• 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!

Imam’s wife: Nixing mosque ‘not option’

Not really worried about CRA violations it doesn't apply to the transportation industry, no supplies no construction. The Mosque five blocks away I don't have a problem with. BTW what are your thoughts about the Orthodox Christian Church being denied a permit to build next to what was the WTC, which BTW was there long before any Mosque. Let that church go up, and perhaps who would see a different outlook from those who oppose the mosque.

The church was denied because they didn't own the property they wanted to build on.
They have been in negotiations with the state on a trade with the property.
Not even the same thing.
 
Don't care about your property rights, as per this thread and all the others.

You have decided to engage in hyperbole and stereotyping, through out this whole discussion, spanning multiple threads.

No **** you don't care about property rights, you are a complete hypocrite.

And I have not engaged in hyperbole and stereotyping, it's you who has tried to paint all Muslims as peace loving and tolerant in your attempt to label those opposed to this Mosque as bigots; whereas, I have pointed to the words and actions of a very specific Muslim individual IE Imam Rauf.
 
No **** you don't care about property rights, you are a complete hypocrite.

Call me what you will champ. ;)

And I have not engaged in hyperbole and stereotyping, it's you who has tried to paint all Muslims as peace loving and tolerant in your attempt to label those opposed to this Mosque as bigots; whereas, I have pointed to the words and actions of a very specific Muslim individual IE Imam Rauf.

Yes you have, you've taken his opinion on OBL, the attacks and turn them into some form of wrong and a form of bias in favor of Islamism.
Frankly, a lot of non Muslims hold that very same opinion, that America meddling in the Middle East, was the cause of terrorism(in America) and the WTC attacks.

No where have I stated that all Muslims are peace loving and tolerant, nice how you have to make stuff up in order to form an argument. :thumbs:
 
Call me what you will champ. ;)



Yes you have, you've taken his opinion on OBL, the attacks and turn them into some form of wrong and a form of bias in favor of Islamism.

No I have taken his favor of Islamism to form my conclusion that he favors Islamism. Supporting a Sharia compliant U.S. in which secular laws do not contradict the Hadiths or the Koran makes him an Islamist that's the very definition of the term. I've taken his apologetics for Islamist terrorism to determine that he is an asshole.

Frankly, a lot of non Muslims hold that very same opinion, that America meddling in the Middle East, was the cause of terrorism(in America) and the WTC attacks.

And they can go screw.

No where have I stated that all Muslims are peace loving and tolerant, nice how you have to make stuff up in order to form an argument. :thumbs:

You're certainly trying to paint this Islamist Imam as "one of the good ones", when he is in fact part of the problem.
 
Last edited:
You're certainly trying to paint this Islamist Imam as "one of the good ones", when he is in fact part of the problem.

No,people are not trying to paint this guy as a "one of the good ones" only that he is not a terrorist as you seem to think he is.

He may be an asshole, like many conservatives here,but being an asshole isn't illegal or make you a terrorist to prevent you from building something.
 
No,people are not trying to paint this guy as a "one of the good ones"

The hell they aren't.

only that he is not a terrorist as you seem to think he is.

He's not a terrorist but he is an Islamist and part of the problem, it is the Islamist ideology which has directly led to Islamist terrorism. And you people are trying to label those who oppose the Mosque as bigots because we draw the only conclusion that can be drawn by the actions and the words of this particular Imam.

He may be an asshole, like many conservatives here,but being an asshole isn't illegal or make you a terrorist to prevent you from building something.

Holy **** I've never said he doesn't have the right to build this Mosque only that it's not right that he's building it.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of disingenuous, here is an Imam who supports sharia law, and here you are trying to frame those who might oppose such as being some sort of radical right winger.

Heaven help us if we have actually arrived at point where a person cannot oppose the brutality of Sharia without being accused of being a racist or a fear monger or a ...gasp ....a "right winger" for doing so.
Oh, you can oppose Shariah Law all you want, but oppose the law, not the people as a whole. As have been stated several times before, there are some Muslims who oppose it. Will you condemn them, too?
 
Oh, you can oppose Shariah Law all you want, but oppose the law, not the people as a whole. As have been stated several times before, there are some Muslims who oppose it. Will you condemn them, too?

Why would I comdemn those muslims who oppose Sharia law?
 
Wow a muslim extremist jihadist terrorist allowing his woman to speak for him... .. wait a minute that is impossible if he was a muslim extremist jihadist terrorist..

Muslims have kicked spanish ass into submission, so it figures you'd be an apologist.
 
Is he wrong? History supports him.

And we don't have to go back very far.

Irrelevant to the thread and hence baiting. If he or you want to discuss things that are no part of the thread in question, I suggest you start your own thread.
 
Irrelevant to the thread and hence baiting. If he or you want to discuss things that are no part of the thread in question, I suggest you start your own thread.

Its funny you request to stick to the subject when you avoided it from the first posting you made and what he responded to. He's describing your attitude towards the information the wife spoke. You didn't talk about the substance at all. If you would like to return to what she actually said ie the subject, that would be great.
 
If I owned a piece of property, and I planned on putting something there, and the city approved it...I'd expect nothing other than to make it happen. Because I live in America. And , and because I believe in the contitution wholly. And if "this isn't an argument about contitutionality, it is a conversation about poor taste," then....

I don't care for the KKK, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.
I don't care for the Greensboro Baptist Church, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.
I don't care for the Strip Clubs 2 blocks from ground zero, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.

Interesting that these groups, two of which are also influenced heavy by religions are in agreeable poor taste, yet here we are, arguing about 1 citizen's decision in the entirety of the United States.

Breaking News = One man's decision to use private property he owns for a community center in Manhattan? Holy ****.
 
Irrelevant to the thread and hence baiting. If he or you want to discuss things that are no part of the thread in question, I suggest you start your own thread.

Why, you never do and you're a big derailer.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's all cut the bickering out.
 
If I owned a piece of property, and I planned on putting something there, and the city approved it...I'd expect nothing other than to make it happen. Because I live in America. And , and because I believe in the contitution wholly. And if "this isn't an argument about contitutionality, it is a conversation about poor taste," then....

I don't care for the KKK, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.
I don't care for the Greensboro Baptist Church, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.
I don't care for the Strip Clubs 2 blocks from ground zero, but you aren't arguing against thier poor taste.

It's the Westboro Baptist Church, and I don't think you'll find anyone on this board who opposes the Mosque and wouldn't likewise oppose just about anything done by the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church. But how can you dislike strippers?

Interesting that these groups, two of which are also influenced heavy by religions are in agreeable poor taste, yet here we are, arguing about 1 citizen's decision in the entirety of the United States.

Breaking News = One man's decision to use private property he owns for a community center in Manhattan? Holy ****.

No breaking news = overt Islamist building victory Mega-Mosque at Ground Zero.
 
No I have taken his favor of Islamism to form my conclusion that he favors Islamism. Supporting a Sharia compliant U.S. in which secular laws do not contradict the Hadiths or the Koran makes him an Islamist that's the very definition of the term. I've taken his apologetics for Islamist terrorism to determine that he is an asshole.

You're certainly trying to paint this Islamist Imam as "one of the good ones", when he is in fact part of the problem.


"A Saudi judge has asked several hospitals whether they would punitively damage a man's spinal cord after he was convicted of attacking another man with a cleaver and paralysing him, local newspapers reported today.

Saudi Arabia enforces strict sharia law and occasionally metes out punishments based on the ancient code of an eye for an eye.

Abdul-Aziz al-Mutairi, 22, was left paralysed after a fight more than two years ago, and asked a judge to impose an equivalent punishment on his attacker under sharia law, reports said."

Saudi Arabian judge asks hospitals to paralyse man | World news | The Guardian



Sharia Law. Quite the mischievous bunch of young rascals.....;)





.
 
Back
Top Bottom