The last refuge of a liberal

[Blake]

Short and sweet. I like it. Dat der is progress, tbh

Sweet irony.

You're a dumb .

[Blackjack]

I did not ask why you call other people names such as "lemming".

reading comprehension fail again.

Yes, you did, Nancy. Who'd I call lemmings, Nancy?

Everyone else around you is calling out your posts, but you think it's everyone else that has the reading comprehension problem.

Why?

Who would that be, Nancy?

Sweet irony.

You're a dumb .

Maybe it's just your butthurt nature that's convoluting the text and having you miss the jokes and the intentions of a post, eh, Nancy?

One things for sure, you mad.

"dumb ."

[Winehole23]

^^^ like WC, always so horribly misunderstood.

[Winehole23]

And there's never any way to untangle it.

[Winehole23]

What a tragedy for the wisdom of the species to be continually deprived of such empathic and sensitive blowhards due to their own innate stupidity and tactlessness.

[Blackjack]

And there's never any way to untangle it.

Except, there is and I did:

• The OP (please read): Lemmings exist, don't be one, and the mosque should be built
  
• Blake fails tying to make humor out of irony -- it didn't exist
  
• Blake solicits an opinion from me as to why the people I know oppose -- suggests the burden of proof lies with me to prove they're not in fact racist or Islamaphobic. He can't come up with another reason, he doesn't know "why?," therefore, they must be racist or bigoted. (The birth of Nancy and the basis for Blake's future self-ownage.
  
• Blake deduces that one of the potential dilemmas, morality, will be the new issue, a debate on semantics that he concocted out of nowhere -- seemingly just a butthurt way of trying to pick himself up from the mat; a mat, ironically, he put himself on.
  
• Blake takes exception to me not taking exception with the opposition I know -- can't understand how I could respect their opinion in disagreement; he implies that I am now in fact as racist and Islamaphobic as the opposition he generalized and I defended.
  
• In the process of me defending and trying to validate the people I know in opposition not to be racists or bigots, the goal posts move once again for me to validate their argument -- LnGrrrR becomes involved here and makes this his point of contention, as he believes this is and always was the contention. (If I believed the argument was valid and not simply the sensitivities and concerns, I wouldn't be for the Park51 project.)
  
• A whole bunch of misunderstanding, miscommunication and mischaracterization takes place, from myself and others -- I was unaware exactly where LnGrrrR was coming from and what his real contention was, LnGrrrR was arguing a point of contention I didn't have or wish to argue, Blake continued to be Nancy (disingenuous).
  
• Now the argument has become about the best way to move forward and what's needed to do so. I believe this is a great opportunity to be a real landmark civil rights moment for the Muslim-American if they can get their message out by going above and beyond what should be necessary; LnGrrrR apparently believes they should only do what they have to do on principle.

^^^ like WC, always so horribly misunderstood.

Winston Churchill? Let's not get hasty, it was only one misunderstanding.

What a tragedy for the wisdom of the species to be continually deprived of such empathic and sensitive blowhards due to their own innate stupidity and tactlessness.

You're one pompous prick, Wino. ... And I love you for it.

[Winehole23]

Winston Churchill? Let's not get hasty, it was only one misunderstanding.

I meant someone much closer to your intellectual caliber: Wild Cobra.

Your attempts to untangle things only lead to worse tangles. Maybe that's why you can't avoid being such a blowhard about it.

[Blackjack]

My windbaggedness can do that at times, I'll readily admit; and have as much in this thread.

Windbags, pricks, we all have and serve a purpose.

[LnGrrrR]

Eh, I feel like I won my part of it. BJ agreed that, in a vaccuum, the opposition doesn't make rational/logical sense. And if one wishes the mosque to be moved due to the sensitivity of the 9/11 families, then it is ultimately based on the faulty logic of the 9/11 families that are offended. Good enough for me.

[Winehole23]

LOGOMACHY, n. A war in which the weapons are words and the wounds punctures in the swim-bladder of self-esteem — a kind of contest in which, the vanquished being unconscious of defeat, the victor is denied the reward of success.

'Tis said by divers of the scholar-men
That poor Salmasius died of Milton's pen.
Alas! we cannot know if this is true,
For reading Milton's wit we perish too.

[Blackjack]

Eh, I feel like I won my part of it. BJ agreed that, in a vaccuum, the opposition doesn't make rational/logical sense. And if one wishes the mosque to be moved due to the sensitivity of the 9/11 families, then it is ultimately based on the faulty logic of the 9/11 families that are offended. Good enough for me.

I've agreed with that all along. That was kinda the point: much was lost in translation, largely due to Blake's ability to convolute the argument masterfully (or, more likely, inability to comprehend) compounded with my windbaggedness to confuse those looking to weigh in further.

It was never about the mosque moving, it was about the initial purchase and decision to build where they did. Moving now would inflame things worse than any possible gains extremists could find with the center's simple presence there. Just about every person I know in opposition believes that.

(* BURP *)


As an aside, I did just get a chance to see the whole interview with the Imam on Larry King with Soledad Brown. The only thing I found to be unbelievable was the notion that he didn't believe this would be controversial on any level. He was clearly trying to make it known to people how cognizant he was to the sensitivities of all involved but he admitted to not consulting with any of the families or anyone else along those lines prior to deciding to build. Just doesn't add up.

The takeaway I got from the interview was, this was the type of thing needed to achieve the requisite engagement to bridge the gap. Taking the medicine, so to speak. Had they just done their project away from the lights it wouldn't have sparked the conversation or moved the discourse forward quickly enough to affect the type of positive change needed --I agree if that's the case but I guess the wisdom in having people take their medicine in this venue could be open for debate.

Maybe I wrong, but it just didn't seem to add up. For him to say now that they wouldn't have gone through with the project if they'd know it would have caused any kind of distress to the victims of 9-11 or controversy with the average American, it just didn't feel right.

The Imam's an extremely intelligent guy who's no stranger to catering to the sensitivities of people, so it's just hard for me to buy he wouldn't consult with anyone before going forward with the project. Just seems to me he found the best way possible to get what's desperately needed done: engagement for the purposes of reconciliation and understanding between faiths and people.

[Blake]

That was kinda the point: much was lost in translation, largely due to Blake's ability to convolute the argument masterfully.

lol at being a master of convolutedness

I have no reason to convolute your statements. Others grasped my points clear enough. I wanted to clear up yours. Thus the simple questions, such as "what is the moral dilemma that the builders face?"

It was never about the mosque moving, it was about the initial purchase and decision to build where they did. Moving now would inflame things worse than any possible gains extremists could find with the center's simple presence there. Just about every person I know in opposition believes that.

That's a new one.

[LnGrrrR]

Maybe I wrong, but it just didn't seem to add up. For him to say now that they wouldn't have gone through with the project if they'd know it would have caused any kind of distress to the victims of 9-11 or controversy with the average American, it just didn't feel right.

And yet, when he purchased the property, there was no outspoken opposition. For instance, let's look at the facts:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...081701473.html

Now, it does say that there's not a place for a Muslim prayer space, but it does specifically mention that it was planning to be a community center, and that it's location was to help send the message that Muslims are tolerant and willing to work with all faiths.

But then the "liberal media" gets ahold of the news...

Based on that Salon piece, the turning point came in May, when the New York Post ran a short story under the headline, "Panel approves 'WTC' mosque." That day Pamela Geller, who blogs at Atlas Shrugs and is the author of a book sub led, "The Obama Administration's War on America," attacked the plan in a post headlined, "Monster Mosque Pushes Ahead in Shadow of World Trade Center Islamic Death and Destruction." "How disgusting," she declared. Days later, Post columnist Andrea Peyser wrote a piece led, "Mosque madness at Ground Zero."

So, from December when the article was published, to May, there was no great groundswell. If opposition should've been predicted, why wasn't there a big outcry from Day One?

[Blackjack]

lol at being a master of convolutedness

Much like the post that started this, there was an "or" involved in the sentence that you conveniently left out. lol

I have no reason to convolute your statements. Others grasped my points clear enough. I wanted to clear up yours. Thus the simple questions, such as "what is the moral dilemma that the builders face?"

Yes, they did. They grasped your points. The problem was, you tried to frame the points you were making as mine. You had no idea what my point was or weren't looking to go along with what I said because of your irony fail and the thinking that I had called you and your brethren lemmings.

See, like: "what is the moral dilemma that the builders face?"

lol thinking that was ever something I stated or a point of contention. ... But statements like that found a way to gain traction and suggest that it had some kind of relevance to my posts -- you asked me why some of the opposition I knew opposed, brah.

And yet, when he purchased the property, there was no outspoken opposition. For instance, let's look at the facts:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...081701473.html

I'm perfectly aware of that. It doesn't change the fact that just about anyone would have believed there would have been some kind of opposition or sensitivity the project would have to deal with at some point. Just because the story hadn't become what it is now a year ago doesn't mean it would have remained that way as the project's construction neared.

And listening to the man speak for an hour, it seemed quite clear that he wanted people to know how empathetic he was to the feelings of all involved. But he also made it known he didn't speak to any family members prior to deciding to purchase and develop the property, which doesn't jive with the sensitivity he was professing.

The one thing that stood out to me more than his wish to let people know how sensitive he was to the feelings of those at unease or in opposition, was his urging for the discourse to change and for his (their) need to "engage."

I can't know for sure (obviously) if that was the real intention of choosing the location, but it makes sense; and it could even be the right thing to do (definitely in a vacuum).

Going this route would definitely bring more people to the table from the jump and could help to advance the cause of the Muslim-American once the message takes hold and some of the good they're hoping to do takes place and can actually be seen coming to fruition.

Like I said, there really wasn't anything I found to be out of line or underhanded in his interview. I agreed with most he said. But him saying they wouldn't have gone through with the project had he known there would have been any controversy or unease and then stating there was never any outreach to get a feel of how the victims' families might feel about it?

That just doesn't add up to me.

[LnGrrrR]

It doesn't change the fact that just about anyone would have believed there would have been some kind of opposition or sensitivity the project would have to deal with at some point. Just because the story hadn't become what it is now a year ago doesn't mean it would have remained that way as the project's construction neared.

But this is your opinion, based off your own view on the project. I don't think there would have been a great deal of furor if it wasn't spun as some huge F-U to the 9/11 community. After all, you'd think that stripper clubs near 9/11 would be as offensive, but until this came about, I hadn't realized that there were some near Ground Zero.

He probably just had a blind spot. After all, you admitted that it doesn't make logical sense for people to conflate Muslims with terrorists. Maybe he forgot how illogical people can be.

[Blackjack]

But this is your opinion, based off your own view on the project. I don't think there would have been a great deal of furor if it wasn't spun as some huge F-U to the 9/11 community. After all, you'd think that stripper clubs near 9/11 would be as offensive, but until this came about, I hadn't realized that there were some near Ground Zero.

Absolutely. I'm not sure it ever becomes close to the story it is now without a couple of bomb throwers looking to create a story or make an issue of the thing, but this definitely seemed an issue that was doused in gasoline -- seemingly just needing a stray spark to ignite.

When you see numbers like 70% of the American public believe it to be a bad idea (even if in the right legally) and you're trying to bridge gaps with as much sensitivity as possible, it just seems a pretty logical assumption that you'd have some kind of outreach to the families or make some kind of effort to find out how the project would be received. They may not have been aware of the number 70% but that's the type of number I'm guessing you don't need to see, you feel; especially as a Muslim-American who has to deal with that on a daily basis.

He probably just had a blind spot. After all, you admitted that it doesn't make logical sense for people to conflate Muslims with terrorists. Maybe he forgot how illogical people can be.

[Winehole23]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/m...v8FaBnnPEyuLmN

[LnGrrrR]

Why, dear God why would you bump this WH?

[Winehole23]

it was by far the MOST tedious GZM related thread I could find

[DarrinS]

Why, dear God why would you bump this WH?

That's how he rolls.

[Winehole23]

And that's how you roll.