Skip navigation



    • wootabega
    • Posted August 20, 2010 at 11:11 am
    • Permalink

    I don’t get why people are in so big of a tizzy of this. It’s an Islamic community center built inside a former Burlington Coat Factory.

    Here’s a great little post I saw today from the one and only Roger Ebert, and it has more insight than I’ve seen from any “journalist” on MSNBC, CNN or Fox.

  1. Excerpt from the new Park51 brochure:

    “After taking care of your soul in the new Neville Chamberlain Chapel, take care of your body with some vigorous laps in the Olympic-sized Peace In Our Time Pool, or some light cardio on one of our Nothing To See Here Move Along Treadmills. And for the kids, don’t forget the Whack-a-Bigot! games in the arcade!”

    • Jamie
    • Posted August 20, 2010 at 11:21 am
    • Permalink

    Zack – another good one… it brings to mind: “thank you, may I have another?”

    • Steve
    • Posted August 20, 2010 at 1:59 pm
    • Permalink

    Wootabega –

    “I don’t get why people are in so big of a tizzy of this.”

    Are you serious? Were you old enough, nine years ago, to understand what happened on 9/11/2001 ?

    That “Islamic Center” will ALSO be a place of Islamic worship – it includes a mosque, and its purpose is to flip the middle finger to the U.S. That is not conjecture, that is a certainty.

    FACT: Islam has an on-going multi-century history of building mosque’s at their sites of conquest.
    At ‘ground zero’, and this particular site is part of ‘ground zero’, because it is within the scope of where debris, body parts, etc… landed, is where these militant Islamo-terrorists are very, very proud of destroying those towers.

    ‘Ground zero’ is a site of considerable accomplishment – in their twisted base of values.

    Further, try to go build a Christian church anywhere in Saudi Arabia.
    Assuming you are not Muslim, try to physically enter the city of Mecca.

    Orthodox Islam is so creepily intolerant, so imperialistic, it is pre-historic thuggery, in many ways. This is not contradicted by the select parts that seem so ‘fluffy nice’ and idealistic.

    Further, these Islamo-thugs are carefully exploiting our own laws against us.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 20, 2010 at 3:48 pm
    • Permalink

    Let them build a mosque there; just put a Pork BBQ restaurant upwind of it, and have an all-you-can-eat special every Friday night around sundown, especially during August and September.

    Also, a strip joint right across from their front door. Somebody else has already thought of a Muslim gay bar next door.

    Or better yet, let’s surround the mosque on all sides with Buddhist temples, Shinto shrines, Wicca, Santorini, Druid, Voodoo, Native American and every other non-dhimmi religion we can find.

    Maybe the Enlightenment can roll Islam the way the’ve rolled Christianity since the French Revolution… nah!

  2. Here’s my take on another way to see it:

    Put that way, who can seriously tell me that the recipients will have absolutely no problems showing Americans tolerance and understanding?

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 20, 2010 at 8:53 pm
    • Permalink

    “Are you serious? Were you old enough, nine years ago, to understand what happened on 9/11/2001 ?”

    Yep! Terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and killed thousands of innocent people. It was a terrible tragedy that I don’t think should be forgotten.

    “That “Islamic Center” will ALSO be a place of Islamic worship – it includes a mosque, and its purpose is to flip the middle finger to the U.S. That is not conjecture, that is a certainty.”

    So exercising freedom of religion, as it is written in our country’s own Bill of Rights, is somehow “flipping the middle finger” to our country?

    It’s a damn community center. It’s going to have a swimming pool and basketball court. It’s going to have performing arts classes. It’s going to have a culinary school. It’s being built in a Burlington Coat factory two to three blocks away from Ground Zero.

    They’re not dropping Mecca in the middle of Manhattan. It’s a YMCA funded by a Muslim.

    The World Trade Center was destroyed by an extremist, militant sect of people. They were Muslims, yes, but they were also suicidal wackjobs. It’s so odd how people are so quick to associate al-Qaeda with all Muslims on the planet. They project the views of one extremist group onto one billion people that conform to the same religion.

    “Further, try to go build a Christian church anywhere in Saudi Arabia.”

    Oh, yes. Surely we shouldn’t have higher standards for freedom of religion than Saudi Arabia. After all, we’re only the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    “Further, these Islamo-thugs are carefully exploiting our own laws against us.”

    Yes, how dare those punk Muslims, exploiting their rights as American citizens in order to learn how to cook a better soufflé or play a quick game of 3-on-3. HOW DARE THEY!

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 21, 2010 at 7:59 am
    • Permalink


    Have you ever been to France? They started out permitting Muslim women to wear the hijab (incorrectly assuming that all women who do are not coerced into it).

    Now, in some neighborhoods in Paris, any woman who goes out without a hijab is publically called a whore, and if raped, is though to have deserved it.

    Something about the camel’s nose in the tent? or maybe boiled frogs?

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 21, 2010 at 8:02 am
    • Permalink


    Would you give the Branch Davidians, or Mormon polytheists, or followers of the Bagwan Shree Rajneesh the same consideration you want to give Muslims?

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 21, 2010 at 8:06 am
    • Permalink


    make that “Mormon polygamists,” although theologically…

    nevermind, that’s for a different blog.

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 21, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    • Permalink

    Re: Hijabs in France

    Nope, never been to France. Would love to visit.

    I don’t think I understand the point you’re trying to make here. France has had controversy surrounding women wearing the hijab for quite some time. Many people were against women wearing such a conspicuous religious symbol in public institutions. There were students who were forcibly removed or expelled from their schools because they refused to remove their headwear. In 2004 a law was passed that prohibited any conspicuous religious symbols from being worn in schools, including hijabs, yarmulkes, and large crosses.

    So what point are you making here? That French government makes no law against the wearing of a hijab out on a public street, or in a private home, and therefore their citizens have been cast into a Muslim hellhole?

    Muslim women can wear a hijab out in public here, too. Yet, I’ve seen various different ethnicities of men call various different ethnicities of women whores out in public. And I’ve heard people say that a rape victim “deserved it” — not for not wearing a hijab, but for having on a skimpy outfit.

    So what point are you trying to make here? When exactly did France “start out” in permitting Muslim women to wear hijabs? Muslims have always been allowed to practice their religion as long as they didn’t interfere in the affairs of public institutions (schools, hospitals, etc).

    Are you trying to say that the seemingly minor act of allowing the wearing of that head-scarf corrupted all of French society? There’s actually been studies that show that France is actually one of the more successful Western countries in integrating Muslims, where they develop a positive outlooks on other faiths and their country.

    Please clarify your point for me.

    • Steve
    • Posted August 21, 2010 at 6:12 pm
    • Permalink

    For wootabega, it is obvious that the facts of history that set the USA apart from every other country, that makes the US a uniquely special country, are totally unknown to, or irrelevant to you.
    You have accepted irrelevant pulp tidbits of information, or outright Islamic BS propaganda, as the central ‘truth’ in your position.
    Your aptitude for a basic human instinct, called “enemy identification” is either non-existent, or you have strong sympathies for those behind this Islamic Mosque, who are also those who want to Islamisize the USA as much as possible.

    Perhaps that agenda may well be part of your progresso-gasm idealisms for a better America.
    You first state “I don’t get why people are in so big of a tizzy of this.”… then you walk this sickening, disgusting apathy back by “It was a terrible tragedy that I don’t think should be forgotten.”
    I am struggling for civility here: Your first statement flatly implies you damn-well did forget about it!
    — sorry to sound so crass,… words mean things, idea’s have consequenses-!

    This duplicitous tap dancing would be laughed off the stage at a 7th grade student council campaign forum.
    I cannot help but wonder – what do you do, for a living?

    You have the facts wrong – or you are one of them, pushing the pro-Islamic cause (pick one)… it is a G**-damnable MOSQUE – it is a Mosque, first and FOREMOST,… and that fact is not changed by whatever ‘bells & whistles’ are added in the floor plans… or by the pulp tid-bit irrelevancies, that are so very important in your argument.

    This spiritual sh-t hole sewer, will be, if allowed, calling these creepy, shameless, thugs to PRAYER, — FIVE TIMES, [count them please,… one, two, three, four,… and five!… times] — a day.

    And have no doubt – those Muslims, who want to “pray” at this ground zero Mosque location – are creepy, shameless, scum-bag goons. Among those other 2-3 millions folks in America of the Muslim faith, who respect the freedoms of faith outside theirs, and condemn that terrorism… they are probably fine folks… and distinctly different.

    You seem unaware about the Islamo-thug who is behind this Mosque, and his very raw pro-terrorist history. Oops, that is dog-gone inconvenient, ya think ?!?

    You also fail to understand – or you are repelled by the convicting truth of the matter – that the extreme double standard of their barbaric and hideous society, and our wide-open freedoms, seriously underscores why this Islamic cause is a mortal enemy of ours.

    Your seeming respect for our “…higher standards for freedom of religion…” is a classic liberal straw-man that is in truth, your willingness to watch the Constitution be used as a suicide pact.
    I have seen this trick-argument used for years.

    We are a stronger, better, freer country when we have the moral courage to openly identify our mortal enemies, isolate them, further expose them… then under due process, deport, incarcerate, or otherwise render them harmless.

    Your expressed views are very consistent with folks who have had a cozy, safe, sheltered life – and the concept of having any ‘skin in the game’ is as alien to you as the shaded side of Pluto.

    However – I do enjoy the contest of idea’s with you…!
    Wootabega, would you kindly offer us a clear, step-by-step argument for constructing a 13-story Shinto shrine at Pearl Harbor, a short distance on shore, behind the USS Arizona memorial ?
    No doubt, perhaps you could dispel any unreasonable, “…so big of a tizzy of this.”…

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 22, 2010 at 8:30 am
    • Permalink


    I’ll try again with a different example; the official language of Quebec.

    Originally, Quebec was English only. Then, as the French speakers grew more politically powerful, they demanded and got a bilingual province, with everything written in both English and French. Later still, the French speakers’ political power grew to majority status. Now Quebec is a French-only province.

    This is the idea of the “slippery slope,” where first something is permitted, but eventually becomes manditory.

    My point is that the Ground Zero Mosque, like the hijab in France, is the “permitted” beginning, with the Muslim’s oft stated goal of Sharia throughout France and the USA as the “manditory” end.

  3. Steve; geeknerd: That’s it, I now need put no further time into these cartoons for you have lain it all out superbly.

    Earth to wootabega: Are you getting all this down??

    • DiversityLaneFan
    • Posted August 22, 2010 at 3:16 pm
    • Permalink

    I don’t think wootabega can understand that just because something is legal doesn’t make it ethical. The Muslims are showing NO cultural sensitivity by building a mosque next to an Islamic terror site. They are just gung-ho to whine about the constitutional (legal) backing they have to do it.

    The little chapel is one of the most patronizing things I’ve ever heard on top of this story.

    When do the Muslims have to start being tolerant of others’ wishes not to see their place of worship next to one of their many acts of terrorism?

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 22, 2010 at 9:13 pm
    • Permalink

    I’m sorry Steve, but the strength of your argument (or lack thereof) is making it difficult for me to take you seriously.

    Tell me exactly what facts of our nation’s history that I am unaware of — particularly the facts that ignorance of would tune me in to your viewpoint. What I know of our country is that our Constitution states that Congress shall make no that prohibits the practice of one’s religion, nor shall it make a law respecting the establishment of any one religion. This demonstrates one of the basic principles that shows a separation of Church and State.

    You claim that I lack the basic instinct of “enemy identification”. I can only assume you say this because I don’t recognize Park51 as a threat to our country. I assume that you think that since I sympathize with a Muslim property, I too must want to subscribe to all aspects of Muslim beliefs and culture. In reality, I just respect one of our country’s founding beliefs that does not persecute people for their religious beliefs.

    You seem to associate the beliefs of an extremist sect of hateful, insane terrorists with the beliefs of people that subscribe to the second largest religion on the planet. I apologize to you if my thinking that that seems an illogical way of thinking seems evil. Consider a comparison I just made up: A person with blue eyes punches me in the nose. Therefore, all people I see with blue eyes wish to punch me in the nose. Or how about less of a gross generalization? I have a Christian person berate me for listening to a Judas Priest album, therefore all Christians hate all metal music and want to tell me about how I am being corrupted by Satan and blah-de-blah-de-blah.

    Now, obviously, not all Christians are anal-retentive douchebags. In fact, many of them are kind, good-hearted, and fun to be around! Then again, I also know other kind, good-hearted, and fun people that are Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, atheists… Now of course, I’m sure you’re thinking, “It’s foolish to think that all are peaceful based on a specific couple of you know”, and you’re right. Therefore, isn’t it also safe to assume that all people of a certain belief are not hateful, bitter, and homicidal?

    Words do mean things, but ideas don’t have consequences. Ideas are nothing but just thoughts floating around in your brain until you put them into action, and actions have consequences. I mean, I could have the idea of killing my neighbor’s massive collection of birds (since their constant noise keeps me up all night), but just thinking that has no real consequences. If I actually went there in the middle of the night and set fire to the back porch – the miniature sanctuary for said birds – that would have consequences. Or if I went to another neighbor and actually told them of my idea, that also would have consequences, much like how the mention of plans to build a Muslim community center had consequences. Tell me, what consequences have I enacted upon voicing my opinion on Park51?

    Of this planned 13-story building, only 1-2 floors are dedicated to prayer space, with other floors containing awfully secular attractions like a 500-seat auditorium, a basketball court, swimming pool, culinary school, childcare center, bookstore, fitness center… (According to the official website of Park51, there is even going to be a 9/11 memorial open to all!) The “mosque” portion of the building is only a fraction of the whole (I also found an unintentionally hilarious bit of irony in your phrasing of “God-damnable Mosque”, but I digress). I really don’t see how you could classify the non-mosque elements of the building to be mere ‘bells and whistles’.

    I’m getting mixed signals from your point on Muslims who would be praying at this location. You claim that only vile and hateful Muslims would be vile and/or hateful enough to even consider praying at the mosque in Park51, yet you say the 2-3 million other Muslims in America wouldn’t dare to (and FYI, recent reports put American Muslim population at around 5-7 million). I find your choice of words here a tad peculiar. You distinctly call the more sympathetic Muslims as “Americans of the Muslim faith”, while saying just plain “Muslims” would pray at Park51. What? Are you insinuating that American Muslims that pray at Park51 would not be ‘real Americans’? Are you saying only foreign Muslims would pray there? Are you saying that Muslim terrorists hellbent on the destruction of the USA would be the sole occupiers of Park51’s prayer space? Yes, I’m sure the terrorists are just waiting to sneak in to our country just to do a quick prayer at the new mosque near Ground Zero. They’re so eager to pray there, apparently, that they will wait months and months and months for it to be completed and ignore the 100+ other mosques throughout New York.

    Oh, and the leadership behind the building, Feisal Abdul Rauf. All I’ve seen from him is that he’s been an Imam at another mosque in New York City since 1983. He’s also written books and articles about how Islam can effectively integrate with the West. Of course, I must be a fool to believe that Islamo-thug propaganda is anything close to the truth!

    Please also inform me of the various double-standards that exist within Muslim society, a society that, coincidentally, exists within many other societies throughout the world. Geeknerd tried with his fictitious “slippery-slope” of hijab wearing, when in fact his example was the exact opposite of reality; women wearing hijabs were a slippery-slope of France passing a law prohibiting conspicuous religious symbols from being worn in public institutions like schools. What freedoms of our country are being threatened by this one Islamic building. (Also, geeknerd: It’s “mandatory”. Are you using a browser without a spellchecker? How barbaric!)

    Do you know exactly what a “straw man” argument is? I don’t think you do, if you consider my claim of the U.S. having a higher standard for religious freedoms to be one. You praise our country for its great freedoms and yet point to an example of a country with lesser freedoms than ours as an example to emulate? That is a rebuttal ripped straight from lines of teenager logic. “But Mo-o-o-m, David’s parents let HIM stay out ‘till midnight, why can’t I?!”

    I can only see your views stem from a belief that all Muslims are an enemy to America and the American way of life. That seems to be the only explanation I can draw since you seem to think that more limited freedom is the only way to preserve less limited freedom. Our enemy does not lie within the religion of Islam. Our enemy lies within extremists sects of hateful individuals that have their own specific set of beliefs based in realms of religion, politics, and society. How can you consider it logical to fully associate those that only bear a partial or even minimal resemblance to those despicable individuals that sought to harm our nation? Did you support the internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II as well? This is no way for our nation to react to our enemies. Knee-jerk reactionary tactics and fear-mongering will only harm us in ways our enemies wish they could.

    You know what? I’m done here, no more comments from me. I’m sure this will make me and many others happy here. I don’t find much personal worth in this since I know deep down I can’t really get many people to even comprehend what I’m trying to say and simply label me as whatever they wish, and then just label me as someone that can’t even comprehend what THEY’RE trying to say and that I label them as whatever I wish. This is a vicious cycle that is as vapid as it is pointless, and considering this the locale for this forum (hint: the internet), that’s saying a lot. So I’m done commenting here. Feel free to think of me however you please: naïve liberal, self-hating American, godless hippie, Muslim foot-kisser — I don’t care anymore.

    Zack: Keep on drawing; despite our opposing beliefs, I still think you’re a really talented drawer. I’ll keep an eye out for your Diversity Lane book. I can’t wait to see your other endeavors in visual art!

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 22, 2010 at 9:15 pm
    • Permalink

    (My last comment ever! I swear)


    You know, I agree. Something that is lawful doesn’t automatically equate it with being ethical. Let’s move this mosque to a more ethical location! That’s something every American can get behind!

    Oh… Well… Maybe we can petition the public schools to have a Muslim History Month? A Week? Maybe we’ll just have a Cat Stevens Day?

    • Steve
    • Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:15 am
    • Permalink

    “He can compress the most words into the smallest idea of any man I know.”

    – Abraham Lincoln

    • Steve
    • Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:17 am
    • Permalink

    …and one more for Mr. Wootabega:

    “There are three kinds of men.
    Those that learn by reading.
    Those that learn by observation.
    And the rest of them who have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.”
    –Will Rogers

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 23, 2010 at 7:11 am
    • Permalink


    My reference to the hijab effect in France: Berlinski, Claire, “Ban the Burqa,” “National Review,” August 16, 2010, pp. 38-40.

    It is an eye witness account of the effect of the hijab on all women in Muslim districts, which CAUSED the government of France to institute the ban.

    Everything bad the Left says about religion in general and Christianity in particular is currently practiced within Islam. If you favor women’s rights, you must oppose sharia, or else you are a hippocrit.

    Please, Zack, add a spell checker!

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 25, 2010 at 9:51 am
    • Permalink


    No, just do to Islam what the Left has been doing to Christianity ever since the Enlightenment.

    Oh, that’s right, if you say the same things about Islam that you say about Christianity, the Muslims demand that you be killed, or forcibly converted.

    • ikabod
    • Posted August 26, 2010 at 1:56 am
    • Permalink

    Ah the liberal warrior! Defender of civil liberties! Supporter of rights for everyone! Defender of Religious freedom…… Whoa! WTF? Liberals for decades have tried and in a lot of cases succeeded in removing or litigating state, local government and even private businesses with removing (Remember when walking into Sears and seeing Merry Christmas during the holidays?… but I digress) anything Christian related. This is to keep in line with the cherished “separation of church and state”. Yet a Mosque is to be built on a site that was not there 11 years ago. A lot of folks don’t want it built there. One would think that after so many years of fighting against religion, conservative and liberals would be on common ground… Not so, nope liberals draw the line on this one. Why is this Mosque so important to you so called “progressives”? A religion that is extremely intolerant of gays, sex before marriage, supports honor killings and treats woman like cattle. Go ahead neo-libs hate the Christians all you want for keeping women in the kitchen, trapped in a stepford wife prison of male dominance. Yet after supporting women finally breaking free of such shackles Islam comes along, throws a Burka over them, removes all freedoms and you guys stand up and cheer their religious liberty? Think about who and what kind of religion your supporting. Look liberal, little secret…… Your not going to gain favor with radical or so called “moderate” Islam if you support the construction of the Mosque near ground zero. They will still hate you. The Arab on the street will indeed see this Mosque as a middle finger pointed directly at the victims. Just like the celebrations they had when word came that the great satins financial centers where destroyed and thousands of innocence where killed (or little Eichmanns, for you Ward Churchill-ettes). Ditch the racist or “islamophobia” BS. This has nothing to do with racism or fear of Islam, and you know it! Certainly not about destroying Islam (destroying Christians? Well they have it coming don’t they.). This is a reflection of who you guys really are. Appeasers the lot of ya, hoping that the alligator eats you last.

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 26, 2010 at 8:58 am
    • Permalink

    Yo, ikabod. I find it quite hilarious that you say your opposition to this Muslim construction has nothing to do with hatred/fear of Islam, and then go on to compare Muslims to large, carnivorous reptiles. Stay classy.

    • ikabod
    • Posted August 26, 2010 at 1:24 pm
    • Permalink

    First of all that was in reference to Winston Churchill quote regarding Chamberlins appeasement of adolf hitler. “Appeasement reflects the hope that the crocodile will eat you last.” This falls directly into my theory of neo-libs trying to gain favor with a very un-peaceful and violent religion. Second they do indeed have a right to build that Mosque right there. Hell, they could even build it at ground zero itself! Call it Islamic “healing” center. Would not make it right wootbega. Yet neo-libs continue with this racism/islamophobia crap when the real issue remains.
    Critical of Christains, cool.
    Critical of Islam, not cool. Cuz ya might just get yourself killed.

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 26, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    • Permalink

    I know the reference, but in the same way Chamberlin compared Hitler to a large, carnivorous reptile, it seemed as though you did the same for Muslims. And yes, of course they must be trying to appease those big bad Muslims; they couldn’t possibly be trying to uphold one of America’s founding rights, no sir.

    But, I understand your argument. Even though freedom of religion is a right in America, American citizens must use their sense of ethics and not exploit these given rights at the expense of others. I fully agree with this. If this was only a case of issues with sensitivity, I’d be fine. But it’s not.

    There is a clear case of fear and hatred of Islam. I continually hear opposition to the mosque spouting ridiculous nonsense like, “It’s being funded by a guy who knew a guy who’s cousin’s son once carpooled with a guy who’s father-in-law was a TERRORIST!!” and “Terrorists will hold parties in the mosque and celebrate their victory towards conquering our country!!”

    There is so much fear and hatred of Muslims as you see so much projection of the beliefs and actions of extremist sects onto people that…just want to have a place to pray.

    I’m not saying the ethical issue of building so close to a place of tragedy doesn’t exist I’m just saying it’s not the ONLY factor, because you still have some people brushing a generalizing view over all Muslims. You have people declaring Muslims as our enemy in a time of war. What? Declaring war on Islam is like declaring war on Christianity, or Judaism, or any religion! It’s a criteria for an enemy that doesn’t gel with conventional warfare, yet we still have these people comparing them to the Axis powers of World War II! It’s absurd!

    I acknowledge and whole-heartedly respect the ethical issues with the insensitiveness presented with a Muslim construct built near a location devastated by Islamic extremists. But you should wonder if that remains the only issue when you have people saying that the Muslims that would pray at this potential mosque are “creepy, shameless, scum-bag goons”. You certainly should wonder if a fear and hatred of Islam does exist when you have people in Tennessee — a good 900+ miles away from New York — are protesting the construction of a new mosque in one of their cities.

    The ethical exercising of freedom of religion is the real issue. I just wish it were the only issue.

    • Coffeee
    • Posted August 28, 2010 at 11:05 am
    • Permalink

    Wootabega, maybe you can explain this.

    Why does it NEED to be at that location specifically? The New York State Governor has offered free, untaxed state land to the Imam for the mosque/community center. So why not move? Yeah, they won’t get to build there, but this is like refusing to leave a McDonald’s until you get a sirloin steak and having the manager offer to take you to a steakhouse and buy you your steak. It makes no logical sense why NOT to jump on the offer.

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 28, 2010 at 2:52 pm
    • Permalink

    I never said it NEEDS to be at the planned location. I simply say that there is no law that prohibits them from using that location for their planned center. If there’s free, untaxed land at a different locale, that’s cool! It’s still solely the decision of the project leader’s to make, and if he has the resources to occupy the land at the first chosen location, shouldn’t he be able to build there?

    That’s less of an issue of ethics as it is an issue of personal responsibility to start and maintain the planned Park51. So, shouldn’t that remain Rauf’s personal responsibility?

    Also: Did you know an Islamic location of worship already exists within FOUR BLOCKS of the former site of the World Trade Center? It’s true! Been there for nearly 30 years.

    • Rafe
    • Posted August 28, 2010 at 7:08 pm
    • Permalink

    Elron — please contact – regarding a technical issue with your posting

    Thank you-
    Rafe C.

    • ikabod
    • Posted August 29, 2010 at 11:12 pm
    • Permalink

    Honestly Wootabega, they can build that mosque where ever they damn well please. The other 4 mosques have been there for how long? I dont remember them being constructed soon after the attacks…. Combined with the fact that the imam has a problem with personal freedoms for individuals as well. Had this been a imam that had truely wanted to “build bridges” perhaps an out right condemnation of terrorism would have been a first step. Perhaps, his support for Hamas was an issue with people. Yet the fact remains. Liberals continue to support a RELIGIOUS group. Yet I cannot see this support for Christian groups, unless its racial motivated. I can remember vividly the 80’s with thousands of anti-nuclear demonstrations throughout Europe, the UK and even the US. Screaming for the UNITED STATES to reduce and eliminate nuclear ARMS. I only saw 1 example of anti SOVIET demonstrations. the point I’m making here is the blatant refusal of liberals to spread their displeasure of injustice equally. Both Christianity and Islam has their problems. Both are indeed good religions both have their moderates and zealots. Both the US and the USSR at the time had blood on their hands. Yet the focus is how bad Christians are or how awful the US is. How hard is it for you guys to look the other way with this religion? Jeesh, honor killings right here in the US. anti-homosexual to the extreme. This is the way of this so-called religion of peace. How do you get around that?

    • Steve
    • Posted August 30, 2010 at 6:34 am
    • Permalink

    Aww, come on! What is extreme about (fundamentalist) Islam?
    They just hang anyone who they believe, or slightly suspect, of being homosexual !?!

    A short process through one of their ‘kangaroo courts’, often, not even that, and some poor young kid, perhaps temporarily confused in his own identity, is getting his neck stretched, under the boom of a light-duty crane truck.

    Where is the harm in that?

    I have an idea! — how about we get a few thousand Islamic-radicals, with all their noose-equipped crane trucks, and place them in a gauntlet at the end of a San Francisco “Gay Pride” march ???

    Wow! I would just love to watch the ‘progressive culture of tolerance’ meet this ‘religion of peace’ -!!… and how the lame-stream leftist media [ABC-CBS-MSNBC-CNN-Time…] would cover the colorful results of that ‘demolition derby’ !

    Perhaps NY Mayor Bloomberg and Obama could offer their insightful advise for how these two charming “cultures” might co-exist?
    And no doubt, both would find a way to blame Palin, Beck, and Limbaugh for the butcher bill.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted August 30, 2010 at 11:26 am
    • Permalink


    Small point of fact; they don’t hang homosexuals, they stone them to death. Not enough suitable trees in Arabia, you know.

    They also stone to death adulterers; such as a girl who says she was raped, but the man says it was concentual. In a Sharia court, a Muslim woman’s testamony is only worth half that of a man’s.

    Compare that with the Branch Davidians, or polygamous Mormon sects.

    • Steve
    • Posted August 30, 2010 at 1:30 pm
    • Permalink

    Honestly – I have no way of knowing how often one technique of murdering citizens is used, as to another.

    I do have a copy of a BBC article where two young men, suspected of being homosexual, are hung with two truck cranes. Sequential pictures were included.

    Actually, all these victims are strangled to death. In the West, hanging typically uses the quick drop & breaking of the neck, and a quick death. In Iran, the victims are lifted up by neck under the truck crane boom… strangling these people to death.
    The little of it I have seen in pictures (and similarly described in articles) stoning requires digging shallow holes, to bury the victim about chest-deep. I suspect this limits the locations where it happens.

    Whereas, these handy-dandy truck cranes can travel anywhere, to very convenient specific locations. Hoisting some victim up by the neck likely takes less time, too.
    Further, someone hanging 15+ feet up in the air, makes for a distant visible spectacle, that may serve their hideous purposes. Stoning, short of doing it in a filled stadium, does not offer this ‘viewership’.
    I suspect the goons in Iran are controlling media exposure too. They will permit some international exposure to these truck crane hangings… I suspect almost no media exposure to stonings..

    Either way, the complete non-existence of ‘Christian Justice’ councils, condemning homosexuals or adulterers to death, is purposely ignored by the sleazy lame-stream media, who are also, very “gay” friendly too. Go figure?

    • ikabod
    • Posted August 30, 2010 at 6:21 pm
    • Permalink

    Lets take a look at the term “Religion of Peace”. This was a term coined by some Dr. Sayyid Qutb in his book (which escapes me by the way) Did indeed pronounce that Islam is the religion of peace! However we must read the fine print….. Peace will be achieved once Islam has engulfed the whole of the earth. Slick huh? Everyone is Muslim, then we will know peace! Or, just pay a tax to keep from them peaceful jihadist from removing your head. I don’t know, perhaps “progressive” are cool with the tax. Yet Is that really a life living as second class citizens? living on your knees? Prove me wrong and let me know of where the EEEEEEEVIL Jews or EEEEEEEVIL Christians are pulling the same crap. Again I am just amazed at the level of ignorance on the part of the left the well known anti-human rights shenanigans of Islam. Religion of Peace? I would hope that the majority of them are truly peaceful. Yet, the ones making the most noise are the ones doing the most killing regardless is they are a minority of Muslim. Furthermore, make no mistake about it. Islam is not just a religion, its also laws (sharia) and a form of government wrapped up in a nice little bow…. Until one has to live under such a “peaceful” theocracy.

    • wootabega
    • Posted August 31, 2010 at 6:39 am
    • Permalink

    You’re right ikabod. It’s about time someone finally stood up for the underdog here: the Christians of America! For too long they have been oppressed by evil liberals. Starting today, I will spend every waking moment fighting for this major minority. We Shall Overcome!

    • Booger
    • Posted September 1, 2010 at 12:21 pm
    • Permalink

    Wootabega, it may well be legal to build this abomination. I won’t stop them.

    However, I won’t be surprised if someone pushes a cart offering samples of the best Bar-B-Que in Manhattan right in front of the place. I won’t be surprised if someone proselytizes for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism in front of the place. I won’t be surprised if people hold signs and vigils offering help for apostates to Islam.

    That’s all perfectly legal too. It’s called freedom of speech. And when the people of this institute scream and holler about all this, what will you say then?

    Legal does not equate to Ethical. We are asking the self styled representatives of a major religion to do something Ethical. Apparently, they’re having none of it.

    That pretty much says it all, doesn’t it?

  4. And stop using that lame leftist straw man to try to justify it. No one has told the Muslims that they can’t build a mosque. Those of us who oppose are saying “don’t do it THERE.” There are zoning ordinances across the nation that dictate where various businesses and other organizations can build. This is no different. There has already been discussion in NY about allowing this bunch to put the mosque somewhere else. But now that Obama has (again) stuck his nose in where it doesn’t belong, things are escalating out of control.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 3, 2010 at 9:35 pm
    • Permalink

    I just find it odd that all of a sudden…. Religious freedom has somehow become “owned” by progressives. Rife with Atheists….. I find this whole matter disingenuous on there part.

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 4, 2010 at 5:56 am
    • Permalink

    “But now that Obama has (again) stuck his nose in where it doesn’t belong, things are escalating out of control.”

    OK, now what the hell has Obama even done for this? Last I heard, Obama simply made two (2) dictated comments about the mosque. One was supporting the legal right for the mosque to be there, and the other was a vague comment about the “wisdom” to put a mosque in that location. He has had no other part in the mosque besides from that.

    The mosque is a construction of private interests and there are no zoning laws that prevent it from being built there.

    I’ve said that I understand and respect the ethical issues people have with the mosque in regards to sensitivity to 9/11 victims and their families/friends. It’s just something I don’t agree with. There were Muslims that were killed in the terrorists attacks, too. The members of an extremist terrorist group are not representative of a religion encompassing over a billion people.

    And clearly the sensitivity is not the only issue at stake here. If it were, we wouldn’t have people even on this blog saying, “The Muslims are exploiting our own rights against us!”

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2010 at 7:24 pm
    • Permalink

    Wootabega, you have got to admit. That clearly this sort of support for a religion is somewhat alien to liberals. Especially a religion that is so far out of phase of liberal thinking and human rights. Sure go after the so-called Christian greed, eliminate the greeting “Merry Christmas”, remove any and all references to god at a public or government land. There is a double standard with Islam. We now have “Islamophobia”, or even racism accusations for being critical of the religion. I don’t remember hearing about Christianophobia…

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 5, 2010 at 6:31 am
    • Permalink

    “I don’t remember hearing about Christianophobia…”

    Mostly “Christianophobia” is within Europe. The reason you don’t hear about it in the U.S. is because three-quarters of our population identify themselves as Christian.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 6, 2010 at 2:11 am
    • Permalink

    Good point. However one problem with this. Christians are not ones to strike back on a local level. Are you saying then that criticism of both religions is level? Equal amounts of venom is shot at both religions? I don’t think so.

    Interestingly my question regarding the lefts out-right refusal to criticize Islam was answered long ago. This statement from Penn Jillette (I realize he does not speak for all progressives…. since he is predominantly libertarian politically).

    The response that goes to the real heart of the reasoning is: “And we haven’t tackled Islam because we have families.”

    He goes on to praise Christians for letting their brutality towards them, is by in large ignored. Bottom line? Criticize Christians is safe, and will get a good laugh. Criticize Islam…. You may get yourself killed. I lost a lot of respect for the guys because of that. I understand their concern for safety and their lives. Yet one day, I don’t want demonstrations through the streets of America with signs reading “Better Islam than dead!”

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 6, 2010 at 9:01 am
    • Permalink

    Tell a Christian his religion is false and he’ll say, “Sorry you feel that way. I’ll pray that you change your mind.”

    Tell a Jew his religion is false and he’ll say, “Here we go again! Just remember, throughout 5,000 years of our history, every empire that tried to wipe us out has been itself wiped out, and not by us. And whenever we have been defeated, there has always been a remnant. SOMEBODY has to be looking out for us.”

    Tell a Hindu his religion is false and he’ll say, “Sorry you feel that way. You may think differently in your next incarnation.”

    Tell a Buddhist his religion is false and he’ll say, “Truth, falsehood, are just two sides to the same counterfit coin.”

    Tell the believer of every other religion his religion is false, and he’ll react in a similar way.

    BUT, tell a Muslim his religion is false, and many of his co-religionists will demand that you either be KILLED, or forcibly converted.

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 6, 2010 at 9:34 pm
    • Permalink

    That’s right! Muslims are the only people who have been so devoted to their faith that they support violence in the face of any opposition to such. Yep. Just Muslims. Only Muslims.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 8, 2010 at 2:33 am
    • Permalink

    Your missing the double standard wootabega. Or rather your blind to it. I am no more in support of them building that Mosque than the Florida church burning the Koran. Both have the “Right” to do such things. Yet, neither is correct. Remember, Muslims are if anything, tolerant to other religions. Especially Christians!:

    Yep! Religion of Peace! And How!

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 8, 2010 at 7:30 am
    • Permalink


    NOW, in the 21st Century it’s only Muslims who support violence for their religion. Most of the other religions gave up that stuff back in the 17th Century.

    In Muslim lands TODAY, Bibles are routinely confiscated and destroyed, yet no Christians threaten violence against Muslims because of it.

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 8, 2010 at 12:27 pm
    • Permalink

    “NOW, in the 21st Century it’s only Muslims who support violence for their religion. Most of the other religions gave up that stuff back in the 17th Century.”

    I was going to offer a proper response, but I’ll just let this statement speak for itself.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 16, 2010 at 3:51 pm
    • Permalink

    Found on

    “A cartoonist has disappeared from public view because she’s on an Islamic cleric’s hitlist for declaring “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” last spring, according to a newspaper that ran her drawings. Seattle Weekly Editor in Chief Mark D. Fefer posted an article Wednesday saying Molly Norris is “moving, changing her name and essentially wiping away her identity” on the advice of the FBI.”

    Has anyone who recently badmouthed Christianity in various New Athiest books been threatened to the point of changing his or her identity?

    Blaspheme Christianity, and get rich.
    Blaspheme Islam, and run for your life.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 18, 2010 at 12:27 pm
    • Permalink

    Her life maybe in danger from Islamic extremist? I’M SHOCKED!

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 19, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    • Permalink


    When was the last time the Christians burned somebody at the stake for blasphemy? About 300 years ago.

    When was the last time the Muslims stoned somebody to death for blasphemy? TODAY!

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 20, 2010 at 8:18 am
    • Permalink

    There are Muslims in America stoning people to death? Why wasn’t I told? I’ve had my own little stone quarry just sitting in my backyard gathering dust like a pathetic infidel.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 20, 2010 at 11:55 am
    • Permalink

    So, because Muslims in America don’t–as yet–stone blasphemers, we should not care that they do it every day in countries that they control.

    By the same logic, we should have done nothing about appartite in South Africa because white people in America had put a stop to Jim Crow.

    I’m still waiting for you to refute that Islam (where it has complete control) retains the violent practices that all other religions had abandonded years–centuries–ago.

    • Steve
    • Posted September 20, 2010 at 2:54 pm
    • Permalink

    To quote a well respected American;
    “I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.”
    — William F. Buckley, Jr.

    Islamic Shariah courts already have been established in Great Britain. The obvious and very clear Islamic agenda has been to aggressively pursue the goal to have their Islamic Shariah courts in ALL Western democracies.

    By definition, those brutal stonings and other 12th century Shariah barbarisms, happening every day, (although outside the US now) are an existential threat to peoples in the free world.
    What IS happening in the US now are numerous, brutal “honor killings”… within Muslim communities.

    Is all that news to you-?

    If so, your convenient disconnection with current events begs the question of why you even come to this political blog site… that you are likely among those who voice your strong opinions about these issues – yet if given a world map, with all country names removed, likely could not accurately locate Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan.

    If you are aware of the Islamic Shariah agenda, the lack of integrity & honesty of your arguments is typical of the rest of the liberal culture you seem to well represent – that is, to support your usual ‘Blame America first’ views, an honest discussion is not possible.

  5. Keep on appeasin’!

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 20, 2010 at 7:58 pm
    • Permalink

    “So, because Muslims in America don’t–as yet–stone blasphemers, we should not care that they do it every day in countries that they control.”

    I didn’t say that. Then again, we really aren’t doing anything about that now, are we? Is that what we — as a ‘Christian nation’ — sent our armed forces over to the Middle East for? To eliminate these barbaric, dehumanizing acts committed by third-world zealots? News to me.

    Also, it’s “Apartheid”. You’d think someone who tags their self as ‘geeknerd’ would at least have a spell check notification in their web browser.

    “Is all that news to you-?”

    No, but I don’t associate the acts of select people with the entire population of a religion. It would be like condemning all Christians as terrorists because of the Ku Klux Klan. Both connections are just nonsense.

    I know plenty of people that are decent, honest, pleasant, America-loving people that are Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, etc… So let’s say I assume because of my friends that are Muslim, that all Muslims everywhere are nice, non-violent people… Now that’s obviously also nonsense, as there are also very evil, violent Muslim people out there. Casting broad strokes like this just seems ridiculous.

    I’m not for instituting Sharia law. It’s in direct opposition to the freedoms that America stands for. I think that Muslims should have every right to practice their religion in America, so long as it does not interfere with the law of the land — the same standard we hold towards people of any other religion. Our system of justice and government cannot establish itself as an institution of any one religion,

    I do not want the United States to become converted to Sharia law. I just think that if a person wants to build a place to worship, without interfering with anyone, they should be able to.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 21, 2010 at 7:22 am
    • Permalink


    Would you give that same right to a religion that preaches the supremacy of one race over all others? To one that preaches the complete subjugation and [chattel]-hood of all women?

    Oh, that’s right. You already did.

    By the [way], I keep asking Zack two ad a spell checker [here], but so far he hasn’t added [one].

    Moderators Note: We appreciate the administrative feedback of all commenter’s, and will look further into this however, a spell checker does not appear available through WordPress now. We will put this idea on our growing ‘to look into’ list of improvements for Diversity Lane.
    Until then, you might consider an idea I have learned than many bloggers do – they compose their comment using their word processor, then copy-paste it to the Diversity Lane comment box.

    -Thank you,

    • Steve
    • Posted September 22, 2010 at 12:02 am
    • Permalink

    In case you are – like most of the secular “progressive” culture, genuinely unfamiliar with the basic tenants of Christianity, when something hideously awful (like the account below) happens, ALL Christian doctrine (over ALL denominations) calls for prayer to forgive one’s offenders, and prayer for seeking forgiveness if feelings of wanting to get revenge happen.
    Revenge is absolutely forbidden in Judeo-Christian doctrine.

    Now – if these victims were Muslim and the perpetrators were Christians,… ALL over the world, some segments of the Islamic culture would be rioting, causing bloodshed by the countless thousands… for who knows how long. They would be drooling for revenge.

    This 12th century goonish riotous culture has no concept of personal forgiveness – and YES, I claim there is a superiority in our Western Judeo-Christian culture due in part, to this extreme and important difference-!!

    >> Read article Below:

    Pakistan: Muslims Burn Christian Man as Policeman Rapes His Wife
    by Ahmar Mustikhan | March 23, 2010 at 12:18 pm

    Washington, D.C. (March 23, 2010)– Travesty of justice does not fit the description of the events. This is simple barbarism.

    International Christian Concern (ICC) has learned that a Christian man, Arshed Masih, died yesterday after Muslims burned him alive for refusing to recant his faith. Additionally, a Muslim policeman raped Masih’s wife.

    Masih and his wife, Martha, worked and lived at the house of Sheik Mohammad Sultan, a powerful Muslim businessman in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, since 2005.
    Pakistan’s most powerful man, army chef General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani is from the Rawalpindi area and is visiting the U.S. capitol.

    In January, Muslim religious leaders and Sheik Sultan asked Masih and his family to convert to Islam. Masih and his family refused to convert and informed Sheik Sultan that they were going to quit working for him. The Sheik became furious and warned Masih that he would kill him if he quit. Masih told his family and friends about the entire incident. Christian leaders tried to persuade the Sheik to let Masih and his family leave his house.

    On March 14, Sheik Sultan`s house was robbed. He filed a case of theft of 500,000 Rupees ($ 5,952) against Martha. After taking them for questioning, the police assaulted Masih and raped Martha. Two days later, Sheik Sultan told the couple that he would ask the police to release them if they converted to Islam. The couple refused to recant their faith.
    On March 19, Masih was set on fire in front of the police station. At the time, three Muslim religious leaders and three policemen were present at the scene. The perpetrators have not been identified.

    Masih was taken to the Holy Family Hospital where he received treatment for three days before finally dying today.
    Masih’s children Mary, 12, Nasir, 10, and Neha, 7, are deeply traumatized after witnessing acts of brutality against their family at the hands of Muslims.
    ICC’s Regional Manager for South Asia, Jonathan Racho, said “We are outraged and deeply saddened by the murder of Masih and the rape of Martha by the police. As this case clearly indicates, Pakistani Christians are treated as less than animals by the Muslims. We urge the president of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zadari, and other high level government officials to bring the perpetrators of the attacks to justice.”

    Dr. Nazir S Bhatti, president of Pakistan Christian Congress, condemned the killing of Masih and rape of his wife.“ Rape of Martha Bibi before her children by Muslim police officials and burning of her husband took place just a few miles from building of the Supreme Court of Pakistan where Muslim judges sitting on benches of justice have no sympathy with Christian victims. Perhaps in the eyes of these judges rape of an “infidel woman” is not a crime.”
    Please call the Pakistani Embassy in your country and demand of the officials of Pakistan to thoroughly investigate the heinous crime committed against Masih and Martha and bring all the perpetrators to justice.

    Dr. Nazir S Bhatti, president of Pakistan Christian Congress, condemned the killing of Masih and rape of his wife.“ Rape of Martha Bibi before her children by Muslim police officials and burning of her husband took place just a few miles from building of the Supreme Court of Pakistan where Muslim judges’ sitting on benches of justice have no sympathy with Christian victims. Perhaps in the eyes of these judges rape of an “infidel woman” is not a crime.”
    Please call the Pakistani Embassy in your country and demand of the officials of Pakistan to thoroughly investigate the heinous crime committed against Masih and Martha and bring all the perpetrators to justice.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 22, 2010 at 2:33 am
    • Permalink

    “I do not want the United States to become converted to Sharia law. I just think that if a person wants to build a place to worship, without interfering with anyone, they should be able to.” Wootabega- I’m going to go out on a limb here and take your word for it. You would NOT like Sharia Law to take hold here in the US. Even if its only in certain areas of Detroit, or as I like to call it Detroitistan…. (only a joke people). I guess my concern with progressives is the willingness to bend over backwards to accommodate the Muslim people. My fear is that at some point with all the good progressive intentions one day a town, somewhere, anywhere in the US wakes up to a new law that requires all women to wear a Burka. What then? What would a progressive do? Make sure the wife is hidden from view with the Islamic robe since they want to respect the culture? Or stand up and finally make a stand? Will a US town one day become governed by a small group of fanatical muslim ruling class? Who knows. To beat you to the punch, I would not like a town being ruled by an oppressive fanatical Christian group. We both know the result of such religious shenanigans. The mighty hand of the ACLU would not stand for such! Yet I do not see the ACLU or progressives for that matter raising a finger to protest a sharia law governing body, not even here in the US. The only advice I would expect from such liberal lions of human rights would be: “Dont live there.” The difference here is simple. Christians will raise a stink and complain…… Muslims? Your only option is the witness protection program…..

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 22, 2010 at 1:27 pm
    • Permalink

    Why is it that the very same people who applauded the raid on the Branch Davidian compound defend the building of the ground zero mosque? Why is it that the people who use Mormon polygamist sects as proof of the evils of Christianity, refuse to attack Islam FOR THE VERY SAME CRIMES?

    • wootabega
    • Posted September 25, 2010 at 1:47 pm
    • Permalink

    “Revenge is absolutely forbidden in Judeo-Christian doctrine.”

    Could have fooled me.

    • Steve
    • Posted September 25, 2010 at 6:11 pm
    • Permalink

    We know that,… there are many serious issues where you have been easily “…fooled” into espousing many absurd and ill-informed opinions.
    You likely have never learned the Judeo-Christian based roots of the American culture – you perhaps consider the Oklahoma bombing attack, committed by Tim McVeigh an example of “…Christian terrorism”… NO, not even close to the truth! McVeigh strongly expressed his atheist views, he was not afraid to die, because he felt he was going into oblivion… there was not a Christian bone, or blood cell in his body.
    Any of those abortion clinic attacks… or the abortionist doctor who was given a lead suppository through his brain pan, by a “Christian”?
    Every Christian church strongly denounced that… you cannot find one denomination or established parish who ever, ever supported it.

    You and your secular-leftist culture cannot find any modern-day Christian-based terrorist groups or acts. Any rare ‘lone wolf’ person, acting alone, always condemned by Christians, carries no weight in a reasoned discussion… none at all.

    What is sad is that, the culture you seem to be from, considers folks like Jerry Falwell and Sarah Palin, to be a greater threat to your liberty and this country’s future, than the hideous culture and agenda of people like Bill & Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama & his twisted, black-liberation theology-Marxist background.

    If you can ever back away from your anti-Christian based feelings & politics, you ought to consider studying Christianity, seriously studying it… as a purely academic subject… I promise there will be some serious & rewarding surprises in store for you-!

    • geeknerd
    • Posted September 26, 2010 at 8:26 am
    • Permalink

    “Vengence is Mine,” says the Lord, “I shall avenge!”

    Wootabega, apply to Islam the very same high standards you apply to Christianity.

    I know! Let’s translate the new Atheist books like “The God Delusion” and “God is Not Great” into Arabic and publish them in the Middle East. Once the Muslims start issuing death threats to atheist liberals, may THEN they’ll oppose things like Cordoba House.

    • Steve
    • Posted September 26, 2010 at 2:13 pm
    • Permalink

    I am getting THIS book-!!… Wootabega – he addresses the issue of Islamic influence in America, & I hope you read it too-!

    10 Questions with “DUPES” author Paul Kengor
    By Jamie Weinstein – The Daily Caller 9:12 AM 09/26/2010

    Paul Kengor is the author of the new book, “DUPES: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.” The political science professor and executive director of the Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College has previously authored such books as “God and Ronald Reagan” and “The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism.”

    Kengor recently answered 10 questions about his new book for The Daily Caller:

    1. Why did you write the book?

    I know people will think I wrote it to be polemical or sensational, but the fact is that I would have never had this idea if I hadn’t been regularly reading Soviet archives for previous projects, and especially the Soviet Comintern Archives on CPUSA— that is, Communist Party USA. There are hundreds of reels of microfiche from this archive just sitting on shelves at the Library of Congress. Our esteemed “scholars” in the academic left are ignoring them. Once I took a close look, I quickly understood why: This material is shocking, fully vindicating the worst fears and claims of anti-communists throughout the 20th century. It shows not only that American communists were secretly serving the Soviet Union, but that they considered themselves loyal Soviet patriots. They were absolutely, unequivocally dedicated to the goal of worldwide communism, headquartered in Moscow, with the United States itself becoming a communist state. I’m not exaggerating at all.

    Read more:

    • ikabod
    • Posted October 6, 2010 at 3:14 pm
    • Permalink

    I can remember vividly the anti nuke demonstrations throughout Europe and the United States during the 80’s. Rarely if ever where their any anti soviet signs of any kind. Most of the protest where for the US to unilaterally disarm the US. Later on during the 90’s I spoke to these former anti-nuke demonstrators. With the Soviet union recently dissolved, there was ample admittance from former KGB officials that these anti nuke groups where funded by the soviets. Their way of blowing off the direct linkage to communist funding was to say they met with their Soviet so-called “peaceful counterparts” that wanted only peace between the US and the Soviet Union. It was a sham. These former demonstrators did not want to think of themselves as dupes or useful idiots. Yet here we are AGAIN, with Muslim extremist pulling the same crap (right out of the communist playbook). Scream racism, bigotry, imperialism and even islamaphobia to silence the concerns of Americans that know better. When it comes to US security and safety, neo-libs just cannot come to grips with the concept that maybe conservatives are right. To me this appears like the enemy of my enemy is my friend. “Hey, you guys hate Americans too? We are with on that! We libs however will just overlook your treatment of gay folks and women.”

    • Steve
    • Posted October 7, 2010 at 4:52 pm
    • Permalink

    These are the “peaceful” Muslims in France…
    They, by the thousands, are openly breaking the laws in France…
    They are openly violating the rights of local residents and store merchants…
    The French government has not the balls to do anything about it.
    They are “ in your face “, and defiant.

    And they will begin doing this HERE – in the USA, if you people like you Wootabega, get your way~

    • Steve
    • Posted October 8, 2010 at 1:10 am
    • Permalink

    Yep – I recall vividly those ‘blame America first’ idiots that spouted their moral equivalencies between what the (then) Soviet Union was doing, and US defense policies.
    Even more grotesque, were the number of Catholic clergy who joined in publically condenming the military build-ups under Pres. Reagan.
    Recall – it was the Vatican, who was literally surrounded by & had their balls in the bear trap of the German Gestapo in WWII (?)
    …And, it was the US who pulled their sweet Sistine Chapel-ed ass out of that mess?
    Sorry – I am not Catholic-bashing… however, the gross ingratitude & dissonance, given the recent history is truly hideous.

    In my uneventful duties as a junior Army officer in the mid-80’s, I had the opportunity to see some classified intel briefs that described an overview of the Soviet military assets behind the iron curtain.
    There are very distinct differences between military defensive postures (to resist & repel an invasion), as opposed to an offensive posture – where you need more and much entirely different equipment to seize and hold new territory.
    Short story – the Soviets had a completely offensive posture, designed in it quantities and equipment make-up to invade deeply into Western Europe and hold onto it.
    No if’s, but’s or maybe’s about it… Gen Patton was dead-on right, those red bastards had more territorial conquest in mind.
    Further, when I ‘came back to the world’ in ’88, I could not say anything about what I had studied, to anyone… so, listening to the bed-wetting peace-niks was all the more aggravating.

    So today, we have & face an aggressive Islamic imperialism… although very different from the former Soviet threat, these clowns (see video) aim to take us over… it is plain as that.

    The ground zero mosque it just a very minor step in that direction.

    • wootabega
    • Posted October 9, 2010 at 9:46 am
    • Permalink

    “I know! Let’s translate the new Atheist books like “The God Delusion” and “God is Not Great” into Arabic and publish them in the Middle East. Once the Muslims start issuing death threats to atheist liberals, may THEN they’ll oppose things like Cordoba House.”

    Atheist liberals are better off dead, anyway. I see nothing wrong with this. Go Muslims!

  6. Wow, I like your blog !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: