• 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!

"Ron Paul to Sunshine Patriots" article about 'GZ Mosque'... Do you agree?

Read OP


  • Total voters
    30
Oh believe me Im looking forward to another retarded War on Christmas by the retards on the religious right. I wonder if Ill be able to break my record of kicking out people who go ape when my employees dont wish someone a Merry Christmas.

Should be great for business. Have fun with that! That happens a lot though? Riiiiight...because I see that everywhere I go...people just absolutely freaking out because someone DOESNT wish them Merry Christmas. :lamo

Bull****.
 
I mean, it's not a propaganda lesson, it's what happened.

And the charges were false they were propaganda used to justify the illegal annexation of Kuwait.

CONFRONTATION IN THE GULF - CONFRONTATION IN THE GULF - The Oilfield Lying Below the Iraq-Kuwait Dispute - NYTimes.com

Even the Iraqi-Kuwait oil price war had been settled prior to the annexation in the Iraqi's favor:

Iraq Said to Prevail in Oil Dispute With Kuwait and Arab Emirates - NYTimes.com

And BTW, who do you think helped put the Baathists in power in the first place?

I've heard these accusations before, and the only evidence I've seen is the CIA giving the names of suspected communists to the Baath party after the coup, I have seen 0 evidence of U.S. funding or arms being granted to the Baath party. In fact Saddam got the vast bulk of his foreign weapons from the Soviet Union not the United States, who only supplied Saddam with appx. .5% of his total foreign weapons mainly consisting of dual use items; such as, bulldozers and helicopters retrofitted after the fact for military use. During the Cold War Iraq was clearly in the Soviet camp.

A party which was hostile towards Iran, a country we were having lots of problems with at the time?

WTF are you talking about? The Baathists came to power in 1963 before the Shah was overthrown by the Iranian revolution and a decade after Mossadeq was ousted by the Shah's counter-coup. And the Shah and Saddam actually had warm relations and the U.S. certainly had warm relations with the Shah.

You can say one thing or the other; but history is as history is.

And you obviously don't know a lot about history.

Fact of the matter is that there were charges of slant drilling,

False charges to justify an illegal invasion like the assertions that Poland had actually attackd Germany in 1939.

there was some lack of diligence on behalf of our ambassador. Sure, after the annexation we looked at the situation and said we couldn't sit idly by and let this happen; we got involved militarily at that point. But there were things which could have been handled better leading up to it. Maybe, just maybe, could have avoided the mess in the first place.

We didn't immediately go to war, we gave Saddam EVERY opportunity to withdrawal his forces and to avoid war. The guilt for the Iraqi annexation of Kuwait and the subsequent Gulf War rests with Saddam Hussein and his regime and no one else.
 
Last edited:
It goes towards motivation, if there is not a pressing need for another Mosque then why build it?
Because they want to. That's reason enough.

Given the words of this Imam I think the motivations are clear IE to give the proverbial **** you to the American people.
Apparently their motivations are not as clear as you think they are, since plenty of individuals see the issue differently. You see it as an insult, others see it as an opportunity and others could care less.
 
Quick...show where ANYONE has suggested ignoring the constitution. Show me where anyone has done anything more than voiced disagreement with the location of the mosque. I'll wait...Im sure you have it right there at your fingertips.

You didn't pay attention the first hundred times you've been shown. Why bother?
 
Because they want to. That's reason enough.


Apparently their motivations are not as clear as you think they are, since plenty of individuals see the issue differently. You see it as an insult, others see it as an opportunity and others could care less.

We who see it for what it is have the right to exercise our freedom of speech to protest this slap in the face from an overt Islamist and encourage others to exercise their right of self ownership not to trade their labour for the capital of this Islamist. By accusing all those opposed to actions of this specific Iman of demagoguery for exercising the same rights as the Islamist that he defends proves Paul for the hypocrite that he is.
 
It goes towards motivation, if there is not a pressing need for another Mosque then why build it? Given the words of this Imam I think the motivations are clear IE to give the proverbial **** you to the American people.

I'm curious if you intentionally left out the last sentence in my quote? Here it is again just incase you missed it.

I'll respond to this with some maps for your viewing pleasure...

Churches in Manhattan - Google Maps

Mosques in Manhattan - Google Maps

:doh

Why are you even asking "how many Muslims live in the area"? Should I ask how many Christians live in my area and use that number to determine how many churches should go in around the city I live in? The answer to that question is "WTF NO!"

Just like any other religious location, if they can't get enough people coming through they will eventually close down. And I highly doubt this Islamic Center will have any problems getting enough people to go there.

Is there a "pressing need" for those hundreds of churches on the map? You know, I don't care what the answer to that question is. And I say the same thing about a "pressing need" for another Mosque.

And I'm still waiting for proof of negative intentions behind this center.
 
You didn't pay attention the first hundred times you've been shown. Why bother?

Because I and MANY people (like other muslims in America, and quite a few democrats) disagree that placing the mosque there, that isnt QUITE the same thing as denying them their constitutional rights...now is it?
 
We who see it for what it is have the right to exercise our freedom of speech to protest this slap in the face from an overt Islamist and encourage others to exercise their right of self ownership not to trade their labour for the capital of this Islamist.
Yes, if everyone could only see from your viewpoint this would not be an issue.

By accusing all those opposed to actions of this specific Iman of demagoguery for exercising the same rights as the Islamist that he defends proves Paul for the hypocrite that he is.

What would you say to Ron Paul about this issue, if given the chance?
 
I'm curious if you intentionally left out the last sentence in my quote? Here it is again just incase you missed it.



Is there a "pressing need" for those hundreds of churches on the map?

I'm sure there is, 12 mosques for the Muslim community in the entire city of NY sounds about right, why do they need 3 Mosques within 12 blocks of eachother?

You know, I don't care what the answer to that question is. And I say the same thing about a "pressing need" for another Mosque.

And I'm still waiting for proof of negative intentions behind this center.

This Imam is a proponent of Sharia law he is an Islamist, this Islamist stated that the U.S. was an accessory to 9-11 and that OBL was made in the USA less than 3 weeks after the attacks, he has repeatedly refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, and most recently he has been shown to have compared the U.S. unfavorably to AQ.
 
Yes, if everyone could only see from your viewpoint this would not be an issue.



What would you say to Ron Paul about this issue, if given the chance?


What I've already said, that he's a hypocrite, apparently he thinks that pointing to the words and actions of a very specific Imam is an attempt to scapegoat an entire religion.
 
I'm sure there is, 12 mosques for the Muslim community in the entire city of NY sounds about right, why do they need 3 Mosques within 12 blocks of eachother?

I don't know, why do we need a Starbucks on every other street corner? Yet they're all over the place. Doesn't matter "need", what matters is "can". And they can put up as many mosques as they can afford to build assuming property and zoning is met.

This Imam is a proponent of Sharia law he is an Islamist, this Islamist stated that the U.S. was an accessory to 9-11 and that OBL was made in the USA less than 3 weeks after the attacks, he has repeatedly refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, and most recently he has been shown to have compared the U.S. unfavorably to AQ.

Do you have to condemn Hamas in order to build a mosque in this country? Maybe the dude is just an asshole. Ain't no law against that.
 
A) That Mosque was there before 9-11.

B) This actually helps your case as there are already two Mosques in the general area then why is a third Mega-Mosque necessary? Are we to believe that there is a pressing demand for a 3rd Mosque within 20 blocks of 2 others in a highly commercial non-residential area? How many Muslims actually even live within the vicinity of these Mosques?

Perhaps we should restrict the right of Jews from boarding any USS? After all, it was a Jewish government that blew up the USS Liberty. Or how about restricting ANY churches from being constructed near an abortion clinic? I believe in individual human rights. You believe in censorship.
 
Perhaps we should restrict the right of Jews from boarding any USS? After all, it was a Jewish government that blew up the USS Liberty

Ya it was a case of friendly fire.

Or how about restricting ANY churches from being constructed near an abortion clinic?

An evangelical church placed right next to a site where a radical evangelical murdered an abortion clinic doctor would be highly inappropriate, as would an evangelical church next to the site where Mathew Shepherd was murdered.

I believe in individual human rights. You believe in censorship.

No you don't believe in individual rights, if you did you would not be harassing me for exercising mine while at the same time defending those rights for an overt Islamist. You are a hypocrite.

How in the ****ing hell am I for censorship pal? I have said time and time again that they have the right to build their Mosque, but here you are telling me that I'm a bigot by exercising my freedom of speech to encourage others to exercise their own rights of self ownership not to enter into contractual obligations to trade their labour for this overt Islamists capital due to this very specific Imam's words and actions. :roll:
 
I don't know, why do we need a Starbucks on every other street corner? Yet they're all over the place. Doesn't matter "need", what matters is "can". And they can put up as many mosques as they can afford to build assuming property and zoning is met.

There's a lot of demand for new starbucks is there a huge demand for 3 Mosque's within this small 12 block largely commericial area?

Do you have to condemn Hamas in order to build a mosque in this country?

No, but when a person is asked point blank repeatedly if an organization which intentionally murders women and children is a terrorist organization and that person refuses to answer in the affirmative you have to question what that person stands for and what are his true motivations behind building the Mega-Mosque.

Maybe the dude is just an asshole. Ain't no law against that.

Aint no law against protesting assholes either.
 
Ya it was a case of friendly fire.



An evangelical church placed right next to a site where a radical evangelical murdered an abortion clinic doctor would be highly inappropriate, as would an evangelical church next to the site where Mathew Shepherd was murdered.



No you don't believe in individual rights, if you did you would not be harassing me for exercising mine while at the same time defending those rights for an overt Islamist. You are a hypocrite.

How in the ****ing hell am I for censorship pal? I have said time and time again that they have the right to build their Mosque, but here you are telling me that I'm a bigot by exercising my freedom of speech to encourage others to exercise their own rights of self ownership not to enter into contractual obligations to trade their labour for this overt Islamists capital due to this very specific Imam's words and actions. :roll:


You need to watch the Colbert Report, my friend.

I'm sorry I was so quick to draw the conclusion that you wished their individual rights were censored. I just hear that crap all the time. Inappropriate? In my heartest of heart, I don't think so. I do think some of the most infamous protestor signs out there in Manhattan are definitely inappropriate.

I don't think your right to speech should be censored, but please don't ever support ANY sort of governmental restriction to prevent the construction of the mosque.

Ever heard of Iranian flight 655?

 
You need to watch the Colbert Report, my friend.

I don't give a **** what Glenn Beck says (even though he didn't call the U.S. an accessory to 9-11) this man labeled the U.S. an accessory to 9-11 and said OBL was made in the USA less than 3 weeks after the attacks, he has repeatedly refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, and he supports Sharia law stating that he doesn't want secular laws to contradict the Koran or the Hadiths and is head and co-founder of the Sharia Index Project, and most recently made public he compared the U.S. unfavorably to AQ. He's not a moderate as has been claimed and if he's a moderate then that begs the question of what should be considered radical?

I'm sorry I was so quick to draw the conclusion that you wished their individual rights were censored. I just hear that crap all the time. Inappropriate? In my heartest of heart, I don't think so. I do think some of the most infamous protestor signs out there in Manhattan are definitely inappropriate.

I don't think your right to speech should be censored, but please don't ever support ANY sort of governmental restriction to prevent the construction of the mosque.

I don't support government let alone governmental intervention into the property rights of the individual.

Ever heard of Iranian flight 655?



Mistaken identity, do you really think the U.S. military would intentionally fire on a civilian airliner?
 
I don't give a **** what Glenn Beck says (even though he didn't call the U.S. an accessory to 9-11) this man labeled the U.S. an accessory to 9-11 and said OBL was made in the USA less than 3 weeks after the attacks, he has repeatedly refused to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, and he supports Sharia law stating that he doesn't want secular laws to contradict the Koran or the Hadiths and is head and co-founder of the Sharia Index Project, and most recently made public he compared the U.S. unfavorably to AQ. He's not a moderate as has been claimed and if he's a moderate then that begs the question of what should be considered radical?



I don't support government let alone governmental intervention into the property rights of the individual.



Mistaken identity, do you really think the U.S. military would intentionally fire on a civilian airliner?

A) Who are you talking about? I said the Colbert Report, not Glenn Beck.

B) Then why did they cover it up and never apologize, officially, to Iran? Sometimes, just an apology is necessary, not a frickin' cover-up.
 
A) Who are you talking about? I said the Colbert Report, not Glenn Beck.

I thought you were referencing the Colbert Show episode with the clip from Beck.

B) Then why did they cover it up and never apologize, officially, to Iran? Sometimes, just an apology is necessary, not a frickin' cover-up.

We didn't cover it up, it was an accident.

We did apologize and payed them a $131 Million dollar settlement.

Anyways why are we talking about Iran, they're not even the same type of Muslims.
 
Last edited:
I thought you were referencing the Colbert Show episode with the clip from Beck.



We didn't cover it up, it was an accident.

We did apologize and payed them a $131 Million dollar settlement.

Anyways why are we talking about Iran, they're not even the same type of Muslims.

Any further debate with you is futile.
 
Any further debate with you is futile.

I partially agree with Agent Ferris on this one. It was an accident. The American government did not appologise but they did pay $131 million... but not until 8 years after the incident. A bit late IMO.

But what does this have to do with what we're discussing?
 
I partially agree with Agent Ferris on this one. It was an accident. The American government did not appologise but they did pay $131 million... but not until 8 years after the incident. A bit late IMO.

But what does this have to do with what we're discussing?

We issued letters of regret, it was an accident caused by the fog of war.
 
Any further debate with you is futile.

And why is that exactly? What's there to debate anyways. You brought up a completely unrelated topic regarding an accident caused by the fog of war which doesn't even involve the same type of Muslims that we're talking about.
 
Yeah i agree with you, it's their government, it's their problem. But the problem is that we give their government billions each years.




I don't condone terrorism. The sacrifice of any innocent life is never justified. My point is to listen and to learn the reasons that motivate them to attack us. And our meddling in their countries, is the principal reason why they came here.



Well first they don't have elected officials . But even it was the case, we're talking about terrorists here. These people are irrational enough to sacrifice the life of innocent people. When they see foreign troops in their land that are accepted by their corrupt leaders, and some drones are causing some "collateral damage" on some family, do you think they're gonna ask us politely to leave? no their reaction will be to take revenge any way it's possible.


The problem is in many case, our foreign policies allows a lot of atrocity to occur consciously or not.



Nope i find this statement pretty offensive. And our insane foreign policy is what caused 9/11. We were allies with Saddam, supported him with money, training, weapons and other technology for years. Same with Bin laden. We're fabricating our own enemies.


This was a collective punishment. Those sanctions which were aimed at Saddam, only hurt the Iraqi people. This was pretty stupid, and caused a lot of resentment not against him but against the people who imposed those sanctions.

Yawn.

I don't accept Blame the Victim Arguments.

Address the point that THEIR government made the choices, not the secretary on the 90th floor of WTC 1 or the stewardess on Flight 93.

The sanctions hurt the Iraqi people because Saddam Hussein was a murderous dictator. Address that fact.
 
I'll respond to this with some maps for your viewing pleasure...

Churches in Manhattan - Google Maps

Mosques in Manhattan - Google Maps

:doh

Why are you even asking "how many Muslims live in the area"? Should I ask how many Christians live in my area and use that number to determine how many churches should go in around the city I live in? The answer to that question is "WTF NO!"

Just like any other religious location, if they can't get enough people coming through they will eventually close down. And I highly doubt this Islamic Center will have any problems getting enough people to go there.



Name other monuments to muslim terrorists atrocties that have been closed.
 
Iraq invaded Kuwait on charges of stealing Iraqi oil via slant drilling. Then 8 days before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the US Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie - in response to a complaint from Saddam about Kuwaiti actions against Iraq - told him: "we have no opinion on Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait. Secretary of State James Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960's, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America."

So most of it could have been resolved with proper diplomacy first. Maybe saying instead something like "The United States would have very negative opinions of open hostilities and depending on the situation; may have to get involved should open hostilities develop".

And the Big So What in this argument is that if the neighbor on your left asks you what your interest in your neighbor on your right's car, and you reply "I have no opinion on your conflict with Ted. Your issue is not associated with me." And if you then report to the police that Neighor Left stole Neighbor Right's car, you in no way either gave him permission to steal the car (It's not yours, you can't give that permission), nor did you assure him that you would take no action if he behaved wrongly.

Also, the issue in question to the response you cited was in regards to a dispute over a border marker getting shifted a few meters.

The murder and rape Saddam Hussein committed was totally out of proportion to the misdemeanor of stealing a little oil. At the most, Hussein should have bombed the slant drilling sites as a warning.
 
Back
Top Bottom