• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque

I havent payed much attention to this since I really dont a flying **** but in my observations much of the opposition are people who dont live/arent even from NYC let along New York state. Its quite funny listening to carpetbaggers preach what we should and should not do. If the land was up for sale and this organization bought it the legal way then they have the right to do what they want with said land (keeping in tune with local building codes and whatnot). If you got a problem with it, dont come to New York City.

Every poll I've seen has the people of New York City decisively against building the mosque so your premise is wrong from the start.
 
A few things make me suspicious of this whole thing. First - down town - there's little to no one living near the WTC, so a mosque there is not really going to be a mosque, it's going to be a monument or a show place of sorts. Second - the proximity to the WTC lends some credibility to the charge: Islam builds monuments on their victories. That's an inflammatory charge but history does tend to show where Islam had victory's - monuments were erected, most of them were built or converted to mosques. One of the most famous - Hagia Sofia in Istanbul. Third, the imam view on Islam and aspects of sharia are a little disturbing. I personally find the proximity distasteful and laugh at the liberal diversity nonsense of Bloomberg as elitist and ignorant politics. He wants to show how ameniable New Yorkers are inviting Islam to the WTC. American's are forgiving but most are not THAT forgiving - and yes, it's been 10 years. I'd personally reject this building - tell them to find another spot in NY where we'd be happy to help them build. If they're dead set on this spot --- come back in another 20 years and we'll discuss it then.

This is spot-on and deserved more recognition than just hitting a thanks button.
 
The Constitution doesn't limit the People, it limits the government. I mean, how many times does this have to be explained to fascists?

I asked where is the protection of the fed allowing people to build wherever they want? And is fascist all ya got? That's laughable... at least name call properly and put some creativity to it.

Which is why what you engage in is treason and tyranny.
I don't engage in anything.

Because you want to infringe upon people's rights without due process, without any evidence, nothing in the least other than "you want to". That's it.
I'm not infringing on anything or anyone by pointing out real life vs. your fairly tale world.
It's sick. Plain and simple. And can only be espoused by those with little to no knowledge and understanding of freedom and liberty.
It's reality. Wake up and get engaged in real life. It happens in your town, in the cities in every state in every corner of this nation and every nation.

Land of the free, it's high time people learn what that means and the consequences of it. Sometimes I think this country has become a bunch of ******s. So ****ing scared over some groups exercising their rights that they piss themselves and try to look for alternate ways to infringe upon the free exercise of rights of others.
Why are you all butthurt? This is the way things work - whether it's this political system, this Constitution or some other. This isn't about freedom and liberty it's about humanity.

People like you are why we have so much intrusive government and fascism. Maybe we should expel those who cannot live by the responsibilities and consequences of freedom.

And people like you are why libertarians are considered a joke. Call me a fascist all you want... it's pretty tame and wussy. If you have to revert to claiming this is all about what "I" do and how "I'm" a fascist, I pushed your buttons, made my point and caused you to lose all credibility. That was pretty easy.
 
Last edited:
This is spot-on and deserved more recognition than just hitting a thanks button.

Thanks Jallman - but apparently I'm a "fascist" now that I had to bring a little honesty to the discussion. People cannot take honesty.
 
Every poll I've seen has the people of New York City decisively against building the mosque so your premise is wrong from the start.

But what can you do about it? Seriously, if everything is legal then how can you justify acting against these people? They are within every right to practice their religion, to have a religious building, and they've done so all by the letter of the law. Yet some people still say we should do something. That you can use forms of social intimidation legitimately against the rights of these people in order to stop something they don't like but have no just reason to infringe upon. How can anyone endorse social intimidation to keep people from practicing their rights? That's all that's left open since this was all done legally.

So for those opposed to the mosque, in a country built upon the rights and liberties of the individual, a limited government which was to support and proliferation our rights and liberties, in such a world how can you believe it justifiable to use forms of social intimidation against groups which are legally exercising their rights? How is that not betraying everything this country was founded on?
 
What's this nonsense about Islam having a "victory"? Last time I checked it wasn't Islam that attacked us. It was Al-Qaeda, and too assume everyone who is muslim is a terrorist is just plain wrong.

I think the association is close enough that it's a sore issue for a lot of people in the US and if these Muslim groups building this mosque had any cultural sensitivity, they would delay their plans. The fact that they aren't showing that sensitivity to New Yorkers and the US smacks of a disrespect we should not allow within our own borders.
 
I asked where is the protection of the fed allowing people to build wherever they want? And is fascist all ya got? That's laughable... at least name call properly and put some creativity to it.

They bought it legit. If they legally purchase property, meet all the zoning codes and such for their building, who are you to say what they can and cannot do with their property? So yes, because you wish to use forms of social intimidation against the free exercise of rights just because you don't like the group who are exercising their rights you are a fascist. You'd use the government power if you could, but that's been rightfully limited so you have to find other forms of intimidation. Why don't you run out there and burn a huge cross on their property. Maybe that'll show them!

People keep betraying the foundation of this country because they're scared, weak, stupid, or all three. It's high time we accept the realities of freedom instead of hiding under our desks praying to the government to save us from freedom.
 
Thanks Jallman - but apparently I'm a "fascist" now that I had to bring a little honesty to the discussion. People cannot take honesty.

Yeah I just got to that part. I think its a ridiculous default slur tossed out by the mentally feeble when they have their beliefs challenged in ways they can't handle. It's their problem, not yours, dude.
 
And people like you are why libertarians are considered a joke. Call me a fascist all you want... it's pretty tame and wussy. If you have to revert to claiming this is all about what "I" do and how "I'm" a fascist, I pushed your buttons, made my point and caused you to lose all credibility. That was pretty easy.

Since you have not logically backed up anything you've said or demonstrated any proof as to why the rights of the individual should be infringed upon, what you've said here is nothing more than a lie. You're the one who called for social intimidation in order to prevent these people from exercising their proper rights. You can try to deny it all you want, run as much as you want it, try hard to make this only about my proper designation of you as a facsist, but you ain't changing reality in any of that. And end of the day, you're the one who calls for social intimidation against a group of people you don't like exercising their rights even though they've done everything by the book. Pretend all you want, hide your head in the sand; but you call for the exact opposite of the purpose of this country which recognizes the rights and liberties of the individual.
 
Yeah I just got to that part. I think its a ridiculous default slur tossed out by the mentally feeble when they have their beliefs challenged in ways they can't handle. It's their problem, not yours, dude.

So can you answer the questions, or are you just going to continue with the verbal handjobs?
 
The fact that they aren't showing that sensitivity to New Yorkers and the US smacks of a disrespect we should not allow within our own borders.

Where is the law that says we have to show you respect? There's no such thing. The only thing which is to be guaranteed are our rights. But I find it funny that this is the argument used considering how the side against the exercise of rights tries to portray the other side.
 
They bought it legit. If they legally purchase property, meet all the zoning codes and such for their building, who are you to say what they can and cannot do with their property? So yes, because you wish to use forms of social intimidation against the free exercise of rights just because you don't like the group who are exercising their rights you are a fascist. You'd use the government power if you could, but that's been rightfully limited so you have to find other forms of intimidation. Why don't you run out there and burn a huge cross on their property. Maybe that'll show them!
I don't wish to use anything. I'm saying that reality is... when legal, legit and constitutional rights are all in line, that does NOT guarantee it will happen. Society, the public and politics play a part in allowing legal, legit and constitutional things to still occur. To say otherwise is not realistic. Some people do not like windmills - zoning laws are met, building permits are purchased, laws are observed and yet the public or the neighborhood decides they don't want it and pressures the town, politicans and the owners to not do it, and it sometimes doesn't happen. Whether you agree with that or not is irrelevant. That's the way life is.

People keep betraying the foundation of this country because they're scared, weak, stupid, or all three. It's high time we accept the realities of freedom instead of hiding under our desks praying to the government to save us from freedom.
It has nothing to do with the foundation of this country. It's because we live in a society and must respect the community and not just laws. There are more than laws and papers and ideals like freedom and liberty in life. You might not like it, but that's the way it is.
 
Since you have not logically backed up anything you've said or demonstrated any proof as to why the rights of the individual should be infringed upon, what you've said here is nothing more than a lie. You're the one who called for social intimidation in order to prevent these people from exercising their proper rights. You can try to deny it all you want, run as much as you want it, try hard to make this only about my proper designation of you as a facsist, but you ain't changing reality in any of that. And end of the day, you're the one who calls for social intimidation against a group of people you don't like exercising their rights even though they've done everything by the book. Pretend all you want, hide your head in the sand; but you call for the exact opposite of the purpose of this country which recognizes the rights and liberties of the individual.
Stick your head out in the real world once in a while. I don't need to pretend - I'm just being honest and real. You can't take it - not my problem.
 
I don't wish to use anything. I'm saying that reality is... when legal, legit and constitutional rights are all in line, that does NOT guarantee it will happen. Society, the public and politics play a part in allowing legal, legit and constitutional things to still occur. To say otherwise is not realistic. Some people do not like windmills - zoning laws are met, building permits are purchased, laws are observed and yet the public or the neighborhood decides they don't want it and pressures the town, politicans and the owners to not do it, and it sometimes doesn't happen. Whether you agree with that or not is irrelevant. That's the way life is.

Those are forms of social and political intimidation. And you damned well seem to be supporting it. Reality or no, it's not a practice which can be endorsed. Just because it happens doesn't mean we say "oh well". If we believe in the foundation of this country and the purpose of government as the founders envisioned, then we cannot accept this type of intimidation. We are meant to protect and proliferate the rights and liberties of the individual, not infringe and curtail them. There is nothing legitimate anyone can do to stop them. There is nothing just that anyone can do to stop them. Those trying to stop them do so unjustly and illegitimately.

It has nothing to do with the foundation of this country. It's because we live in a society and must respect the community and not just laws. There are more than laws and papers and ideals like freedom and liberty in life. You might not like it, but that's the way it is.

Where does it say anywhere I have to respect anything or anyone? I don't. I don't have to respect the community. The community MUST acknowledge my rights and liberties; that's the way it goes. Communities don't have rights, only individuals possess rights. It's not the individual which must respect the community, it's the other way around.
 
Stick your head out in the real world once in a while. I don't need to pretend - I'm just being honest and real. You can't take it - not my problem.

It's not that I can't take it. It's that I've told you exactly what you are if you endorse that path.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Cease the personal attacks
 
Palin sparks Twitter fight on mosque - Yahoo! News


Interesting. On one hand I agree with Palin, it feels like a provocation. On the other hand, Palin should mind her own damn business. This is a New York City issue. The Masjid Manhattan Mosque is only a few blocks away from the WTC. Muslims regularly can be seen praying OUTSIDE of the mosque when it is too busy. Is that a provocation? Not at all. Seems to me like one more issue she feels the need to cash in on. New Yorkers pride themselves in being multicultural. It should be up to them to decide whether or not the mosque is built and for what reason. Not up to politicians who pimp themselves out at every chance or their xenophobic followers around America.

Unless they got these muslims who are having the mosque built on video expressing that the reason for building the mosque is to rub the 9-11 attacks in the faces of the victims I do not see it as a provocation on the part of the Muslims building the mosque. I think this is just lumping all Muslims together on the part of the people opposed to a mosque being built. SHould all priests be banned from being around children because of a few pedophile priests?
 
But what can you do about it? Seriously, if everything is legal then how can you justify acting against these people? They are within every right to practice their religion, to have a religious building, and they've done so all by the letter of the law. Yet some people still say we should do something. That you can use forms of social intimidation legitimately against the rights of these people in order to stop something they don't like but have no just reason to infringe upon. How can anyone endorse social intimidation to keep people from practicing their rights? That's all that's left open since this was all done legally.

So for those opposed to the mosque, in a country built upon the rights and liberties of the individual, a limited government which was to support and proliferation our rights and liberties, in such a world how can you believe it justifiable to use forms of social intimidation against groups which are legally exercising their rights? How is that not betraying everything this country was founded on?

Now that you and others want to change the subject because someone got nailed on a false premise I'll answer your question. There is absolutely nothing wrong with social pressure. The mosque builders can simply ignore it. There is nothing wrong with people not accepting the presence of the mosque so near ground zero. The mosque builders can choose to ignore that too. Apparently the Muslims building the mosque are getting their wishes becasue they are within their rights and to do so but it doesn't mean in any way that everyone has to like it. This is not taking away anyone's liberties.
 
Now that you and others want to change the subject because someone got nailed on a false premise I'll answer your question. There is absolutely nothing wrong with social pressure. The mosque builders can simply ignore it. There is nothing wrong with people not accepting the presence of the mosque so near ground zero. The mosque builders can choose to ignore that too. Apparently the Muslims building the mosque are getting their wishes becasue they are within their rights and to do so but it doesn't mean in any way that everyone has to like it. This is not taking away anyone's liberties.

It's one thing to bitch about something. It's another one to endorse the use of societal or political pressures on a specific group to infringe or prevent the exercise of a right; which was what was being espoused.

There is plenty wrong with the use of social and political pressures to infringe upon the free exercise of rights by the individual. If you want to be pissed, be pissed. But there is nothing one can legitimately or justly do to prevent it.
 
Where is the law that says we have to show you respect? There's no such thing. The only thing which is to be guaranteed are our rights. But I find it funny that this is the argument used considering how the side against the exercise of rights tries to portray the other side.

Did you even bother to read a ****ing word I said before you decided to verbally vomit forth this bilious gas-bag of a post?

I didnt make any legal argument at all. I would love it if you could show me what moronic mental somersaults you did to get to this response because I could use a dose of humor today.
 
Still defaulting to your deranged rants?

Nope, just asking if you could answer the question. Which apparently the answer to that is "no".
 
See, weird thing on this...

I agree with her that its unnecessary provocation. As I've said before, these people building the mosque are either needed to be nominated for the biggest douchebag in the universe award OR are the most obtuse dumbasses this side of Washington and regardless of which of those two things they are they are unquestionably lacking in tact.

I have no issue with her having a problem with it either. I laugh when people are saying essentially "Shut up Palin, you're not FROM New York, its not your business!" when many of those people are the type to get angry when a European or Canadian poster is dismissed for having an opinion on something going on in America. At least in this case its actually something affecting her country. Many of these people seem to also be ones that have zero issue having an opinion on Arizona without living there. Nothing says American's can't have opinions on things going on in other states.

That said, there's nothing New York can or really should do as a government. If the people buy the land and want to build something that's legally zoned to be built there then more power to them. The only way this should, and could, be stopped imho would be from the citizens themselves protesting and doing legal actions that cause such bad publicity that it makes it useless to build if the intent REALLY is to "build bridges" and do "outreach". People protesting this would be no worse or more wrong then those protesting for amnesty or were protesting the wars.

In regards to the comparisons, the KKK one is crappy and is a poor one all together. A better example would be buying up the land and building a bar on the site of a wreck caused by drunk driving that killed 13 people from the town. Is all alcohol to blame for that car crash? No. But that car crash happened in large part due to alcohol and thus for those in the town affected by it seeing a building dedicated to the thing that helped cause those deaths would be inflamatory. Similarly, while Islam as a whole is not to blame for 9/11, its undeniable to suggest that Islam did not have a large part in the why and the how that it was carried out.

Or opening up a "History of Japan" museum next to Pearl Harbor 10 years after WWII ended. 10 years later was ALL Japanese people in general our enemies? No. Were the individual citizens, who at that time were hardly a democratic country, directly responsable for the attacks on Pearl Harbor or even to a man agreed with it? No. Yet despite that, only 10 years after the fact, would something like that so close to wreckage not be inflammatory for many?

I've said it before and I have yet to see a reason to leave from this thought process. If their goal was HONESTLY to build bridges then they'd have bought land farther away from ground zero and advertise it from there. You don't have to "build bridges" to people that don't have an issue with you, your religion, or what happened with 9/11 because those bridges already exist. You don't "build bridges" to places you're already connected to. The whole point of "building bridges" is to connect to people who are apart from you...people who have a negative view, distrusting view, or outright oppositional view towards Islam. Those are the type of people that if someone is "building bridges" that they'd be reaching out to. And those are the people that are most being bothered/annoyed, upset, or pissed off about the location of this mosque.

To equate it with something elses, this is like trying to "make friends" with someone who you've generally not gotten along with and for your initial action in trying to do that you flick them off.
 
Did you even bother to read a ****ing word I said before you decided to verbally vomit forth this bilious gas-bag of a post?

I didnt make any legal argument at all. I would love it if you could show me what moronic mental somersaults you did to get to this response because I could use a dose of humor today.

I asked you a question, you were telling these other people who seemed to endorse societal and/or political pressure to infringe upon the rights of people who have legally and within the full of their rights exercised their own liberties that they get unreasonable terms thrown at them. Therefore, I only asked YOU if YOU could answer the question the others couldn't. So, if you'd like to start reading and responding rationally, that would be super. But if it's just going to be more of these temper tantrums, please save yourself the time.
 
Back
Top Bottom