The last refuge of a liberal

[Blake]

That might be the best ing meltdown and spin job in the history of ever. in classic.

No spin job.

You have been pwned and everyone but you knows it.

Just answer the simple questions and it will be much easier for you.

in message board tough guy in all of his greatness. You think about me before you go to bed don't you? Mommy rubbin those shoulders, massaging those temples trying to make that headache go away. ... From the bottom of my heart, I thank you. I haven't laughed and smiled so much in forever.

U mad.

BAHAHAHAHAWAWA!!!

WHYYYYYYYYY!?!?!!?!

PROOOVVVEEEE ITTTT TOOOO MEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

U definitely mad.

Please keep on pwning me. I'm sure everyone else is too lazy to go back and see how this all started, you becoming extremely butthurt and trying to do your best ChumpDumper to a massive fail. He-Larry-Us.

Everyone else that has gone back and read all of your posts realizes how much of a hypocrite you are, trying to walk both sides of the issue.

Me exposing your hypocrisy has led to the continual meltdown on your part.

C'Mon, let me hear some more pussy and dip smack.

Youre a pussy and a dip .

Is that really more fun for you than answering a very, very simple question?

answering any of the questions you've been asked, just keep on sticking with the gameplan: deny, deny, deny, keep plowing ahead and eventually you'll win the argument by means of convolution -- never mind that it was you who sought out my opinion and engaged in the first place.

I've answered all your questions.

Now you are resorting to all out lying to try to save whatever e-face you think you have left.

Why?

Keep doin' your thing, Nancy. Fight the power, never surrender and whatnot.

Keep condoning bigotry and fear, pussy

The burden of proof is on me to prove that the people I know in opposition aren't racists?

I'm not claiming people you know are racists.

You are the one saying that they have legitimate reasons to oppose the mosque.

So far, the reasons that you have posted on their behalf have amounted to nothing more than fear of the Muslims being associated with terrorists.

You are a dumb .

in beautiful. I'm supposed to give you my opinion (which I did -- the mosque should be built) and then give you an opinion on the people I know in opposition that's factual? Factual opinions, eh?

I got your opinion on the mosque.

But nobody asked you to bring your friends' opinions up. You did, and you continue to justify their fear of terrorists hanging out in the new Community Center because it's a Muslim Community Center.

I called you out on condoning it, and your ass turned a bright red.

Everyone knows it but you.

You are a dumb .

Keep pwning me, brah.

Will do.

in' own my ass! Release all the pent up aggression from years of getting on and punk'd for the little you're proving to be.

Your doing enough self-owning, tbh.

You are a dumb .

Ya know, I was pretty bigoted about message boards and the internet a few years back. I didn't know much about them and just assumed there were a bunch of socially-challenged and repressed individuals. Thanks for proving I wasn't too far off base.

You are condoning your friends' Islamophobia.

Why is that?

My guess at this point is that you are just a dumb .

Let me have it, Nancy!

No need any more! You are letting yourself have it, pussy!

You are a dumb .

[Blackjack]

MORRRRREEEEEEEEEEE!!!

That was weak, brah!

Dumb ? Hypocrite? If you're gonna make up you might as well get creative, for 's sake.

C'Mon, Nancy, tell me how tolerant you are and intolerant I am and how calling people racists and bigots is the way to enlightenment!

You're "the man," Nancy. Let me have it, dammit! C'Mon, I know you've got the anger and hostility built up ... I can see the veins in your Arial.

[Blake]

MORRRRREEEEEEEEEEE!!!

That was weak, brah!

Dumb ? Hypocrite? If you're gonna make up you might as well get creative, for 's sake.

C'Mon, Nancy, tell me how tolerant you are and intolerant I am and how calling people racists and bigots is the way to enlightenment!

You're "the man," Nancy. Let me have it, dammit! C'Mon, I know you've got the anger and hostility built up ... I can see the veins in your Arial.

now you've gone full koriwhat.

U definitely mad at getting pwned by me, yourself and everyone else in the thread.

More!

[Blackjack]

now you've gone full koriwhat.

U definitely mad at getting pwned by me, yourself and everyone else in the thread.

More!

Do you you use "pwned" in real life when you're getting all swole?

So is chazley a Blake troll or is Blake a chazley troll? I win! I'm ownin' fools! #1 poster! Decent schtick but you just blew your cover.

So was my little benign OP the first time you realized you were, well ...



one of those?

Suck it up and move on, Nancy. I'm sure your life's had plenty -- and will have plenty more -- of disappointments. Don't allow it to get you down, brah. Somebody's gotta be the doorstop. Everybody's gotta purpose, and people like myself don't take the likes of your kind for granted, tbh. Good times.

PWNIN FOOLLLZZZZ YO!

[Blake]

jibberish

This has not been a good thread for you.

[Blackjack]

Let me break it down for you so even you can understand, Nancy (and so others don't have to go back and read all that's been posted to appreciate your pwnge of me)

Blackjack: Krauthammmer's right in this particular instance that lemmings will shout racist and alike at the drop of a hat rather than acknowledge and have a productive, meaningful conversation on the subject; wrong in believing the mosque shouldn't be built

Blake: I find it ironic Blackjack is calling people names.

Blackjack: People that avoid a productive, meaningful conversation by using extreme rhetoric to shout-down, dismiss or paint the other side of the argument as having an extreme view (i.e., racist or Islamaphobe) because it does not coincide with their own, those would be people that fall into the "lemming" category. There's no irony in calling a spade a spade.

Blake: You're a name-calling hypocrite, and what moral issue could these objectors you've alluded to have?

Blackjack: First, I'm not a hypocrite, you've just read into something you shouldn't have or have taken offense upon the realization you've met the criteria for a "lemming." I didn't call anyone here a lemming or base my OP off anyone else's post. The post stands on its own. It was not a reply.

Secondly, the objectors I've come across (friends and family whose character couldn't be questioned by anyone who truly knows them) find the developers to be in the wrong (morally) even if they do believe they have the right to move forward legally. Their morality leads them to believe there is a right and wrong way to go about things. They believe the building of this mosque will inevitably have unintended consequences in some size, shape form or fashion (recruitment tool and/or validation to the cause of those that murdered thousands of innocent Americans on 9-11), and a couple are left to ask if the consequences may actually be intended, not unintended -- both the "unintended" [majority] and "may be intended" [minority] objectors I've spoken to will tell you this mosque/community center didn't have to be built in the shadows of Ground Zero. The former sight the chosen location as being insensitive and less-than-neighborly at the least; the latter sees it as a very real reason to look into and scrutinize Cordoba name. [The latter I wouldn't blame anyone for questioning the presence of Islamaphobia, but I've known the 2 individuals involved for over 20 years and know that not to be the case -- they were simply on the fence in opposition and learning of the Cordoba name, in conjunction with the community center's choosing to build in the shadows of Ground Zero [both sides of the opposition I've talked with will sight that as a major point of contention -- choosing to build there, not being forced to or without another choice], had them put 2 + 2 together and decide to oppose.

Blake: Why is it a moral issue though?

Blackjack: For all the aforementioned reasons. You can't paint ALL [This was capitalized and made clear on numerous occasions, by the way, folks] of the opposition as being racist or Islamaphobic. I've discussed the subject with objectors I know that not be the case with. They exist.

Blake: I can see no other reason why someone would object other than to be a racist, Islamaphobe or moron [essentially]. You've yet to answer why it's a moral issue. Why?[x 10 -- the birth of "Nancy."]

Blackjack: Now that's something that could be deemed as "ironic," making a blanket statement that a whole segment of the population -- ALL [Note: There's that unmistakable capitalization again] whom oppose do so for the same reasons and they're ALL based in hate or fear -- are bigots on the basis of no facts. Making an assumption that you know all. That any notion or idea which eludes you, or you are simply unable to grasp, means there are no other notions or reasons -- or because the ones offered just don't satisfy your desires. It has to mean you're correct in stating ALL whom oppose have to be racist or Islamaphobic. [At least the people I disagree with about the Cordoba name and the permutations have some kind of actual factual information to go along the actions of this project's leadership to come to an honestly wrong conclusion. But I digress. ...]

Blake: * [Butthurt, seemingly about the lemming realization and that his holier-than-thou-look-how-smart-I-am-as-I-ask-questions-I-don't-want-an-answer-to-or-were-never-in-question-because-this-ChumpDumper-impersonation-ain't-workin'-out-great-because-it-apparently-takes-talent-and-intelligence. x 10 ] *

Blackjack: * [Realizes Blake is butthurt -- seemingly about the lemming realization and that his holier-than-thou-look-how-smart-I-am-as-I-ask-questions-I-don't-want-an-answer-to-or-were-never-in-question-because-this-ChumpDumper-impersonation-ain't-workin'-out-great-because-it-apparently-takes-talent-and-intelligence] *

I decide to have a little fun by taking a stroll down troll lane [x 10].

[I talk a bit with snackbar and LnGrrrR and eventually decide to give up the troll and get the train back on the tracks. I had had my fun and was willing to let bygones be bygones. It was all in good fun.]

Blake: [Starts responding to posts not directed at him, still butthurt and not willing to let it go and move on]

Dumb , dip , idiot, pussy, vaginia!

[Note: Still puts a smile on my face: head up his ass 2 'I's in the vagina. lol]

Blackjack: U Mad???

Blake: Pussy, dip , dumb ... answer the ing question. You're an idiot. Pussy. Answer the the question, pussy! And I never said ALL the opposition was racist or Islamaphobic. I said there's no other answer.

[* He said on the basis of an inability to find one and an unwillingness to suggest my verbose, nuanced, genuine retorts before and after trolling him -- tee-hee -- were sufficient or satisfactory enough for him.]

Blackjack: Prove it to me! Answer the question! Prove to me you're not projecting a guilty conscience!

Blake: I don't have a guilty conscience. What reason would I have to project?

Blackjack: [lols at the notion Blake would admit to projecting and that he thought that wasn't the same response a projector would have -- conscious or unconscious, a guilty conscience comes from shame, shame you project onto others and not admit to]

Prove it to me, Nancy! Prove it to me! Prove to me you're not a closet bigot and intolerant, ignorant asshat!

Blake: U Mad???

Blackjack: [lols to self how Blake tries to turn his being made fun of into a way of flipping the "U Mad???"]

Give me all you've got, interweb thug! Release all that pent up aggression from years of being on!

Blake: BAHHWHAAHHWHHAHWHAHWHA

Blackjack: More! More! C'Mon, you can do better than that!

Blake: It's koriwhat. I'm just pwning you in front of everybody. You're getting owned!

Blackjack: It's chazley, SpursTalk's #1 poster!

This has not been a good thread for you.

I've enjoyed it, Nancy. I've still yet to lose the smile on my face.

[Blake]

I've enjoyed it, Nancy. I've still yet to lose the smile on my face.

Others explained it to you. Reiiterating your points does not suddenly make you correct.

Not a good thread for you.

Why is it a moral issue, pussy?

[Blackjack]

Let's start fresh, Nancy. I've still yet to see how anything you've said or the position you've taken -- the arrogant and ignorance you've apposed -- isn't counterproductive to whole process: tolerance by way of intolerance; silencing dissent on account of dissent; imposing what's believed to be the "right" instead of building consensus by any and all means, even if you shouldn't necessarily have to.

So how about answering the questions you supposedly read in my genuine and verbose post?

What does one hope to accomplish by stoking the flames of racism and intolerance upon generalization and opinion, not on actual facts?

Is that any way to build consensus and tolerance?

Is the mosque/community center legitimately in danger of not being built on account of the opposition (a number around 30-40%); and is that why this has become such a contentious argument over such a benign OP?

Does silencing dissent ever prove to be a good thing?

And if you feel the need to silence dissent -- as a means to not incite or encourage some disenfranchised individual(s) from potentially doing something reprehensible -- did you feel the same way about America being the Middle East's interventionists as a means to defeat terrorists and their cause (and even if you believe America's intentions were oil or anything else, please answer the question hypothetically)?

I've made my views known, my opinions on some of the dissenting views in my circle of friends and family, and I've presented the best and most logical ways I could think of to find a better consensus in order to get the "right" thing(s) done: morality a la Blackjack.

How 'bout you, Nancy?

[Blackjack]

Others explained it to you. Reiiterating your points does not suddenly make you correct.

Not a good thread for you.

Why is it a moral issue, pussy?

I can't believe anyone could be morally opposed to being pro-choice given the chance to interact with you.

WHY!?!?

[Blake]

I've made my views known, my opinions on some of the dissenting views in my circle of friends and family, and I've presented the best and most logical ways I could think of to find a better consensus in order to get the "right" thing(s) done: morality a la Blackjack.

How 'bout you, Nancy?

You say you are in favor of the mosque being built and then also ask if the builders don't have the moral obligation to build it somewhere else because of the "sensitivity" of the issue.

You are talking out of both sides of your ass, vaginia.

You never answered this one either:

Why do you think terrorists might be associated with this community center?

[Blake]

I can't believe anyone could be morally opposed to being pro-choice given the chance to interact with you.

What is the moral dilemma, pussy?

In 50 words or less please.

[Blackjack]

You say you are in favor of the mosque being built

I am.

and then also ask if the builders don't have the moral obligation to build it somewhere else because of the "sensitivity" of the issue.

I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, Nancy, but I never said that, Nancy.

You are talking out of both sides of your ass, vaginia.

No, I'm not Nancy. You can't discern the difference between my opinion and the view I've relayed, Nancy.

You never answered this one either:

Why do you think terrorists might be associated with this community center?

Why do I think they are or will? Common sense. America's a war-weary country trying to wind down two wars that radical Islam has been the focal point of. 9-11 and Ground Zero are still open wounds (both figuratively and literally) with OBL, Al-Qaeda and their sympathizers still at large and yet to be dealt with and the city's failed to do anything with the actual site. It's nothing more than a daily reminder of what happened. Nothing developed or rebuilt in a way that could provide any kind of closure and help to aid those that would like to move on.

Sufficient, Nancy? I gave you my opinion on why some would associate terrorists with this place but I realize my opinion -- even when asked for it by you, Nancy -- isn't usually enough because it's not a fact. I'm still working on figuring out how to give you a factual opinion, Nancy.

What is the moral dilemma, pussy?

In 50 words or less please.

None, Nancy. I have no moral dilemma with the mosque or my pro-choice stance, Nancy.

Would you care to answer the questions you've avoided, Nancy?

[Blake]

I am.

But your "friends" aren't and you have been condoning their opposition.

I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, Nancy, but I never said that, Nancy.

Obviously you can't comprehend your own posts, pussy:

and then also ask if the builders don't have the moral obligation to build it somewhere else because of the "sensitivity" of the issue.

Simply put, if you're in charge of this community center........... Any kind of conflicting feelings/moral dilemmas under this particular sensitive cir stance? (And this particular cir stance has everything to do with why it is there are some legitimately conflicted people.)

Let me know if you need to re-look at your posts where you (or your "friends") questioned the logistics of where it was being built as well.

You are now a proven liar on top of being an idiot.

Well done.

Why do I think they are or will? Common sense. America's a war-weary country trying to wind down two wars that radical Islam has been the focal point of. 9-11 and Ground Zero are still open wounds (both figuratively and literally) with OBL, Al-Qaeda and their sympathizers still at large and yet to be dealt with and the city's failed to do anything with the actual site. It's nothing more than a daily reminder of what happened. Nothing developed or rebuilt in a way that could provide any kind of closure and help to aid those that would like to move on.

Sufficient, Nancy? I gave you my opinion on why some would associate terrorists with this place but I realize my opinion -- even when asked for it by you, Nancy -- isn't usually enough because it's not a fact. I'm still working on figuring out how to give you a factual opinion, Nancy.

Why are you (or your "friends") assuming that these Muslims are OBL and Al-Qaeda sympathizers?

How far away from Ground Zero would be appropriate for you for a Muslim community center to be built? Be specific.

None, Nancy. I have no moral dilemma with the mosque or my pro-choice stance, Nancy.

You have made it clear that you are not the one against it......it's your "friends".

You've also made it clear that you would rather condone their opposition than stand up to them.

It's a pussy move.

Would you care to answer the questions you've avoided, Nancy?

I haven't purposely avoided any questions. Ask them again and I'll be glad to answer.

Good thread.

[LnGrrrR]

the people -- friends and family whom I know personally (who they are, what they stand for and the way they live their life) I've argued with have yet to hear a reason why this community center needs to be built in the shadows of Ground Zero.

Because they own the land?

They believe there were better places to build for both the people of the center logistically (places that would have found a better demographic for the center and bring an easier more sensible commute) and would not bring the sensitivities of 9-11 into the equation. They're left to ask "Why?" and a couple are left to wonder if some of the type of MiamiHeat has been talking about might have some validity. I've been unable to convince them otherwise. They may actually be right about the actual logistics, but I don't believe the sensitivities of 9-11 should come into it; I'm not a scholar when it comes to Islam ... but I can't bring myself to believe the MiamiHeat rhetoric one or two of the people I've spoken to believe could be in play. I, nor they, have budged from their stance.

Right, but do you ask them if there's a LOGICAL reason they want the mosque moved? I think that was our point all along; that arguments asking people to move the mosque are based off passion/emotion, and not facts. Whether that passion is grounded in racism or not, it certainly seems to be grounded in SOME negative emotion, agreed?

Now, when you get to that emotion, is the reason for that emotion logically valid? For instance, some people think this will provide terrorists a "home base"... but how much sense does that make? If anything, one would think radical Muslims would AVOID this place, as it would be a pretty obvious place to look for that type of activity.

As to the notion of terrorists using this issue as a means to bolster their cause or fuel their fire as being supposition? Technically, sure. But listen to any terrorism expert. Watch any and all of the cable news channels. I've heard all three of MSNBC, CNN and FOX's "experts" say it would in one way or the other. And I find it hard not to believe them on this particular issue, as it seems pretty commonsensical: any issue that causes unrest or can be used as a wedge will be used as a recruitment tool or means to incite extremist rhetoric.

Well, for one thing, that's the price we pay living in America. The alternative to arguing is shutting down opinion, which is unacceptable.

What does one hope to accomplish by stoking the flames of racism and intolerance upon generalization and opinion, not on actual facts?

Blake, I and others have been LOOKING for someone to give an argument for moving the mosque that is based on facts, but I haven't seen one yet. This tells me all the appeals to move the mosque are grounded in emotion.

Is that any way to build consensus and tolerance?

I don't think I've directly accused anyone of being racist.

Is the mosque/community center legitimately in danger of not being built on account of the opposition (a number around 30-40%); and is that why this has become such a contentious argument over such a benign OP?

It's more the principle behind it.

Does silencing dissent ever prove to be a good thing?

Never said anything about silencing the opposition. Calling out the opposition for ill-founded arguments is completely fair game though.

I'm just left to wonder what you're actually hoping to accomplish with the stance you've taken, in all sincerity. I simply can't understand how creating a better more tolerant people and country could benefit from such emotionally-charged rhetoric.

What stance have I taken though? All I've asked for is an argument that says we should move the mosque due to facts. For instance, there are already existings mosques in NY; have any of them been known to harbor terrorists? (To be honest, I think an argument like this would be quite tough, which goes towards my line of thinking that it's not a logically-based argument.)

Maybe this has always been about being right, though, and not about doing the "right" thing -- there's both a right and wrong way to go about getting the "right" thing(s) done.

By arguing that they should build the mosque as proposed, you are arguing for the "right" thing and for being right.

[Blackjack]

But your "friends" aren't and you have been condoning their opposition.

I don't believe there's anything to condone, Nancy. They dissent without hate, fear or malice, Nancy. Condoning requires there to actually be something wrong, Nancy. Comprende, Nancy?

Obviously you can't comprehend your own posts, pussy:


Let me know if you need to re-look at your posts where you (or your "friends") questioned the logistics of where it was being built as well.

I'll let you know, Nancy. Haven't found reason to yet, Nancy. It's a sensitive issue, Nancy. What does that have to do with my sensitivities, Nancy? What goes on around you and the world still goes on around you and the world, Nancy. It happens to be a sensitive issue to a lot of people for and against this community center, Nancy? Comprende, Nancy?

You are now a proven liar on top of being an idiot.

Well done.

You're quite the illiterate, ignorant e-thug, Nancy.

Why are you (or your "friends") assuming that these Muslims are OBL and Al-Qaeda sympathizers?

You asked why some would find any kind of correlation, Nancy. I told you why some do, Nancy -- I didn't say the people I've alluded to did, Nancy. That wasn't the question you asked, Nancy.

The majority believe this to be about potential unintended consequences, Nancy; the 2 others believe there are unintended consequences at a minimum and are weary of the Cordoba name and the project's wish to build where they are when they didn't have to, Nancy. I'm not talking rocket science, Nancy.

How far away from Ground Zero would be appropriate for you for a Muslim community center to be built? Be specific.

I'm for the center, Nancy. I'm fine with it, Nancy.

You have made it clear that you are not the one against it......it's your "friends".

I have, and what's with the quoting of friends, Nancy? Are they foreign to you, these things they call "friends."

You've also made it clear that you would rather condone their opposition than stand up to them.

There's nothing to condone, Nancy.

It's a pussy move.

It's a tolerance and free country/speech move, Nancy. Have they done anything wrong in having a belief that does not coincide with your own, Nancy?

I haven't purposely avoided any questions. Ask them again and I'll be glad to answer.

Oh, then it's just that reading comprehension thing, Nancy. It's all good. I don't really need your answers -- you and I both know they wouldn't favor your position, Nancy.

Good thread.

I disagree.

GREAT THREAD.

Because they own the land?

When did they purchase it? I honestly don't know. But if they've had it before 9-11 that sure would be helpful to my argument.

Right, but do you ask them if there's a LOGICAL reason they want the mosque moved? I think that was our point all along; that arguments asking people to move the mosque are based off passion/emotion, and not facts. Whether that passion is grounded in racism or not, it certainly seems to be grounded in SOME negative emotion, agreed?

It's perfectly logical to them. They'll tell you again and again (I've had many a discussion on the topic) this project's desire and choice to build there was an insensitive and less-than-neighborly move/gesture.

Yes, this has to do with emotion. I've noted that on more than one occasion. I've also stated that a resentment certainly exists because of their belief that this project isn't doing the "right" thing, even if in their right and in accordance with any legality.

There are unsaid things and actions that occur and take place in every part of a person's life. Things that people do or say in an effort to not make waves, not offend, err on the side of caution or even build consensus. They simply believe this project is missing the boat in that respect.

Now, when you get to that emotion, is the reason for that emotion logically valid?

Depends on whom you ask. I personally believe there will be unintended consequences whether this thing is built or not now. It's become too big of a topic and focal point. But even if it hadn't, I'm sure there still would have been extremists using this as some kind of recruitment tool or fuel to their cause. , just look at it from their point of view. If you're a follower of the same Islam apposed by the perpetrators of 9-11, wouldn't you believe this to be great news, that a beacon of Islam was now proudly being displayed in a place their brethren reduced to rubble in its name?

The difference with me is, I couldn't care less about what others think or how they'll act/react to things like this. I believe if you take care of your own , country and people, the rest pretty much falls in place. You can't live your life or run a country for others, you've just gotta be the best possible individual and country you can. Haters are gonna hate. If you're doing the right things and taking care of your business the way you should, 'em.

For instance, some people think this will provide terrorists a "home base"... but how much sense does that make?

Those people would be idiots. You can't get around those, as idiots don't discriminate from any people or belief.

If anything, one would think radical Muslims would AVOID this place, as it would be a pretty obvious place to look for that type of activity.

If there's anything to be gained from this project by radical Islam, it's symbolism -- as reprehensible as these bas s are and can be, they're not all that stupid.

Well, for one thing, that's the price we pay living in America. The alternative to arguing is shutting down opinion, which is unacceptable.

Amen.

Blake, I and others have been LOOKING for someone to give an argument for moving the mosque that is based on facts, but I haven't seen one yet. This tells me all the appeals to move the mosque are grounded in emotion.

I wasn't aware you and Blake were in full agreement, only that somehow the semantics of one's morality became the topic of discussion, which was completely and utterly off the mark and inconsequential to the OP that started all of this fun.

I've taken the position I have (with my family and friends' opposition) because I'm about the endgame. Sure, it can piss me off from time to time and have me wanting to regress to the immature Blackjack of yesteryear, crackin' heads and whatnot, but I've mellowed as I've aged. And since I know these particular objectors to be good people that could potentially be won over or have their view soften considerably, I choose to believe there are plenty of Americans just like them out there. So when someone likes to generalize and paint a whole segment of the population on the basis of an inability to understand or not come up with a better reason, that ain't all right with me. It's ignorance under the guise of tolerance while being intolerant. It's counterproductive.

I don't think I've directly accused anyone of being racist.

I'm not sure, other than maybe one post, that I've made a comment towards you in which you haven't been quoted in. I can't recall you ever saying something that would lead me to believe you had.

It's more the principle behind it.

I'm fine with people standing for something. I'm still standing.

Never said anything about silencing the opposition. Calling out the opposition for ill-founded arguments is completely fair game though.

Dissent. Ain't nothing wrong with it or a need to condone it.

What stance have I taken though? All I've asked for is an argument that says we should move the mosque due to facts. For instance, there are already existings mosques in NY; have any of them been known to harbor terrorists? (To be honest, I think an argument like this would be quite tough, which goes towards my line of thinking that it's not a logically-based argument.)

Like I said, you haven't really been the target of much of what's been said. And any objection I've tried to relay leads more to unintended consequences and the center's perceived failure to do the "right" thing. Those unsaid words and actions I alluded to earlier in the post. The ones we all use in life to have as decent and cordial an environment as possible. Being a good neighbor, doing onto others and whatnot. They don't believe this community center is. It's their belief. It is what it is.

By arguing that they should build the mosque as proposed, you are arguing for the "right" thing and for being right.

Yes, but argue for doing the "right" thing, not those whom oppose are racist, Islamaphobic or idiots. It's about the endgame. Discourse is needed and necessary, but things still have to get done. You have to have the humility and patience to know that it's not about you and being "right," it's about making sure the "right" thing gets done.

Being right and doing the "right" thing are two separate things. So I'd ask what's more important: Telling someone they're wrong and your right (by any means necessary); or knowing what's "right" and doing everything in your power to make sure it gets done, even if you're never given the satisfaction of being acknowledged for doing so?

[Blake]

more jibberish

nothing new.

Great thread.

[LnGrrrR]

When did they purchase it? I honestly don't know. But if they've had it before 9-11 that sure would be helpful to my argument.

They bought it in 2009, for what it's worth.

It's perfectly logical to them. They'll tell you again and again (I've had many a discussion on the topic) this project's desire and choice to build there was an insensitive and less-than-neighborly move/gesture.

So... their argument is that people are building the mosque to piss off people who went through 9/11. That doesn't seem very logical to me, but even granting that it might be "logical" in a sense, it certainly isn't based off facts.

Depends on whom you ask. I personally believe there will be unintended consequences whether this thing is built or not now. It's become too big of a topic and focal point. But even if it hadn't, I'm sure there still would have been extremists using this as some kind of recruitment tool or fuel to their cause. , just look at it from their point of view. If you're a follower of the same Islam apposed by the perpetrators of 9-11, wouldn't you believe this to be great news, that a beacon of Islam was now proudly being displayed in a place their brethren reduced to rubble in its name?

I would think it would be much more of a selling point if it WASN'T allowed to be built there. "Look, the great and mighty America, they are afraid of Islam/Muslim peoples. They talk about religious freedom, and yet, force us to stop building our mosque."

I don't think we should determine policy based on what a few wackjobs might think. As you said, the people who are against us will twist it no matter what, so what difference does it make whether it's built or not in that regard?

nd since I know these particular objectors to be good people that could potentially be won over or have their view soften considerably, I choose to believe there are plenty of Americans just like them out there.

Can you see why this statement won't fly in an argument/debate though? YOU may know good people, but that does nothing for the argument, since none of us know them.

Not only that, but people can be good while still having irrational, hateful, etc etc beliefs.

All these "good people" who think it's offensive usually either can't explain why it's offensive or provide faulty reasoning. They conflate all Muslims with a few deranged ones, which is obviously non-sensical. (For instance, many Christians divorce their wives, does this mean that I should assume all Christians will eventually divorce?)

Being a good neighbor, doing onto others and whatnot. They don't believe this community center is. It's their belief. It is what it is.

It may be their belief, but that doesn't VALIDATE said belief. I'll provide a hypothetical: you're my friend, and I tell you I can fly if I flap my arms hard enough, and I plan to show you by jumping off a bridge. Wouldn't you correct my belief, tell me it's wrong? I should hope so!

I've yet to hear a logical reason for opposition. Most of the opposition relies on one or more of these arguments:

Terrorists will claim it as a victory/use it for recruitment! (So what, they'll claim it as victory if we do or don't build it)

It's offensive to 9/11 family members! (That may be the case, but it doesn't make logical sense... I'm very dubious of those who use "moral outrage" to try and shut things down)

It's too close/too big! (I don't see how making it smaller/more humble does anything to make it less offensive. If you're offended by the fact that it's there, what does it's size matter?)

Being right and doing the "right" thing are two separate things. So I'd ask what's more important: Telling someone they're wrong and your right (by any means necessary); or knowing what's "right" and doing everything in your power to make sure it gets done, even if you're never given the satisfaction of being acknowledged for doing so?

I disagree. I think you can do the right thing, and be right. It's about education.

[Mikesatx]

This issue has been beaten to death. But I'll add to it. One of the themes of defending the mosque is the idea that not all muslims should be characterized by the actions of a few. I am guessing that the majority of those who posted here are not Muslim. So your fight is not personal it is based on principal. As I mentioned earlier I agree with your argument. Do you defend the Tea Party under the same principal when others decry racist when there is no evidence? And even if evidence existed it would represent the opinion of the individual not the group.

[LnGrrrR]

Do you defend the Tea Party under the same principal when others decry racist when there is no evidence? And even if evidence existed it would represent the opinion of the individual not the group.

Good question. I'd say I'd defend the principles of the Tea Party much more if they actually used cogent arguments/examples and provided logical alternatives. All I've seen so far is a bunhc of people arguing that "government is too big" and "they're stealing our money" with limited talk of what to cut, and even less talk of after-effects of proposed cuts.

It could be self-bias though; tbh, I haven't bothered to read up on Tea Party platforms.

[Blake]

Do you defend the Tea Party under the same principal when others decry racist when there is no evidence? And even if evidence existed it would represent the opinion of the individual not the group.

Is there a specific example you are referring to?

[Mikesatx]

The NAACP thinks so. Post a thread with that question and you'll get an affirmative from DMX and Boutons.

[Wild Cobra]

I thought this was the last refuge for liberals:

AM 620 KPOJ, Portland's Progressive Talk Radio

Lineup:

Monday

12a-3a Ring of Fire
3a-6a Bill Press
6a-9a Carl in the morning
9a-12p Thom Hartmann– Nationwide
12p-3p Ed Schutlz
3p-6p Randi Rhodes
6p-9p Norman Goldman
9p-12a Mike Malloy

Tuesday-Friday

12a-3a Alan Colmes
3a-6a Bill Press
6a-9a Carl in the morning
9a-12p Thom Hartmann– Nationwide
12p-3p Ed Schutlz
3p-6p Randi Rhodes
6p-9p Norman Goldman
9p-12a Mike Malloy

Saturday

12a-3a Alan Colmes
3a-6a Randi Rhodes
6a-9a Best of Bill Press
9a-12p Best of Stephanie Miller
12p-3p Ring of Fire
3p-6p Norman Goldman
6p-9p Ed Schultz
9p-12a Randi Rhodes

Sunday

12a-4a Mike Malloy
4a-5a ABC Perspective
5a-7a Keep Hope Alive with The Rev. Jesse Jackson
7a-8a KPOJ Public Affairs
8a-1p Dr. Dean Edell
1p-4p Best of Alan Colmes
4p-7p Ed Schultz
7p-10p Randi Rhodes
10p-12a Thom Hartmann - NAtionwide

Listen Live

[ChumpDumper]

The NAACP thinks so. Post a thread with that question and you'll get an affirmative from DMX and Boutons.

Great. I'll say they aren't all racists.

Anything else?

[Blackjack]

nothing new.

PWNED!

Great thread.

I knew we could find something to agree on!

So... their argument is that people are building the mosque to piss off people who went through 9/11. That doesn't seem very logical to me, but even granting that it might be "logical" in a sense, it certainly isn't based off facts.

No. That's why it's "unintended." Their (Park51) intentions may be well and good and without any sinister undertones but the fact that they decided to build the mosque so near to Ground Zero, leaves for the very real and distinct possibility that the extremists will use its existence as propaganda. I realize some would like to flat out dismiss that notion but it's seems a pretty logical conclusion and the conventional wisdom of most a terrorism expert -- just look at what this little piece of church caused with their planned Quran burning.

I would think it would be much more of a selling point if it WASN'T allowed to be built there. "Look, the great and mighty America, they are afraid of Islam/Muslim peoples. They talk about religious freedom, and yet, force us to stop building our mosque."

Like I said, at this point, either way it will be used to further their (extremists) cause -- if it's built, it's proof of their "just" cause; if it's not, the evil, oppressive, Zionist West strikes again. It's a win-win for these guys now that this community center's become the huge story it has.

I don't think we should determine policy based on what a few wackjobs might think. As you said, the people who are against us will twist it no matter what, so what difference does it make whether it's built or not in that regard?

The people I know that are against it are just that: against it. I haven't heard one of them say they didn't think the project wouldn't be completed. They just don't approve of the way Park51 chose to go about the whole thing, namely the location.

Can you see why this statement won't fly in an argument/debate though? YOU may know good people, but that does nothing for the argument, since none of us know them.

It may not fly for a message board argument but it wasn't stated to argue. It was simply a fact known to me and the basis of my objection to lumping all whom oppose into a racist, bigoted category.

We all have opinions and beliefs based off our own experiences, this was one of mine. Whether you choose to believe me or not is up to you. All I can say is I don't make a habit of getting into these long drawn-out debates and I can't say I've ever done so in someone else's defense or whom had an opposing view from myself. I'm not sure what reason anyone would have to believe I'd make up some like this, besides Nancy who believes there's some kind of reason to be afraid of a message board. Weird -- maybe koriwhat's gonna find my address and come attack me when I'm sleeping or some , though. I could just be naive.

Not only that, but people can be good while still having irrational, hateful, etc etc beliefs.

I disagree. That's quite the stretch for "good" people if they have hateful beliefs. Cordial and unassuming maybe, but not good.

All these "good people" who think it's offensive usually either can't explain why it's offensive or provide faulty reasoning. They conflate all Muslims with a few deranged ones, which is obviously non-sensical. (For instance, many Christians divorce their wives, does this mean that I should assume all Christians will eventually divorce?)

Who's ALL? Because good people are good people. Views and opinions may differ, some will even be uninformed, naive or flat-out ignorant, but those are people that can be informed and won over with a little patience and hard work. Let's not forget there are plenty of people that share our belief that this community center should be built and are every bit as hateful, ignorant, naive or whatever else you could attribute to a portion of the opposition, so let's not pretend doing the "right" thing is always done for the "right" reasons -- there are people for this mosque that believe we deserved 9-11; Americans.

It may be their belief, but that doesn't VALIDATE said belief. I'll provide a hypothetical: you're my friend, and I tell you I can fly if I flap my arms hard enough, and I plan to show you by jumping off a bridge. Wouldn't you correct my belief, tell me it's wrong? I should hope so!

But if you honestly believe extremists will be bolstered by the development, some bit of rhetoric/propaganda gained from this mosque's building will find its way to a disenfranchised youth that will become the next soldier in Jihad -- a potential threat to be the next suicide bomber or Al-Qaeda leader -- is it really equatable to trying to be Superman after watching Chris Reeves do his thing?

The objection isn't about this center harboring terrorists or equating the developers as terrorists, it's erring on the side of caution ... not taking any chances that anything bad could come to the memory of those that lost their lives or from those that would gladly take more in the name of Islam, using this mosque as the symbolism of conquered soil.

Terrorists will claim it as a victory/use it for recruitment! (So what, they'll claim it as victory if we do or don't build it)

I agree, especially now that it's become the focal point it has. But that doesn't take away the resentment a good amount of objectors have for this community center putting them in that position. The thinking being: 'You build a few blocks away and that's never even an option and this is never even a debate/discussion.'

It's offensive to 9/11 family members! (That may be the case, but it doesn't make logical sense... I'm very dubious of those who use "moral outrage" to try and shut things down)

If the that's the only issue and not just a part of the reasoning -- the sensitivity to the victims of 9-11 -- I've gotta believe they're either; a.)the lemmings; b.) Islamaphobic or; c.) racist/intolerant. You're -out-of-luck with those that fall into the C category but A could be won over and there's hope for B -- knowledge and interaction can do wonders for fear.

It's too close/too big! (I don't see how making it smaller/more humble does anything to make it less offensive. If you're offended by the fact that it's there, what does it's size matter?)

Beats the out of me.

I disagree. I think you can do the right thing, and be right. It's about education.

Of course you can. That wasn't my point.

Too often people want be correct at any cost. They have to be rewarded and acknowledged for it, so they do whatever it takes -- dragging others in the mud, being an ass, vindictive, or simply looking to embarrass, humiliate or annihilate the person wrong or in the "wrong."

Being and knowing your right or in the "right" should be enough. And if you really care about what's "right" and doing what is "right," you know that it often times takes a little nudge, convincing or enlightenment to get others to help you along the way.

If your first notion is to look for the worst in people, ask people to prove a negative, throw out extreme rhetoric (racist) that will only prove to be a sharp stick to those that could be won over, where's that getting you? Maybe you're right but how much solace do you take in that when the "right" things aren't getting done because of a toxic atmosphere that's now been created -- people don't want to come over to your side of the issue because words like racist won't soon be forgotten. Soon (and it's like this now politically) it's not a matter of doing the right thing but making sure the people you believe to have wronged you in the past don't have their way. Do you honestly think Republicans and Democrats won't do the same damn things they're doing now, just vice-versa if Republicans gain back control?

What's "right" is "right." But there's both a right and wrong way of getting the "right" things done. Being correct just isn't enough, it never has.

[Blake]

You're quite the illiterate, ignorant e-thug, Nancy....

Oh, then it's just that reading comprehension thing, Nancy. It's all good. I don't really need your answers -- you and I both know they wouldn't favor your position, Nancy.

I wasn't aware you and Blake were in full agreement, only that somehow the semantics of one's morality became the topic of discussion, which was completely and utterly off the mark and inconsequential to the OP that started all of this fun.

PWNED!

I knew we could find something to agree on!

Yes, I agree you've been pwned.

No. That's why it's "unintended." Their (Park51) intentions may be well and good and without any sinister undertones but the fact that they decided to build the mosque so near to Ground Zero, leaves for the very real and distinct possibility that the extremists will use its existence as propaganda.

Just how far away from Ground Zero should Park 51 be built in order to ease your fears of possible extremists using it?

I realize some would like to flat out dismiss that notion but it's seems a pretty logical conclusion and the conventional wisdom of most a terrorism expert -- just look at what this little piece of church caused with their planned Quran burning.

What terrorism expert? Give a name.

Like I said, at this point, either way it will be used to further their (extremists) cause -- if it's built, it's proof of their "just" cause; if it's not, the evil, oppressive, Zionist West strikes again. It's a win-win for these guys now that this community center's become the huge story it has.

So you are all for it being built.......but you are afraid of the bad guys (extremists) taking it over.

You really don't know what Islamophobia is.

You really don't know how Islamophobic you are.

The people I know that are against it are just that: against it. I haven't heard one of them say they didn't think the project wouldn't be completed. They just don't approve of the way Park51 chose to go about the whole thing, namely the location.

You are all for it, but you are afraid.

You've made it perfectly clear.

We all have opinions and beliefs based off our own experiences, this was one of mine. Whether you choose to believe me or not is up to you.

I believe you when you say you are afraid of the extremists.

I'm not sure what reason anyone would have to believe I'd make up some like this, besides Nancy who believes there's some kind of reason to be afraid of a message board.

I believe you when you say you have "friends" that oppose the community center being built.

I also believe you are too much of a pussy to tell them off because you are afraid of it being built yourself.

Weird -- maybe koriwhat's gonna find my address and come attack me when I'm sleeping or some , though. I could just be naive.

Why would he do that? Do you have calf tattoos that are better than his?

Who's ALL? Because good people are good people. Views and opinions may differ, some will even be uninformed, naive or flat-out ignorant, but those are people that can be informed and won over with a little patience and hard work.

Na, apparently the information is not getting through to you.

Let's not forget there are plenty of people that share our belief that this community center should be built and are every bit as hateful, ignorant, naive or whatever else you could attribute to a portion of the opposition, so let's not pretend doing the "right" thing is always done for the "right" reasons -- there are people for this mosque that believe we deserved 9-11; Americans.

Is the mosque being built for the wrong reason?

Please prove it.

But if you honestly believe extremists will be bolstered by the development, some bit of rhetoric/propaganda gained from this mosque's building will find its way to a disenfranchised youth that will become the next soldier in Jihad -- a potential threat to be the next suicide bomber or Al-Qaeda leader -- is it really equatable to trying to be Superman after watching Chris Reeves do his thing?

Is this your thinking or your "friends"?

The objection isn't about this center harboring terrorists or equating the developers as terrorists, it's erring on the side of caution ... not taking any chances that anything bad could come to the memory of those that lost their lives or from those that would gladly take more in the name of Islam, using this mosque as the symbolism of conquered soil.

You've already made it clear how Islamophobic you are.

Constantly repeating this point won't suddenly make you unafraid.

I agree, especially now that it's become the focal point it has. But that doesn't take away the resentment a good amount of objectors have for this community center putting them in that position. The thinking being: 'You build a few blocks away and that's never even an option and this is never even a debate/discussion.'

How many feet away from Ground Zero should they build it to avoid any opposition?

Give a specific number please.

If the that's the only issue and not just a part of the reasoning -- the sensitivity to the victims of 9-11 -- I've gotta believe they're either; a.)the lemmings; b.) Islamaphobic or; c.) racist/intolerant. You're -out-of-luck with those that fall into the C category but A could be won over and there's hope for B -- knowledge and interaction can do wonders for fear.

Yes, you should stop being b.)

Too often people want be correct at any cost. They have to be rewarded and acknowledged for it, so they do whatever it takes -- dragging others in the mud, being an ass, vindictive, or simply looking to embarrass, humiliate or annihilate the person wrong or in the "wrong."

Being and knowing your right or in the "right" should be enough. And if you really care about what's "right" and doing what is "right," you know that it often times takes a little nudge, convincing or enlightenment to get others to help you along the way.

If your first notion is to look for the worst in people, ask people to prove a negative, throw out extreme rhetoric (racist) that will only prove to be a sharp stick to those that could be won over, where's that getting you? Maybe you're right but how much solace do you take in that when the "right" things aren't getting done because of a toxic atmosphere that's now been created -- people don't want to come over to your side of the issue because words like racist won't soon be forgotten. Soon (and it's like this now politically) it's not a matter of doing the right thing but making sure the people you believe to have wronged you in the past don't have their way. Do you honestly think Republicans and Democrats won't do the same damn things they're doing now, just vice-versa if Republicans gain back control?

What's "right" is "right." But there's both a right and wrong way of getting the "right" things done. Being correct just isn't enough, it never has.

more jibberish.

although it hasn't been good for you, this has been a great thread.