroyed by the 9-11 attacks.Your side: But there is a strip club down the street and Sarah Palin said Holy Ground.My side: Again..not relevant, this particular site, the one they want to build a mosque on, this site was physically damaged by the airplane parts landing on its roof during the 9-11 attacks.Your side: Yea, but muslims died in the twin towers too.My side: But it was muslims who flew the planes, not Jews, not strippers, not cats...muslims.Your side: But we are all about freedom of religion.My side: Freedom of religion? There are 50 other mosques in Manhattan..how is 51 going to change their freedom?Your side: Strip clubs

[Balloon guy 158]

You keep bringing up the strip club thing, if you'd care to notice I haven't mentioned that once, but I realize that you like generalizing and lumping people together, so I guess I should have expected it.But I do take my marching orders from the country of France.

If I had the reality of the facts pointed out this clear, I too would want to distance myself from your former teammates.

[Mills 0]

Let's get a little focus.My side: Building this mosque on the site that one of the plane's damaged during the 9-11 attacks is so offensive and insensitive that we should demand they not build it. Sure they have a legal right, but it's still wrong for them to build it there.Your side: Oh, but there is a strip club down the street.My side: Don't care, we are talking about this particular location, and exact place that had the dubious honor of being destroyed by the 9-11 attacks.Your side: But there is a strip club down the street and Sarah Palin said Holy Ground.My side: Again..not relevant, this particular site, the one they want to build a mosque on, this site was physically damaged by the airplane parts landing on its roof during the 9-11 attacks.Your side: Yea, but muslims died in the twin towers too.My side: But it was muslims who flew the planes, not Jews, not strippers, not cats...muslims.Your side: But we are all about freedom of religion.My side: Freedom of religion? There are 50 other mosques in Manhattan..how is 51 going to change their freedom?Your side: Strip clubs

There is no 'my side' and 'your side' there is only the two of us discussing the issue. Until you ackowledge that i'm not sure how you expect to have an honest conversation, but i'm not sure you want that anyway.

[Mills 0]

Also, "its not impinging on freedom of religion because there are other ones" is a fantastic argumenthow is the fact that people calling themselves Muslims flew planes into the towers relevent to the majority of Muslims in the world who condemn this action?Do you want to be saddled with everything the westboro baptist church does?

[Balloon guy 158]

There is no 'my side' and 'your side' there is only the two of us discussing the issue. Until you ackowledge that i'm not sure how you expect to have an honest conversation, but i'm not sure you want that anyway.

Making little jabs calling me a troll and pretending that my explaining to YOU why I responded to someone ELSE about a thread with 40 pages is a private conversation shows that your side is really about ignoring facts and trying to declare yourselves the winners without even having entered the starting block.Don't get me wrong, I've seen a lot of your arguments...it really is the most +EV method you have to just declare victory, cover your ears with both hands, and say troll troll troll over and over.Lord knows the facts are -EV for you.

[Balloon guy 158]

Also, "its not impinging on freedom of religion because there are other ones" is a fantastic argument

Again..facts.Arguing that it is impinging on their freedom of religion to deny them the right to build here brings that issue into the argument.Therefore to point out that nobody wants to stop them from practicing their religion, and proving it by pointing out that they have complete freedom everywhere else, just not here, for non-religious reasons, clarifies our position, and destroys yours.

[Balloon guy 158]

More clarity:Build a mosque on the site damaged by 9-11: Acceptable by your side.Asking their women to wear a robe that covers them: Unacceptable by your side.

[Mills 0]

More clarity:Build a mosque on the site damaged by 9-11: Acceptable by your side.Asking their women to wear a robe that covers them: Unacceptable by your side.

I wish you'd answer the other part of my post post

[Mills 0]

Making little jabs calling me a troll and pretending that my explaining to YOU why I responded to someone ELSE about a thread with 40 pages is a private conversation shows that your side is really about ignoring facts and trying to declare yourselves the winners without even having entered the starting block.Don't get me wrong, I've seen a lot of your arguments...it really is the most +EV method you have to just declare victory, cover your ears with both hands, and say troll troll troll over and over.Lord knows the facts are -EV for you.

Yea, and you've glossed over/ flat ignored a bunch of them, because answering them honestly would mean the end of your trollingalso, whatchu know about EV?

[Balloon guy 158]

Yea, and you've glossed over/ flat ignored a bunch of them, because answering them honestly would mean the end of your trollingalso, whatchu know about EV?

Sorry, can't allow you to declare this without some semblance of facts.Please present any facts that I have glossed over?To save you time, I have stated:A. They have a legal right under building code laws in NY city to build.B. The president was right to defend them building it because we are busy killing terrorist and using other muslims to help, don't want to upset that apple cart.

[Mills 0]

1. How is you saddling muslims with what a few muslim terrorists did any different from someone saddling you with the actions of christian extremists, like the westboro baptist church?2. With this exclusion, you are effectively telling first responders who happen to be Muslims that they are not allowed to have a house of worship there... That seems fair to you?

[Balloon guy 158]

Also, "its not impinging on freedom of religion because there are other ones" is a fantastic argumenthow is the fact that people calling themselves Muslims flew planes into the towers relevent to the majority of Muslims in the world who condemn this action?Do you want to be saddled with everything the westboro baptist church does?

I wish you'd answer the other part of my post post

I'm here to help.I already pointed out that if Janet Reno and Bill Clinton wanted to open a fire safety clinic on the Waco compound grounds, I would be equally against it.I would also be against Smith and Wesson building a shooting range at Columbine High School.I am able to see that there are places where action mean more than they would in other places.Neo-nazi skin heads who want to march in the hills outside of Hicksville Kentucky has a different meaning than marching in a Jewish neighborhood famous for having a high concentration of holocaust survivors in it.Building a mosque on the site that people who declared themselves to be true followers of islam destroyed has a different meaning at THIS site than it does 100 feet away.

[Balloon guy 158]

1. How is you saddling muslims with what a few muslim terrorists did any different from someone saddling you with the actions of christian extremists, like the westboro baptist church?2. With this exclusion, you are effectively telling first responders who happen to be Muslims that they are not allowed to have a house of worship there... That seems fair to you?

answered aboveThe actions of the terrorist so far outweighs the actions of any first responders that to make the case that they cancel each other out is laughable.

[Mills 0]

I'm here to help.I already pointed out that if Janet Reno and Bill Clinton wanted to open a fire safety clinic on the Waco compound grounds, I would be equally against it.I would also be against Smith and Wesson building a shooting range at Columbine High School.I am able to see that there are places where action mean more than they would in other places.Neo-nazi skin heads who want to march in the hills outside of Hicksville Kentucky has a different meaning than marching in a Jewish neighborhood famous for having a high concentration of holocaust survivors in it.Building a mosque on the site that people who declared themselves to be true followers of islam destroyed has a different meaning at THIS site than it does 100 feet away.

I'm not trying to jab.I don't think any of these examples are appropriate. For one thing, Neo Nazi's more than likely support the hatred of jews and anti-semitism... the majority of Muslims do not support what happened on 9/11.But more generally, there is absolutely no reason for a shooting range to be built on the Columbine site. There is no reason to put a fire prevention station at Waco... Placing a mosque here ( to me) says that we will not give these extremists the holy war they so desperately want. We arent gonna lose our minds and say that Muslims in general are the enemy, because thats not the case.You keep wanting to make the fact that Muslims died in the towers irrelevant, but it isn't. This is just as much a tragedy for Muslims as it is for Christians, Jews etc.... so how exactly is this a 'slap to America's face' as you put it?

[Mills 0]

answered aboveThe actions of the terrorist so far outweighs the actions of any first responders that to make the case that they cancel each other out is laughable.

So then, what carries more weight? A few bilion peaceful muslims, or a few thousand murderous ones?What about the Westboro Baptist church thing?

[El Guapo 8]

the majority of Muslims do not support what happened on 9/11.

You people keep saying stuff like this...where exactly are you getting your information that shows this?

[Mills 0]

You people keep saying stuff like this...where exactly are you getting your information that shows this?

go back to Vb's article about "sharia law" that's a startBut really... would I need conclusive proof that most Christians are anti- what happened in the crusades? Or is it just sort of understood that the majority of people who function in a society are anti-murder.

[SweetDee 0]

I'm not trying to jab.I don't think any of these examples are appropriate. For one thing, Neo Nazi's more than likely support the hatred of jews and anti-semitism... the majority of Muslims do not support what happened on 9/11.But more generally, there is absolutely no reason for a shooting range to be built on the Columbine site. There is no reason to put a fire prevention station at Waco... Placing a mosque here ( to me) says that we will not give these extremists the holy war they so desperately want. We arent gonna lose our minds and say that Muslims in general are the enemy, because thats not the case.You keep wanting to make the fact that Muslims died in the towers irrelevant, but it isn't. This is just as much a tragedy for Muslims as it is for Christians, Jews etc.... so how exactly is this a 'slap to America's face' as you put it?

You do realize that this could also be taken as a memorial to a great victory from the extremist side, right? There is no reason to put a shooting range at Columbine, none for putting a fire prevention station at Waco, none for putting a demolitions clinic in Oklahoma City (Or a Timmys Fertilizer Emporium for that matter) and also no reason to build this Mosque, except for one: a certain group has said "I wanna."That same reason could be applied to every other situation, and that's not a good enough reason.In my mind the other Mosques in the area demonstrate nicely our resolve to not get into a Holy War. If there is 100, 101 does not make that case anymore.

[Mills 0]

You do realize that this could also be taken as a memorial to a great victory from the extremist side, right? There is no reason to put a shooting range at Columbine, none for putting a fire prevention station at Waco, none for putting a demolitions clinic in Oklahoma City (Or a Timmys Fertilizer Emporium for that matter) and also no reason to build this Mosque, except for one: a certain group has said "I wanna."That same reason could be applied to every other situation, and that's not a good enough reason.In my mind the other Mosques in the area demonstrate nicely our resolve to not get into a Holy War. If there is 100, 101 does not make that case anymore.

Except that it if we stop the building of this one, we are telling people where they can and can't have a place of worship. How does that not go against freedom of religion?

[SweetDee 0]

Except that it if we stop the building of this one, we are telling people where they can and can't have a place of worship. How does that not go against freedom of religion?

We do that with zoning laws all of the time. It doesn't impede on freedom of religion. It impedes on it right here on this spot is all.Not to mention is a house of worship the congregation or is the congregation the house of worship?