PDA

View Full Version : Should New York have cleared the way for a mosque to be built near the World Trade Ce


Nick Fury
08-04-2010, 02:06 AM
http://msnbc.polls.newsvine.com/_question/2010/08/03/4806803-should-new-york-have-cleared-the-way-for-a-mosque-to-be-built-near-the-world-trade-center-site?threadId=1033839&pc=25&sp=125#short%20comment

food for thought
08-04-2010, 02:11 AM
yes why not?

its a fucking place of worship.

i was watching the god Cornel West on real time with bill maher and he said something like " if they can have strip clubs and porn shops right around the block(apparently they really do) then they should be permitted to have a mosque there"

fucking scary ass racist ass people i cant stand teh shit

EAGLE EYE
08-04-2010, 02:25 AM
Yea I'm pretty sure it's allowed and in our First Amendment of the Constitution


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Religion_in_the_United_States

Edgar Erebus
08-04-2010, 05:48 AM
Well, to be honest, it does seem pretty tasteless to me.

cutn' heads
08-04-2010, 07:02 AM
it's an old burlington coat factory building. they have great prices. i say go for it...

Sense-A
08-04-2010, 11:45 AM
I do not believe there is anything illegal about it at all.

But where is the money and funding for this mosque coming from? For all we know the funding is coming from Osama bin Laden or the same Saudi bastards who orchestrated the whole thing 10 years ago.

Muslims are known for building monuments at their locations of conquest. This is not going to be your ordinary mosque. It is a $10M+ extravagant mosque being planned. It'll have all the bells and whistles.

And just to smack you in the face some more, they planned on opening the Mosque on September 11, 2011, the 10th anniversary. But why?

And 10 years later, ground zero is still a pile of rubble? Why? Bush and Obama take turns robbing the treasury for $1 trillion plus, but no one can come up with funding for a monument at ground zero? The only thing we'll have to remember 9-11 by is a mosque down the street?

I wish someone would just go in and outbid the Muslims and buy the damned burlington store and sit on it. I have nothing against Muslims or mosques, but can't you be respectful enough to know that all the hijackers on 9-11 were muslims (radical) and have the decency to build your mosque a little bit farther away from ground zero? Why does it have to be rock throwing distance from the greatest attack on American soil in this great country's 200+ year history?

It is nearly the equivalent of me going to Mecca with suitcases full of cash and building a huge Christian Church right next to where all you guys walk around that big black box or meteorite whatever it is. I'm quite sure the Mecca authorities would disallow it. But in America we'll let Japanese people build statues where they killed our soldiers in Pearl Harbor because we are self-loathing pieces of shit who piss on the graves of our own soldiers.

I'm not too worked up about this either way. As Slim T mentioned, it is quite tasteless to say the least. But there is a lot of tastelessness going around these days.

food for thought
08-04-2010, 01:05 PM
i clicked the link just now (didnt click it last night) and saw it was a poll. its funny to see how blatantly racist these people are now towards muslims and they dont even give a fuck

the word is the hijackers were all muslims and now all muslims in america, who some say the number is more than 2 million (american muslims), are doomed to get discriminated against automatically. how american and christ like.




But where is the money and funding for this mosque coming from? For all we know the funding is coming from Osama bin Laden or the same Saudi bastards who orchestrated the whole thing 10 years ago.

it could be but i highly doubt it. like i said there more than 2 million american muslims (shock!!) so maybe like half a dozen of them got together to build it. i think that is more plausible

And just to smack you in the face some more, they planned on opening the Mosque on September 11, 2011, the 10th anniversary. But why?

that sounds ridiculous but i doubt it is true. what if they opened it with fireworks. and jihad music. and dance in the street while burning american flags. fucking sand niggers daaam.


christians were just as responsible for what happened on 9/11, if not more. but most dumb ass americans are too stupid to even know or care.

thats just my opinion.

http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2008/06/26/pagesix/photos_galleries/G217_photo11.jpg

Sense-A
08-04-2010, 01:35 PM
In what manner do you believe Christians to be responsible for the 9-11 attacks? Please explain that point of view a bit more.

I mentioned above that it is a $10M construction project. However, it is actually a $100M+ construction project. It will be 13 stories high. So not exactly "towering" over ground zero.

The new mosque will be 2 blocks away around a corner. So it is not ON GROUND ZERO as many might claim or infer.

I don't think the argument is about whether it is legal or not. Because they purchased the property for $4M and they are legally allowed to build a Mosque if they want to. Only legal issues might be zoning regulations/requirements.

The argument is about common decency in my opinion. And my opinion that peaceful Muslims should have the heart and decency and understanding to realize that a Mosque might be offensive to people still mourning over the jihad attack. There were a few innocent Muslims who died in those towers too though.

Nobody (publicly) seems to know where the $100 million dollars is coming from. No one knows. I've looked all over google and read through articles. Can't find an answer. like i said before, it is a long shot, but for all we know osama bin laden or the very cronies who masterminded the 9-11 attack might be the same ones funding this mosque for all we know.

I believe that America is tolerant of all religions and we are tolerant of Muslims and mosques. But decency comes into play here. Just the chance, the mere slim chance, that any Muslim who was responsible for the 9-11 attacks but not prosecuted or caught will get some enjoyment or sense of conquest out of all this is a little bit bothersome. Didn't a Muslim try blowing up central park just a few weeks ago?

With all my mixed feelings, in conclusion, I think they should just let them build the mosque. There is nothing illegal about it and if someone is so upset about it they should just buy the property back. Maybe they should have bought the property to begin with. Eventually, hopefully, we will have new twin towers that cast permanent shadows over the mosque to represent the perseverance of America.

Nick Fury
08-04-2010, 05:17 PM
anti Islamic undertones coming from the aritcle and sense-a

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 12:08 AM
I'm all for letting them put a mosque in the new tower if they felt the need. This is America the right to worship God anywhere you like is Rule of Law. If they blocked this I'd be pissed off. As soon as they start trying to curb my rights through legislation I'm gonna curb stomp somebody in Congress. Islam isn't responsible for 911. Criminals were. Murderers were. Muslims? Naw. In the same way that the Crusades don't reflect on modern day Christians, 911 is not the fault of Muslims in any way.

Sarah Palin is the worst thing that could happen to the moderate-conservative majority. We should be getting pissed at the Democrats and then we look the other side and they're shoving their heads up their ass because they've been hijacked by a disgusting mix of far right nut jobs and progressives and completely tainted their Liberal Reformist roots.

There is no alternative. I'm either voting for Karl Marx in Blackface (Obama) or Simon Legree in a skirt (Sarah Palin). Hurrah for a two party system! The Tea Partys are a bunch of average joes belligerently trying to destabilize the country and the leftists are conspiratorially trying to destroy them which is only fanning the flames. And there are still no fiscally conservative social liberals (moderates) who I can rally behind.

Sense-A
08-05-2010, 12:10 AM
^(nick fury)

Oh please. You regurgitate an auto-response to the one opinion that isn't status quo.

What about the guy who posted above me who came out of no where and blames 9-11 on Christians? Evidence? Proof for those allegations? What about the comment "dumbass Americans." No undertones there?

I have a lot more in common with American Muslims than I do with Atheist White Liberals. I actually consider Muslims allies in the secularist onslaught against religion in this country. I have never opposed or complained about any of the thousands of mosques in this country ever!!

Asking where the hell $100 million is coming from seems like a reasonable question that doesn't seem to concern anyone else. Most of you still think George W Bush knocked down the towers so why am I even arguing?

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 12:15 AM
^(nick fury)

Oh please. You regurgitate an auto-response to the one opinion that isn't status quo.

What about the guy who posted above me who came out of no where and blames 9-11 on Christians? Evidence? Proof for those allegations? What about the comment "dumbass Americans." No undertones there?

I have a lot more in common with American Muslims than I do with Atheist White Liberals. I actually consider Muslims allies in the secularist onslaught against religion in this country. I have never opposed or complained about any of the thousands of mosques in this country ever!!

Asking where the hell $100 million is coming from seems like a reasonable question that doesn't seem to concern anyone else. Most of you still think George W Bush knocked down the towers so why am I even arguing?

cosign

I don't want terrorists tainting a place of worship for a religion that's just trying to get its shit together after years of bad publicity. However I would only want an investigation of funding if that was the same procedure for a church. (Which I doubt.)

Sense-A
08-05-2010, 12:33 AM
I'm all for letting them put a mosque in the new tower if they felt the need. This is America the right to worship God anywhere you like is Rule of Law. If they blocked this I'd be pissed off. As soon as they start trying to curb my rights through legislation I'm gonna curb stomp somebody in Congress. Islam isn't responsible for 911. Criminals were. Murderers were. Muslims? Naw. In the same way that the Crusades don't reflect on modern day Christians, 911 is not the fault of Muslims in any way.

Sarah Palin is the worst thing that could happen to the moderate-conservative majority. We should be getting pissed at the Democrats and then we look the other side and they're shoving their heads up their ass because they've been hijacked by a disgusting mix of far right nut jobs and progressives and completely tainted their Liberal Reformist roots.

There is no alternative. I'm either voting for Karl Marx in Blackface (Obama) or Simon Legree in a skirt (Sarah Palin). Hurrah for a two party system! The Tea Partys are a bunch of average joes belligerently trying to destabilize the country and the leftists are conspiratorially trying to destroy them which is only fanning the flames. And there are still no fiscally conservative social liberals (moderates) who I can rally behind.

Good post as always.

Personally I believe that the Tea Party ruined themselves by not denouncing the Republican GOP from the get-go. Allowing themselves to be swallowed by the GOP and allowing GOP candidates to ride the coattails of the Tea Party movement was a huge fucking mistake. At this point i think any third or fourth party in this country would be an advantage whether i agreed with them or not. At least i'd have an extra choice on the ballot.

The only issues with me are whether or not there are any zoning regulations against a religious institution on that street and whether or not the funding is laundered money from terrorist sects or anyone with any financial ties to terrorist segments in the middle east. $100 million doesn't just fall out of the sky. Would they have allowed a Christian Church at that location? If yes, then of course any other religious building should be allowed.

Sarah Palin is not that bad. I don't understand why the liberal media is so fascinated with her. I think the liberals follow her around more than any conservatives do. You do notice that every news media outlet with the exception of FOX has a very partial liberal bias. Therefore they'll portray conservatives how they want to portray conservatives - as radical and extremist as possible.

Overall i don't think another mosque in NYC is going to effect my life at all whether they build it or not. i'm just kicking the can down the street.

Sense-A
08-05-2010, 12:45 AM
And there are still no fiscally conservative social liberals (moderates) who I can rally behind.

hahah these creatures do not exist.

I am definitely not social liberal. I do not believe that the government should interfere with citizens' lives as much as social liberals do. too many social services and control over economic policy is more harmful than it is helpful in the long run. Merely my opinion of course.

I guess I am probably more libertarian than I like to admit.

I like to think that American Liberalism is not a political ideology so much as it is a mental disorder.

food for thought
08-05-2010, 12:54 AM
In what manner do you believe Christians to be responsible for the 9-11 attacks? Please explain that point of view a bit more.

I mentioned above that it is a $10M construction project. However, it is actually a $100M+ construction project. It will be 13 stories high. So not exactly "towering" over ground zero.

The new mosque will be 2 blocks away around a corner. So it is not ON GROUND ZERO as many might claim or infer.

I don't think the argument is about whether it is legal or not. Because they purchased the property for $4M and they are legally allowed to build a Mosque if they want to. Only legal issues might be zoning regulations/requirements.

The argument is about common decency in my opinion. And my opinion that peaceful Muslims should have the heart and decency and understanding to realize that a Mosque might be offensive to people still mourning over the jihad attack. There were a few innocent Muslims who died in those towers too though.

Nobody (publicly) seems to know where the $100 million dollars is coming from. No one knows. I've looked all over google and read through articles. Can't find an answer. like i said before, it is a long shot, but for all we know osama bin laden or the very cronies who masterminded the 9-11 attack might be the same ones funding this mosque for all we know.

I believe that America is tolerant of all religions and we are tolerant of Muslims and mosques. But decency comes into play here. Just the chance, the mere slim chance, that any Muslim who was responsible for the 9-11 attacks but not prosecuted or caught will get some enjoyment or sense of conquest out of all this is a little bit bothersome. Didn't a Muslim try blowing up central park just a few weeks ago?

With all my mixed feelings, in conclusion, I think they should just let them build the mosque. There is nothing illegal about it and if someone is so upset about it they should just buy the property back. Maybe they should have bought the property to begin with. Eventually, hopefully, we will have new twin towers that cast permanent shadows over the mosque to represent the perseverance of America.

i donot believe the official story that your governments tells us about 9/11. I dont believe a bunch of arabs hated you for your freedom and they planned in a cave how to hijack an airplane and attack the white house and pentagon and the US government had no idea this was going to happen. i dont think that is possible. I dont know the whole story but i know there are alot of inconsistencies with the official story and credible questions that are not answered concerning that day. and dumb ass americans, yes folks!!, dont care or dont know.


We are continuing to compile the best documentation links for every single point on this page, and intend to post the updated version as soon as possible, and create teaching tools and more from the info. This is a significant and time-consuming process--if you have useful links, please send them to janice[at]911truth[dot]org. Thanks for your help!
If you use the search function with title key words, you will discover that 911Truth.org is home to articles backing virtually every point made below. Much of the basic research is available at the Complete 9/11 Timeline (hosted by cooperativeresearch.org), the 9/11 Reading Room (911readingroom.org), and the NY Attorney General Spitzer petition and complaint (Justicefor911.org). For physical evidence discussion, see Point 7.


THE DAY ITSELF - EVIDENCE OF COMPLICITY

1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack - George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield - all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.

2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies - NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission - gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?

3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation''s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack - including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were "real world or exercise." Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an "inside job"?

What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the "Big Wedding"), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.



10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers - as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the "Phoenix Memo," David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration''s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the "Bojinka" plot, and John O''Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in The 9/11 Commission Report.)

11) Insider Trading

a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally - including but not limited to "put options" placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London.

b. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks.

c. Initial reports on these trades were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).

12) Who were the perpetrators?

a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the "magic passport" of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.

b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had "doubles," all of which is omitted from official investigations.

c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-50suspects,0,1825231.story


http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646


do you care about any of this info? dont u think it matters? or do you think they are jsut conspiracy theories?

i think theres some christians responsible for some of that shit. dont you?

and why dont the dumb ass americans demand answers for these crucial questions?

nah bro. lets just profile and discriminate against every muslim in the world. casue mohammed atta hated us for our freedom and attacked us from the cave bro. and osama and saddam hussein.


I mentioned above that it is a $10M construction project. However, it is actually a $100M+ construction project. It will be 13 stories high. So not exactly "towering" over ground zero.

The new mosque will be 2 blocks away around a corner. So it is not ON GROUND ZERO as many might claim or infer.

ok i did a little research. yes it apprently is a $100 million project. but its a fucking community center. its not just a mosque. it just happens to have a mosque in it

That decision clears the way for the construction of Park51, a tower of as many as 15 stories that will house a mosque, a 500-seat auditorium, and a pool. Its leaders say it will be modeled on the Y.M.C.A. and Jewish Community Center in Manhattan.

so its not a $100 million mosque. ( i knew that sounded ridiculous) its a $100 million community center. blowing things out of proportion as usual.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Free-Press-Release.com) July 13, 2010 --
New York, NY (July 13, 2010) – Soho Properties, in conjunction with New York’s Muslim
communities, are pleased to announce Park51, a world-class community center which will
provide lower Manhattan and the metropolitan region with unique cultural, educational and
recreational opportunities.

“From the very beginning, we’ve wanted this to be a transparent and responsive process,” says
Sharif El-Gamal, CEO of Soho Properties, a private real estate developer in Manhattan. “We
want New Yorkers to know we are building this institution for all of us.”

Park51 intends to establish a friendly, inviting institution that serves all New Yorkers. To improve
outreach, increase programmatic capacity and create synergies with like-minded institutions and
individuals, Cordoba House will serve as a dedicated interfaith center within Park51.

Park51 is New York, an open space for all of us: private moments for peaceful reflection, vibrant
spaces for exciting events, and a commitment to our environment and our common future. A
$100 million investment in the future of our city, Park51 will bring 150 jobs, badly-needed meeting
spaces of all sizes, high-tech learning spaces and a 500-seat auditorium to lower Manhattan.

Following in the footsteps of the YMCA and JCC, Park51 will also offer New Yorkers unparalleled
opportunities to learn about the diverse cultural and artistic heritages of the Muslim American
tapestry. Future facilities will include a mosque space, providing New York’s growing Muslim
population with a communal place to pray and opportunities for engagement with and service to
all.



I believe that America is tolerant of all religions and we are tolerant of Muslims and mosques. But decency comes into play here.

lol bullshit. this thread, the website linked here, amongst other things, proves this to be the opposite.

tolerant my ass. more like racist as fuck.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 12:55 AM
When she was running as VP I felt bad for her being twisted around and shit, but she is still saying stupid shit like two years later. At this point I think she's ignorant if not dumb, but other then in the eyes of the left she's no longer relevant. She's a good fundraiser and she's never going to be president. Its just that Fox is so defensive of her, I know she's a contributor and they stand by her message but they treat her like she's relevant.

Shes not. She's effectively dead as a politician. I can't stand the news anymore. Every station is blatantly biased to the point its almost hilarious. I'm just scared of all the Nineteen-eighty-four shit coming our way. Perhaps if I stopped watching the news I'd probably be less worried but I don't know if that's a good thing. The worst thing is that there is a conspiracy going on, not a "Palehorse Level Conspiracy" but there's definitely some sort of Socialist (I can't tell yet if its Communist or Fascist the rhetoric is similar) gears turning behind the scenes.

From where I sit I think Bush was paving a path to hell with good intentions, I think Obama is doing it intentionally.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 01:00 AM
hahah these creatures do not exist.

I am definitely not social liberal. I do not believe that the government should interfere with citizens' lives as much as social liberals do. too many social services and control over economic policy is more harmful than it is helpful in the long run. Merely my opinion of course.

I guess I am probably more libertarian than I like to admit.

I like to think that American Liberalism is not a political ideology so much as it is a mental disorder.

I meant classical liberals as in Gay people are people too (marriage should be left to the churches to decide the state shouldn't need to recognize marriage anyway) women can votes, blacks have equal rights. Not give them the wealth progressive "liberals." Liberal as in lover of freedom. The original meaning. The All Men are created Equal liberals. Libertarian is just the word they have to use because the progressives hijacked the term liberal. The founding fathers were Liberals. They were also radicals in that they shook things up. But if you say Radical Liberals now its clearly not our founding fathers being spoken of.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 01:10 AM
i donot believe the official story that your governments tells us about 9/11. I dont believe a bunch of arabs hated you for your freedom and they planned in a cave how to hijack an airplane and attack the white house and pentagon and the US government had no idea this was going to happen. i dont think that is possible. I dont know the whole story but i know there are alot of inconsistencies with the official story and credible questions that are not answered concerning that day. and dumb ass americans, yes folks!!, dont care or dont know.





http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646


do you care about any of this info? dont u think it matters? or do you think they are jsut conspiracy theories?

i think theres some christians responsible for some of that shit. dont you?

and why dont the dumb ass americans demand answers for these crucial questions?

nah bro. lets just profile and discriminate against every muslim in the world. casue mohammed atta hated us for our freedom and attacked us from the cave bro. and osama and saddam hussein.



ok i did a little research. yes it apprently is a $100 million project. but its a fucking community center. its not just a mosque. it just happens to have a mosque in it



so its not a $100 million mosque. ( i knew that sounded ridiculous) its a $100 million community center. blowing things out of proportion as usual.







lol bullshit. this thread, the website linked here, amongst other things, proves this to be the opposite.

tolerant my ass. more like racist as fuck.

Fair points. It is a community center with a mosque in it. But the point is that doesn't change opinions since Sense A and I were okay with a mosque.

Looking for a conspiracy in 911 is crazy because obviously there was a conspiracy. A group of terrorists with a wide ranging organization throughout the world and a lot of bank role and men pulled off a devastating attack worthy of an entire country planning a sneak attack. Pearl Harbor was the same scenario. A ton of things went wrong which is why the attack happened. Japan didn't get the message through that they were declaring war until afterwards because of an oversight. The whitehouse knew an attack was coming because the Japanese fleet was effectively missing (deployed somewhere) and they knew that Pearl Harbor was on a list of possible targets. However they didn't put everyone on alert because the situation with Japan was fragile and we didn't want to look belligerent while we were constantly being assured Japan didn't want war. Then when the Radar operators saw a bunch of objects on the map that shouldn't be there some idiot on the receiving end said it couldn't possibly be the Japs and that it must be friendlies that he hadn't been briefed on.

Point is it take a lot of slip ups for 3000 Americans to get killed by foreigners. But it happens.

LONDON!
08-05-2010, 05:40 AM
yes why not?

its a fucking place of worship.

i was watching the god Cornel West on real time with bill maher and he said something like " if they can have strip clubs and porn shops right around the block(apparently they really do) then they should be permitted to have a mosque there"

fucking scary ass racist ass people i cant stand teh shit

co-sign this for accurateness

cutn' heads
08-05-2010, 09:34 AM
http://www.burlingtoncoatfactory.com//IWCatProductPage.process?Product_Id=1650355&SearchedProduct=t

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-05-2010, 03:44 PM
co-sign this for accurateness

Any American who deserves the name American would want them to build there. If anything its a shining symbol of peace. It says "Terrorists who associated with this view may have killed Americans but America is above petty criminals who claim do the work of prophets."

Anyone who's making a fuss is a jingoistic boob.

Its the same idiocy when people hate on Germans because they were Nazis. There are less Nazis in Germany then in America. Hell there are probably more Nazis in America now then there were in 1942 Germany.

THUGNIFICENT
08-05-2010, 04:55 PM
^^
I'd rep you if I could.

By the way, a couple posts up you were talking about the socialist conspiracy you believe America is currently apart of. Would you mind giving the people some evidence to support this?

LONDON!
08-05-2010, 09:24 PM
Any American who deserves the name American would want them to build there. If anything its a shining symbol of peace. It says "Terrorists who associated with this view may have killed Americans but America is above petty criminals who claim do the work of prophets."

Anyone who's making a fuss is a jingoistic boob.

Its the same idiocy when people hate on Germans because they were Nazis. There are less Nazis in Germany then in America. Hell there are probably more Nazis in America now then there were in 1942 Germany.

thats the 100% truth

Sense-A
08-06-2010, 10:18 AM
I meant classical liberals as in Gay people are people too (marriage should be left to the churches to decide the state shouldn't need to recognize marriage anyway) women can votes, blacks have equal rights. Not give them the wealth progressive "liberals." Liberal as in lover of freedom. The original meaning. The All Men are created Equal liberals. Libertarian is just the word they have to use because the progressives hijacked the term liberal. The founding fathers were Liberals. They were also radicals in that they shook things up. But if you say Radical Liberals now its clearly not our founding fathers being spoken of.

Thank you for clearing this up. The word "liberal" used to describe political ideology has changed a lot during the last 200 years in this country. Not only does it mean different things in the USA depending on what era you are discussing, it also has varying definitions in other countries.

My personal generalized hatred of liberals is directed towards the modern followers. far left Demoncrats who I believe are far worse than Republicans. Both parties suck though and have negative effects. Republicans are bad. Demoncrats are even worse. That is my opinion.

By the way, a couple posts up you were talking about the socialist conspiracy you believe America is currently apart of. Would you mind giving the people some evidence to support this?I can't speak for TheBoarzHead but I'd like to explain what I think about the socialist conspiracy.

The socialist conspiracy to me is the idea that there are people in power in the world with great international political influence who'd like to establish a world socialist government.

"A secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries is increasing in its evil influence and control over America and the entire world." -- Ezra Taft Benson
LDS General Conference, October 1988
(Ensign, Nov. 1988, p. 87.)




"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
--Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Sec. of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.



Even though George W Bush and Barack Obama are supposedly 2 separate opposing parties, one could argue that in fact they are not. They are actually quite similar if not nearly the same. Bush almost doubled our country's national debt. But most Republicans are fiscally conservative!! So far Obama is racking up debt as well. Bush implemented the patriot act giving the government broad powers to spy on its own citizens. Demoncrats openly ridiculed the patriot act during their campaigning, but once they won office they extended the Patriot Act. WTF? Bush gets us into two concurrent wars. Demoncrats criticize him and demand that we withdraw. Demoncrats later get elected into office, and what do they do, they prolong the wars and send in more troops. WTF? Both GWB and Obama have been centralizing power. That is making the federal government more powerful that the states. When we founded the Constitution over 200 years ago, our forefathers wanted power distributed and balanced between federal and state, not centralized. So centralization of power is certainly a goal of the "Socialist Conspiracy." This centralization of power will become more and more international. There is immense pressure for the USA to adopt progressive laws and policies of OTHER countries. WHY? We are sovereign, so why are we allowing foreign influences to govern our legislation?

Healthcare reform is certainly a huge example of socialization. Healthcare in America is superb! There wasn't even an emergency to begin with. We also socialized Chevrolet and Chrysler in America, two of the top 3 American automobile manufacturers. They fucked over all the bond holders so they could cater to union workers (a lot of Obama's campaign financing came from unions). What happens when in the future bond holders decide not to invest in companies anymore because the government assists in fucking them over to lose their entire investments? Why should the government have any ownership at all in private companies? You have to be concerned with the conflict of interests. What if government starts legislating in favor of the companies they have a stake in instead of legislating to reflect the democratic will of the people?

I think the general idea behind all of this is to make people more dependent on government. You sure NEEEEED government if they are they ones manufacturing all the cars, when they are the ones lending student loans, when they are the ones lending money for home purchases, when they are the ones lending you money to start up a business, when they are the ones providing your healthcare, when they are the ones providing your job, your housing, your food, etc. etc. Then they can require you to get a license for everything. License to drive. license to fix someone's roof. License to fix your own house. license to serve food. License for this and that and this and that and approval for this and a stamp of approval for that. You'll need a bureaucrat 24/7 to help you fill out all the forms. You'll have to fill out a form to be allowed to use a public restroom.

Similar to this idea of dependency is the creation of a welfare state. You create low-level entitlement programs and welfare programs to keep people low class. It is a method of keeping the bar low for a huge mass of people. You breed laziness and complacency into generation after generation. The lower class will blame rich people when it is actually the government fucking them over. The rich people are getting fucked over too because the lower class allows and even demands that the government persecute the rich more and more to the point that the rich are paying half of their livelihoods to the government. The rich people have no majority so the only choice they are left with is trying to get politicians in their pockets because free enterprise has been thrown out the window. Rich people might just flee the country, taking their businesses with them. Then the government will have to step in and begin providing all the jobs. Everyone will work for the government in some form and fashion. All the rich people fled the country for constantly being the scapegoats. You are left with a whole nation of low class citizenship with no means to start up their own businesses, all of whom beg and demand assistance and help from the big wonderful superhero federal government. They will give federal government more and more and more power because they are desperate for help and think the federal government is the only thing that can save them.

I also believe that there is elitist ownership of our media. Almost every American has a television set, which they watch for hours per day. Almost all the channels are owned by about 6 companies. All the federal and national government news is coming out of one or two sources. All reporting is being filtered through the pentagon. Remember in George Orwell's 1984 he speaks about the "ministry of truth." Well that idea is more fact than fiction. Sure, Fox news might be the one channel that offers a conservative view. Or so we think. Fox news might just be a decoy to offset every other channel that has a clear liberal bias. The news media in this country used to report news story with objectivity. But now every media station is spinning a political take on the news. There is an intention to instill a liberal bias into viewers. Add to that conspiracy the possibility that the liberal socialist conspiracy is even capable of infiltrating its own opposition and posing as their own opposition only to make them publicly discredited. Why argue against your opponent when you can pretend you ARE your opponent and act like an idiot so that your opposing ideology loses all credibility in the public eye? If i hate liberals, I can go to a local liberal protest and hold up a ridiculous racist sign and tell everyone I am a liberal even though I am really a conservative. Get it?

The rabbit hole goes a lot deeper. Personally, I believe that most Americans who claim to be blatant supporters of the Democratic Party really don't know what they are supporting. Democratic leaders try to tell the people what they are supporting, yet they do the opposite sometimes. They try to create some sort of duality between our only two political parties when both political parties might just be doing the same thing. The liberal socialist conspiracy doesn't want you to pay attention to how they are dismantling the Constitution, so they get you addicted to Hollywood celebrities, sports, game shows, pornography, sitcoms, rap music and bitches and rims, etc. Anything as long as you are not paying close attention to what politicians are doing. And just in case you actually are interested in politics, they'll making C-SPAN so boring that anyone trying to watch it falls asleep in less than 5 minutes. haha

I'm sure TheBoarzHead might be able to explain it better since i typed too much already.

THUGNIFICENT
08-06-2010, 02:01 PM
I agree with a lot of what you said, largely on the similarities between Bush II and Obama and the government's stake in the stock market and automotive industry. Let me just highlight a few points of what you said there and offer my two cents / further questions:

Healthcare reform is certainly a huge example of socialization. Healthcare in America is superb! There wasn't even an emergency to begin with. Maybe not an emergency for you. But, before healthcare was passed, for every person who died in a terrorist attack globally (1), 58 people in the US died because of a lack of healthcare (2).

1 - 774.7 per year, according to the US Department of State
2 - 45k a year, according to Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance

Similar to this idea of dependency is the creation of a welfare state. You create low-level entitlement programs and welfare programs to keep people low class. It is a method of keeping the bar low for a huge mass of people. You breed laziness and complacency into generation after generation. The lower class will blame rich people when it is actually the government fucking them over. The rich people are getting fucked over too because the lower class allows and even demands that the government persecute the rich more and more to the point that the rich are paying half of their livelihoods to the government. The rich people have no majority so the only choice they are left with is trying to get politicians in their pockets because free enterprise has been thrown out the window. Rich people might just flee the country, taking their businesses with them. Then the government will have to step in and begin providing all the jobs. Everyone will work for the government in some form and fashion. All the rich people fled the country for constantly being the scapegoats. You are left with a whole nation of low class citizenship with no means to start up their own businesses, all of whom beg and demand assistance and help from the big wonderful superhero federal government. They will give federal government more and more and more power because they are desperate for help and think the federal government is the only thing that can save them. I'd rather just the abolishment of welfare at the federal level and then let the states run their own independent welfare programs, whether it be nothing or even more than what's currently in place. A lot of people take advantage of welfare, but at the same time there are people who need it, so totally abolishing it would certainly bring those people more hardship. The answer is reform, not abolishment.

I also believe that there is elitist ownership of our media. Almost every American has a television set, which they watch for hours per day. Almost all the channels are owned by about 6 companies. All the federal and national government news is coming out of one or two sources. All reporting is being filtered through the pentagon. Remember in George Orwell's 1984 he speaks about the "ministry of truth." Well that idea is more fact than fiction. Sure, Fox news might be the one channel that offers a conservative view. Or so we think. Fox news might just be a decoy to offset every other channel that has a clear liberal bias. The news media in this country used to report news story with objectivity. But now every media station is spinning a political take on the news. There is an intention to instill a liberal bias into viewers. Add to that conspiracy the possibility that the liberal socialist conspiracy is even capable of infiltrating its own opposition and posing as their own opposition only to make them publicly discredited. Why argue against your opponent when you can pretend you ARE your opponent and act like an idiot so that your opposing ideology loses all credibility in the public eye? If i hate liberals, I can go to a local liberal protest and hold up a ridiculous racist sign and tell everyone I am a liberal even though I am really a conservative. Get it?
This is what I was talking about in my original post, and also where I asked for "evidence." Not you stating your opinions and offering nothing to back them up. Get it? And I'm not talking about the elitist ownership; that's pretty common knowledge.

The rabbit hole goes a lot deeper. Personally, I believe that most Americans who claim to be blatant supporters of the Democratic Party really don't know what they are supporting. Democratic leaders try to tell the people what they are supporting, yet they do the opposite sometimes. They try to create some sort of duality between our only two political parties when both political parties might just be doing the same thing. The liberal socialist conspiracy doesn't want you to pay attention to how they are dismantling the Constitution, so they get you addicted to Hollywood celebrities, sports, game shows, pornography, sitcoms, rap music and bitches and rims, etc. Anything as long as you are not paying close attention to what politicians are doing. And just in case you actually are interested in politics, they'll making C-SPAN so boring that anyone trying to watch it falls asleep in less than 5 minutes. haha
This is where I leave the boat. I left my tinfoil hat at the cleaners. I don't think that everything on television is a way to distract people from politics; I think that it's certainly what happens a lot of the time, but I don't believe that it was the desired effect. They (the people involved in the creation of the show) just wanted people to watch so they'd get paid.

Okay I'm out.

Professor Poopsnagle
08-06-2010, 03:55 PM
Yea I'm pretty sure it's allowed and in our First Amendment of the Constitution


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Religion_in_the_United_StatesAgreed

Well, to be honest, it does seem pretty tasteless to me.Agreed

The chairman of the Cordoba Initiative (the organisation of this project, named after the Mezquita mosque built in Cordoba as a flag of victory over the Romans) Faisal Abdul Sauf has glorified the acts of 9-11 and said he doesn't believe in inter religious dialogue.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/ground-zero-imam-i-dont-believe-in-religious-dialogue/?singlepage=true

Maybe this article will help people understand why it's called Cordoba House.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyrs_of_C%C3%B3rdoba

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-06-2010, 10:33 PM
Thank you for clearing this up. The word "liberal" used to describe political ideology has changed a lot during the last 200 years in this country. Not only does it mean different things in the USA depending on what era you are discussing, it also has varying definitions in other countries.

My personal generalized hatred of liberals is directed towards the modern followers. far left Demoncrats who I believe are far worse than Republicans. Both parties suck though and have negative effects. Republicans are bad. Demoncrats are even worse. That is my opinion.

I can't speak for TheBoarzHead but I'd like to explain what I think about the socialist conspiracy.

The socialist conspiracy to me is the idea that there are people in power in the world with great international political influence who'd like to establish a world socialist government.







Even though George W Bush and Barack Obama are supposedly 2 separate opposing parties, one could argue that in fact they are not. They are actually quite similar if not nearly the same. Bush almost doubled our country's national debt. But most Republicans are fiscally conservative!! So far Obama is racking up debt as well. Bush implemented the patriot act giving the government broad powers to spy on its own citizens. Demoncrats openly ridiculed the patriot act during their campaigning, but once they won office they extended the Patriot Act. WTF? Bush gets us into two concurrent wars. Demoncrats criticize him and demand that we withdraw. Demoncrats later get elected into office, and what do they do, they prolong the wars and send in more troops. WTF? Both GWB and Obama have been centralizing power. That is making the federal government more powerful that the states. When we founded the Constitution over 200 years ago, our forefathers wanted power distributed and balanced between federal and state, not centralized. So centralization of power is certainly a goal of the "Socialist Conspiracy." This centralization of power will become more and more international. There is immense pressure for the USA to adopt progressive laws and policies of OTHER countries. WHY? We are sovereign, so why are we allowing foreign influences to govern our legislation?

Healthcare reform is certainly a huge example of socialization. Healthcare in America is superb! There wasn't even an emergency to begin with. We also socialized Chevrolet and Chrysler in America, two of the top 3 American automobile manufacturers. They fucked over all the bond holders so they could cater to union workers (a lot of Obama's campaign financing came from unions). What happens when in the future bond holders decide not to invest in companies anymore because the government assists in fucking them over to lose their entire investments? Why should the government have any ownership at all in private companies? You have to be concerned with the conflict of interests. What if government starts legislating in favor of the companies they have a stake in instead of legislating to reflect the democratic will of the people?

I think the general idea behind all of this is to make people more dependent on government. You sure NEEEEED government if they are they ones manufacturing all the cars, when they are the ones lending student loans, when they are the ones lending money for home purchases, when they are the ones lending you money to start up a business, when they are the ones providing your healthcare, when they are the ones providing your job, your housing, your food, etc. etc. Then they can require you to get a license for everything. License to drive. license to fix someone's roof. License to fix your own house. license to serve food. License for this and that and this and that and approval for this and a stamp of approval for that. You'll need a bureaucrat 24/7 to help you fill out all the forms. You'll have to fill out a form to be allowed to use a public restroom.

Similar to this idea of dependency is the creation of a welfare state. You create low-level entitlement programs and welfare programs to keep people low class. It is a method of keeping the bar low for a huge mass of people. You breed laziness and complacency into generation after generation. The lower class will blame rich people when it is actually the government fucking them over. The rich people are getting fucked over too because the lower class allows and even demands that the government persecute the rich more and more to the point that the rich are paying half of their livelihoods to the government. The rich people have no majority so the only choice they are left with is trying to get politicians in their pockets because free enterprise has been thrown out the window. Rich people might just flee the country, taking their businesses with them. Then the government will have to step in and begin providing all the jobs. Everyone will work for the government in some form and fashion. All the rich people fled the country for constantly being the scapegoats. You are left with a whole nation of low class citizenship with no means to start up their own businesses, all of whom beg and demand assistance and help from the big wonderful superhero federal government. They will give federal government more and more and more power because they are desperate for help and think the federal government is the only thing that can save them.

I also believe that there is elitist ownership of our media. Almost every American has a television set, which they watch for hours per day. Almost all the channels are owned by about 6 companies. All the federal and national government news is coming out of one or two sources. All reporting is being filtered through the pentagon. Remember in George Orwell's 1984 he speaks about the "ministry of truth." Well that idea is more fact than fiction. Sure, Fox news might be the one channel that offers a conservative view. Or so we think. Fox news might just be a decoy to offset every other channel that has a clear liberal bias. The news media in this country used to report news story with objectivity. But now every media station is spinning a political take on the news. There is an intention to instill a liberal bias into viewers. Add to that conspiracy the possibility that the liberal socialist conspiracy is even capable of infiltrating its own opposition and posing as their own opposition only to make them publicly discredited. Why argue against your opponent when you can pretend you ARE your opponent and act like an idiot so that your opposing ideology loses all credibility in the public eye? If i hate liberals, I can go to a local liberal protest and hold up a ridiculous racist sign and tell everyone I am a liberal even though I am really a conservative. Get it?

The rabbit hole goes a lot deeper. Personally, I believe that most Americans who claim to be blatant supporters of the Democratic Party really don't know what they are supporting. Democratic leaders try to tell the people what they are supporting, yet they do the opposite sometimes. They try to create some sort of duality between our only two political parties when both political parties might just be doing the same thing. The liberal socialist conspiracy doesn't want you to pay attention to how they are dismantling the Constitution, so they get you addicted to Hollywood celebrities, sports, game shows, pornography, sitcoms, rap music and bitches and rims, etc. Anything as long as you are not paying close attention to what politicians are doing. And just in case you actually are interested in politics, they'll making C-SPAN so boring that anyone trying to watch it falls asleep in less than 5 minutes. haha

I'm sure TheBoarzHead might be able to explain it better since i typed too much already.


The fucked up thing is I was aware and telling people that Bush was a leftist when I was in 8th grade (4 years ago) and no one believed me. They all thought I was an idiot because he was a republican... Here's what happened at some point in the last 100 years the democratic party traditionally the conservative party began introducing "Progressive" ideas. Progressives were the guys who thought that we should kill off the black race by enforced birth control because they were racially inferior monkeys. The Democrats were the party of slavery after all. While there were democrats in the North they were "War Democrats" which were moderates. The South however was wholly democratic. Now these progressives got in with the Unions which were all white workers guilds designed to keep minorities out of the work force and keep the wage artificially high. At this point the Republicans were still a decent party.

Now we turn to the depression. The Depression was a grand fuck up caused by the Republicans. Their mistake was they went too hands off in the wrong areas and pretty much allowed the economy to grow faster then it should and when it reset it reset too hard and everyone freaked their shit. So we get rid of Hoover our second to last true conservative. We put in Roosevelt who essentially began to dissemble the economy in order to save it. Unfortunately while it did have an effect he couldn't stop the problems. Regardless a shit ton of communists got into office under Roosevelt. Yes, communist manifesto reading chest beating Power to the People communists.

Anyhow, we thank god defeat the Nazis and Fascists in Italy (who lets no forget were supposed to be Britain's buffer against Communist expansion and who we backed until the war started.) Then we look at McCarthy who essentially got blacklisted for trying to clean up the government. McCarthy had been a Democrat but he switched parties in 44. The reason of course is rather obvious. At this point the Democratic party is now the party we know today. "Left" leaning communists in disguise. There of course were good elements. I don't think Kennedy was anything short of a great american, but as we all know, Nixon not so much. I think Nixon and the corruption of his administration was the point where the taint of progressivism took first root in the Republican party. I can't really point out any blatant progressive things, but its either here or under Reagan and I think the roots were there before.

Anyhow, by Reagan we're dealing with "Reaganomics" which essentially ran us into the ground. Cut taxes (good) set spending to "Kill the Mother Fucker" and meanwhile we had the biggest fucking scandal in probably US history (Iran Contra) and both parties decided to sleep on it so that we didn't have another Watergate and erode what slight semblance of faith Americans had in their government. Then we got Bush Sr. damn good republican. I like Senior. Smart guy, tried to take us off the course to damnation that Reagan put us on with Voodoo economics. Apparently people blamed Reagans idiocy on Bush. Bush is out. On the plus side we kicked Iraq's ass. Iraq had been our man in the middle east under Reagan, so its only poetic justice that we killed those mother fuckers.

Then we got Clinton. Clinton was a far leftist who realized he wasn't going to get shit by the Right because Newt Gingrich was running shit. Anyhow by now the two parties are in bed behind closed doors politically and its no surprise that Bush gets the election in 2000. It didn't really matter. We had a far left progressive (Al Gore) and a moderate progressive (George Bush.) It wasn't so much that some Illuminati planned this, its just how things worked out. The Democrats were Communists in all but name and the Republicans were Neo conservatives which is just a fancy term for Progressive Republican. I don't think some cat stroking mother fucker orchestrated it, I just think the game got rigged 50 years earlier.

Now we have Obama who was going to "change policy" but has effectively redoubled every effort Bush had. What's happened gentlemen, is our "two party system" has effectively become a one party system. What will happen? The far left will be replaced by the less left. And the Less left will be replaced by the far left. With each new election we do not take one step backwards but creep towards an imagined Goal.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Kolkhoznitsa.jpg

Now, as long as it is done in bits and pieces over many years there will be no white army. The red can infiltrate and build up its power. Obama is a socialist. The next president will be a Republican. Of that I am certain. They will attempt to dial things back a bit. But it won't matter. The left controls the media. The left controls the unions. The left will have a man back in 2016. By then it won't be a little bit by little bit like it is now. There will be blood. I'm not saying there will be a war, but its not going to be pretty. We've gone so far in over our head there's going to be a lot of problems coming out of it. We've got a lot of people who will die to see Communism and that's what it is, in America. We've got a lot of people who would die rather then see their kids grow up under communism. That's a problem. We also have a third and even worse possibility. The people who will try to take advantage of this. These will be fascists. You won't recognize them because no one really knows what fascism looks like. Every thinks Fascism is Far Right, but that's Anarchy (when the only law over you is your own and God's). Fascism is radical moderation. The Fascists will claim to unite left and right in a greater purpose. They'll blame the Blacks and the Mexicans as the Communists. They'll blame the Jews as capitalist pigs.

I'll put it lightly. We'll look back at World War two and laugh. Palehorse will start looking sane. And God help me if I'm gonna let that happen.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-06-2010, 11:01 PM
I agree with a lot of what you said, largely on the similarities between Bush II and Obama and the government's stake in the stock market and automotive industry. Let me just highlight a few points of what you said there and offer my two cents / further questions:

Maybe not an emergency for you. But, before healthcare was passed, for every person who died in a terrorist attack globally (1), 58 people in the US died because of a lack of healthcare (2).

1 - 774.7 per year, according to the US Department of State
2 - 45k a year, according to Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance

I'd rather just the abolishment of welfare at the federal level and then let the states run their own independent welfare programs, whether it be nothing or even more than what's currently in place. A lot of people take advantage of welfare, but at the same time there are people who need it, so totally abolishing it would certainly bring those people more hardship. The answer is reform, not abolishment.


This is what I was talking about in my original post, and also where I asked for "evidence." Not you stating your opinions and offering nothing to back them up. Get it? And I'm not talking about the elitist ownership; that's pretty common knowledge.


This is where I leave the boat. I left my tinfoil hat at the cleaners. I don't think that everything on television is a way to distract people from politics; I think that it's certainly what happens a lot of the time, but I don't believe that it was the desired effect. They (the people involved in the creation of the show) just wanted people to watch so they'd get paid.

Okay I'm out.

We need to fix health care. We should introduce more programs to make it easier to become a doctor (financially speaking). More doctors means more supply. The demand certainly isn't going anywhere. So we cater to the supply side. Doctors make a little less but prices go down because of the free market. Doctors want to help people. They aren't in it for money. Then we open up the insurance market to make it so that no matter where you are you can get whatever health insurance you want. More options=more competition=lower prices. Basic economics. Everyone should have affordable health care. The government can't make that happen.

I think welfare is a crutch. I think a lot of people need that crutch. I think some people don't. We need to reform the system so that if you're getting money from the state you have to do something in return. I think community service would be a good idea. If you're taking money from tax payers I want you to be doing something. Not something hard, but helping at a soup kitchen or cleaning up a park. Low impact stuff.

I can see where you back off with tin foil. So do I. I don't think anyone planned it to work out the way it did. But it may have just been the natural evolution of things. If anyone planned this, it was the Commies fifty years ago. Vietnam turned America against the government. Vietnam made shit go wrong socially. The 1960s made the world we have now. That's not a good thing. Some good things happened, but it created the sons of bitches we have in politics now. We've just got so much fuckery going on. Everybody is a puppet of everybody else. I don't think Fox is evil and I don't think MSNBC is evil. I also don't think Hitler was evil. That's the problem. Everybody just does their own thing and it all spirals out of control.

Orwell was a socialist who saw the risks of socialism. He wanted people to have a good life but he saw the dangers that could come of it. I don't think he had a solution. That's where we are. We want everyone to have a good life and that's our mission as humans. To make it easier for ourselves and others. But when we take short cuts we run off the road.

Sense-A
08-07-2010, 11:15 AM
Good stuff Threyev and Boarzhead.

ahhh I don't really want to go too far on to a tangent as far as healthcare is concerned. But i do believe that the Obama/Pelosi healthcare bill that they passed with urgency and immediacy and panic panic panic was a great deception. You think it is a wonderful glorifying bill that is going to grant free healthcare to all people in a sweet candyland fair world. Not really. I've never in my life been denied healthcare or been unable to pay for my healthcare. Of course i am still fairly young. The real problems were with all the fraud and waste in medicare and medicaid. Why couldn't they just clean up medicare and medicaid and be done with it? Nooooooo they had to try to get their greedy government fingers in on the healthcare sector which is about 20% of our entire GDP. Lots of money for the taking! I think that once people see the new healthcare (obamacare) in action they won't be so impressed AT ALL. And once we see that obamacare is costing this country more money than our huge inflated defense budget we'll be completely convinced that it was some pretty bad accounting by the CBO when they claimed that it would save our country money in the long run. There are LOTS of things wrong with the new healthcare legislation but I could write a very long essay on it that WU fans are probably not interested in.

As far as Reagonomics, I think Reagan catches way more heat than he deserves. I actually think he was a good president. We can start a thread breaking down all the successes and failures of his administration. I know that liberals absolutely fucking hate Ronald Reagan. Which means he must not be bad at all (sarcasm)!!!

I liked Threyev's point about welfare being a state power in state jurisdiction. In my honest opinion, the federal government should not be doing charity. That is what we have churches and communities and friends and family for - to get us through the tough times. Not many of us completely make it on our own in this lifetime. We use other people as our crutches. I don't think that government is meant to be a crutch. Government is a "necessary evil" and we should remember that. If the government doing charity helps you forget that they are indeed a "necessary evil" then you are only being deceived. Besides, when the government does charity, you are taking from many to give to a few. Now the attitude of many is that they do not need to do charity because the tax money they pay the government is doing their charity for them. I met someone last week who has been unemployed since 2008 and is STILL RECEIVING UNEMPLOYMENT CHECKS!! 2 fucking years you can't find a job? Yeah right. There are enough not-for-profit and private charity organizations and churches and religious community centers in this country to do the charity for the people who legitimately need it. Government cannot efficiently operate these programs, they've PROVEN that to us.

Where it all breaks down in my opinion is something as simple as this: family values, morals, ethics, honesty, responsibility, positive attitude, self-dependency and self-respect, etc. All the characteristics and values are fading away. People just have bad fucking attitudes, think they deserve free everything and shouldn't have to work for it, think that successful people are just evil rich people, etc. etc. No one takes responsibilities for their own failures anymore. People are addicted to instant gratification and entertainment and don't know the value of taking pride in their work anymore. And most people don't even pay attention to the REAL news or the politics or even who they are voting for. Attention spans are so short now that someone can't even stand through the national anthem without pulling out their cell phone and texting. No respect for this country, no pride, no respect for your neighbors, etc. Big evil government or no big evil government, society is failing as a whole and becoming more like your biblic Sodom and Gamorrah. Simple old rituals such as actually sitting down with your family for dinner are becoming extinct. Families are becoming extinct. We don't even know what a fucking family is anymore? One spouse with 2 prior divorces? 2 gay married men? 3 fat kids with attention deficit disorders who eat their tv dinners watching are you smarter than a 5th grader? Parents who don't know how to be parents. Children who don't respect their parents. A busted educational system. Colleges that aren't even affordable because they tenured too many closet-communist professors who would never stand a chance at hacking it in the real world. etc. etc.

So yeah I'm not going to blame everything on some "cat stroking mother fucker" as Boarzhead put it. I'm putting most of the blame on the decay of moral values in society. And yeah, we thought that the communists were defeated when they were still always still there just waiting for us to let our guards down. Now we have fucking communists teaching our children at colleges around the country. Fucking commies are educating your children! And parents aren't educating their children. Parents hardly even see their own children. And I've already posted enough in this forum for you guys to notice my views on communism which i believe to be heavily influencing liberal left politics in this country. Their advancements are gradual and their policies implemented in pieces so that the change can happen nonchalantly.

If you really just want to seal the coffin of the USA, just take away legal citizens' rights to bear arms (which they have been trying to do for a long time). Take away the free people's weaponry and we are literally disarmed from whatever government does or from whoever takes over our government. Liberals only want criminals and government employees to have guns. Not free law-abiding citizens.

THUGNIFICENT
08-07-2010, 01:42 PM
I think welfare is a crutch. I think a lot of people need that crutch. I think some people don't. We need to reform the system so that if you're getting money from the state you have to do something in return. I think community service would be a good idea. If you're taking money from tax payers I want you to be doing something. Not something hard, but helping at a soup kitchen or cleaning up a park. Low impact stuff.
Cosign one-hundred per cent.

I can see where you back off with tin foil. So do I. I don't think anyone planned it to work out the way it did. But it may have just been the natural evolution of things. If anyone planned this, it was the Commies fifty years ago. Vietnam turned America against the government. Vietnam made shit go wrong socially. The 1960s made the world we have now. That's not a good thing. Some good things happened, but it created the sons of bitches we have in politics now. We've just got so much fuckery going on. Everybody is a puppet of everybody else. I would argue that, while lots of fuckery did go down as a direct result of the 60's, it was a time of great advancement for many groups of people in society. Women, gays, non-white dudes - they all got some wins in that decade, which was extremely rare for them in American history up to that point. It was also the last time that any significant change in the way the government behaved and the policies it followed was affected by the people. Since then, protests and marches have meant dick to the people in power, and haven't lead to any change. Even groups that get lots of coverage (today's Tea Party, for example) don't actually influence politics.

I don't think Fox is evil and I don't think MSNBC is evil. I also don't think Hitler was evil. That's the problem. Everybody just does their own thing and it all spirals out of control. I'm all for shades of gray (one of the primary joys in my life is directing people to the plethora of racist Ghandi quotes out there), but I don't know about that whole Hitler-not-being-evil thing. But that's another thread.


ahhh I don't really want to go too far on to a tangent as far as healthcare is concerned. But i do believe that the Obama/Pelosi healthcare bill that they passed with urgency and immediacy and panic panic panic was a great deception. You think it is a wonderful glorifying bill that is going to grant free healthcare to all people in a sweet candyland fair world. Not really. I've never in my life been denied healthcare or been unable to pay for my healthcare. Of course i am still fairly young. The real problems were with all the fraud and waste in medicare and medicaid. Why couldn't they just clean up medicare and medicaid and be done with it? Nooooooo they had to try to get their greedy government fingers in on the healthcare sector which is about 20% of our entire GDP. Lots of money for the taking! I think that once people see the new healthcare (obamacare) in action they won't be so impressed AT ALL. And once we see that obamacare is costing this country more money than our huge inflated defense budget we'll be completely convinced that it was some pretty bad accounting by the CBO when they claimed that it would save our country money in the long run. There are LOTS of things wrong with the new healthcare legislation but I could write a very long essay on it that WU fans are probably not interested in. I should've stated this in the other post, but I'm pretty vehemently against the healthcare bill that passed. I'm all for healthcare reform, but that's not at all what we got. I still want a public option, and I think the notion that you are forced to get healthcare is an idiotic and oppressive one. I also believe that the main issue that needed to be addressed was the corruption and dismal treatment of human beings within and by the insurance companies, and that wasn't changed at all; probably because the insurance companies are in the pockets of just about every politician with a voice (see I can put on that tinfoil New Era when I want to). And if you wanna write that essay on why you think the healthcare plan is ass, PM it to me and I'll read it (no homo).

That being said, there are certainly positives to the healthcare bill being passed, which were what I had in mind when speaking on it earlier. Things like the fact that kids can't be denied because of preexisting conditions, small business tax cuts to help pay for insurance, and that insurance companies can't cut somebody when she or he gets sick. Is that worth the price? Probably not. But I still think those are good things that shouldn't be ignored.


As far as Reagonomics, I think Reagan catches way more heat than he deserves. I actually think he was a good president. We can start a thread breaking down all the successes and failures of his administration. I know that liberals absolutely fucking hate Ronald Reagan. Which means he must not be bad at all (sarcasm)!!!

Yeah we're definitely on different pages here. If you make a thread about it I'll definitely make the argument for "Shitty" while you make the argument for "Good" or "Not So Shitty" or whatever.

Where it all breaks down in my opinion is something as simple as this: family values, morals, ethics, honesty, responsibility, positive attitude, self-dependency and self-respect, etc. All the characteristics and values are fading away. People just have bad fucking attitudes, think they deserve free everything and shouldn't have to work for it, think that successful people are just evil rich people, etc. etc. No one takes responsibilities for their own failures anymore. People are addicted to instant gratification and entertainment and don't know the value of taking pride in their work anymore. And most people don't even pay attention to the REAL news or the politics or even who they are voting for. Attention spans are so short now that someone can't even stand through the national anthem without pulling out their cell phone and texting. No respect for this country, no pride, no respect for your neighbors, etc. Big evil government or no big evil government, society is failing as a whole and becoming more like your biblic Sodom and Gamorrah. Simple old rituals such as actually sitting down with your family for dinner are becoming extinct. Families are becoming extinct. We don't even know what a fucking family is anymore? One spouse with 2 prior divorces? 2 gay married men? 3 fat kids with attention deficit disorders who eat their tv dinners watching are you smarter than a 5th grader? Parents who don't know how to be parents. Children who don't respect their parents. A busted educational system. Colleges that aren't even affordable because they tenured too many closet-communist professors who would never stand a chance at hacking it in the real world. etc. etc.

I disagree with you here on certain aspects. I think that the whole "family values" rhetoric that is usually pushed out by the right (no disrespect) is pretty much bullshit. There was just as much miserable marriages and homosexuals in America in the time when we still had these precious values (when people talk of this, I usually get an image of the 50's or early 60's; correct me if I'm wrong), it's just that people suppressed their feelings. They got stuck in miserable relationships and soldiered through it for their whole life while they churned out the two kids that are fucking up social security right about...now. The only difference between then and now is that people are more open about their feelings, and it is much more widely accepted (in most aspects of society, except for the most part the very religious) to get a divorce etc.

Now as far as the decline of society, I can't decide if I agree or not. Some days I look at Lady Gaga and think we're all headed for shit, and some days I just think that this is the typical "this is the end" mentality people have had since humans evolved to the point where we're capable of such thoughts. More often that not, I lean towards the latter rather than the former, and just say that it's kids bein' kids, acting differently from their parents and pissing them off.

I definitely cosign the idea that this generation is the dumbest, though. Or if not the dumbest, just dumb as a bitch. Pound for pound, we've been getting dumber and dumber for a while. That's why, with all the talk of things we need to reform right now, it's strange that so often education seems to get placed on the back burner. If we taught the kids how to think for themselves and made them into intelligent citizens, they'd be able to assist in the reformation of all the other problems in the country. That's just me though.


If you really just want to seal the coffin of the USA, just take away legal citizens' rights to bear arms (which they have been trying to do for a long time). Take away the free people's weaponry and we are literally disarmed from whatever government does or from whoever takes over our government. Liberals only want criminals and government employees to have guns. Not free law-abiding citizens. I don't think that sort of "liberals want this" and "liberals are commies trying to brainwash your children!" rhetoric is helping anybody, least of all yourself and your arguments. Do some liberals (foolishly) believe in restriction of gun rights? Sure. Do all? Surely not. Do most? I don't think so. Many believe in reform, certainly, but those who want guns only in the hands of federal employees are in the minority.

ZigZag
08-07-2010, 02:10 PM
The way they acted in Staten Island about a mosque being built over there was also very racist. Fuckin fags.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-07-2010, 03:17 PM
I think that you make good points here. Essentially we always say "this is the end!" Every generation has done it. Its never happened, and while I might be wrong "the end" is never going to happen. Eventually there might be an accidental or terrorist nuking but we'll get over it. Its just a bomb. Cooler heads prevail. There are almost 7 billion people on this planet. I don't even think we could kill everyone off. We're survivors. We're the end of evolution. We've evolved beyond our bodies. Its probably hubris but I think as a species we're nigh invincible. Give us a problem and we can solve it. We've been without planet wide problems for a while now. Things went quiet after ww2.

The Cold War never went hot so it never got resolved. Here we are with a bunch of baggage and no easy solutions because we didn't listen to Patton and tear Stalins balls off before he got the bomb. We let Russia get the bomb and changed the game. Then one of the players quits without warning and the other guy doesn't know what to do any more. So we find enemies. We call them terrorists. Declare war on them. Instead of treating them as criminals we make war without clear objectives (which is disastrous, war without clear direction is chaos) and ten years later we don't know where we're heading. Of course we've never known where we're heading and that's why life's an adventure. We're essentially six billion drunk drivers not knowing if we'll make it home or not. Me? I like my odds.

On the topic of Reagan. I don't think he was bad. He was blind to everything else because he had the Evil Empire sitting on the other side of the world playing Russian roulette with him. He did what he thought he needed to. He probably didn't know about Iran Contra. Governments are big. If he did I'm sure he felt it was for the greater good of destroying the Russians ability to kill Americans. He also wasn't well. His Alzheimers was in full swing by the end of his first term. He took a bullet and lived. He was a strong man who kept together. I respect him. But I don't think he made good choices in retrospect. He's not the God that conservatives make him. He's also by no means the devil. He was the conservative version of FDR. He saved the country but left it off worse then he knew. I wasn't alive yet so I wasn't there for Reagan, but he seems okay.

On social structures, Aristotle essentially says there are three things that matter. Individual, Family, and State. Every person is an individual. Every person belongs to a family. And every person belongs to a state. A family is a Man, his wife, and his children. No father and mother, no family. Homosexuality? I'm all for it. But its not the family unit. It never has been and never will be. Its not the same thing. Marriage is more then love and sex. Its about raising citizens. If you want children and you're gay, you should marry a woman and have a homosexual relationship on the side.

She can be your friend and help you raise the children, whatever. If she needs a lover she can have one. Work it out. But kids need a father and a mother. That seems messy, so I think its easier to keep marriage and child rearing to heterosexual couples. But I don't think a kid should have two fathers because he's missing out on having a mother. It may be better then having an abusive father and a detached drunken bitch for a mother but its not ideal. A man can love a man as another man, but I don't think a man should love a man as a woman. Its two men, not a man and a woman. Totally different creatures.

The way I see it there are four genders. Male, Female, Neuter, and Both (think A, B, O and AB). Male is male. He might be attracted to men, but he is a man. Female is Female. She might be attracted to women but shes a woman. Neuters are not sexual creatures. Some people are meant to be chaste. Its uncommon, but its there. Bigenders are a whole bag of stuff I don't want to get into the complexities of. But pretty much a fag or a dyke are in this category. A woman in the body of a man or a man in the body of a woman. Whatever. They can screw whoever they want. A "normal" gay is A- while a normal straight is A+ or vice versa but they're essentially one gender with two variants. A traditional lesbian is B- or B+ whatever with the straight woman as the opposite but still one gender. Then AB+ might be a gay man who feels like a woman and AB- might be a gay woman who feels like a man. Its complicated. I'm not an expert. But everyone belongs. Its just not as easy as putting a square peg in a round hole.

On Gun Control. I won't lie. Guns scare me. I'm always afraid a little bit when I see a gun. But I'd rather have my own gun and police my own life then have some government enforcer be responsible for my safety. Police should have guns. But they shouldn't be expected to defend me. I'll defend me. When I need back up I'll call five oh. If a burglar breaks into my house I'll decide whether I need to shoot him or not thank you. I'll be damned if I go to jail for shooting someone who entered my home unlawfully. Every man's home is his castle. Every citizen should have a gun. That's the difference between a citizen and a serf. A citizen doesn't need to put up with bullshit.

THUGNIFICENT
08-07-2010, 06:24 PM
I think that you make good points here. Essentially we always say "this is the end!" Every generation has done it. Its never happened, and while I might be wrong "the end" is never going to happen. Eventually there might be an accidental or terrorist nuking but we'll get over it. Its just a bomb. Cooler heads prevail. There are almost 7 billion people on this planet. I don't even think we could kill everyone off. We're survivors. We're the end of evolution. We've evolved beyond our bodies. Its probably hubris but I think as a species we're nigh invincible. Give us a problem and we can solve it. We've been without planet wide problems for a while now. Things went quiet after ww2.

Cosign. All I wanna do is throw in a (paraphrased) Bill Hicks quote that I think sums up my feelings on what you just said, "Evolution didn't stop when we grew thumbs." Something like that, although certainly better put.

The Cold War never went hot so it never got resolved. Here we are with a bunch of baggage and no easy solutions because we didn't listen to Patton and tear Stalins balls off before he got the bomb. We let Russia get the bomb and changed the game.
Do you think that America could've simply "tore off Stalin's balls?" I don't. You gotta think about the sort of ruler that Russia was living under, combined with the massive population. That's why it always pisses me off when people talk about what Hitler coulda done and how he would've won the war if a, b and c happened. Bullshit. Even if he'd won at Stalingrad, Stalin would've thrown more and more young Russian men at Hitler until Germany was defeated. The aforementioned battle at Stalingrad is just such an example; if memory serves me correctly (which it probably isn't, but the gist is essentially on point), it was the Soviet Union going up against three or four countries, lead by Germany and backed by Italy and Romania (that I can remember). Stalin won that battle, despite the fact that he suffered over a million casualties with Germany and co. losing about 3/4 of that. Stalin had enough heads to beat Hitler, it was just a matter of when. On top of that, Hitler was a clumsy military commander so it didn't matter, but that's another topic.

Basically, the point I'm trying to make here in my meandering way is that attempting to engage in the ripping of Soviet testicles would not have been easy at all. It might have even been a suicide mission. And, since they had enough manpower to drag out a war against the United States for a long time (even if we dropped more nukes on em; which I doubt we would've following Hiroshima), eventually they would've gotten bombs of their own, and dropped them back on us. The ripping of balls would have to be so perfectly executed - from minor battles in the countryside to the bombing of cities - it would've been destined for failure.

We're essentially six billion drunk drivers not knowing if we'll make it home or not. Me? I like my odds. Then again, if we're six billion drunk drivers, the chances of a fatal car crash are pretty high. (My oh my I'm clever)

He saved the country but left it off worse then he knew. I wasn't alive yet so I wasn't there for Reagan, but he seems okay. Well. I guess I'll just see you when that Reagan thread pokes it's ugly head on KTL somewhere.

On social structures, Aristotle essentially says there are three things that matter. Individual, Family, and State. Every person is an individual. Every person belongs to a family. And every person belongs to a state. A family is a Man, his wife, and his children. No father and mother, no family. Homosexuality? I'm all for it. But its not the family unit. It never has been and never will be. Its not the same thing. Marriage is more then love and sex. Its about raising citizens. If you want children and you're gay, you should marry a woman and have a homosexual relationship on the side.

She can be your friend and help you raise the children, whatever. If she needs a lover she can have one. Work it out. But kids need a father and a mother. That seems messy, so I think its easier to keep marriage and child rearing to heterosexual couples. But I don't think a kid should have two fathers because he's missing out on having a mother. It may be better then having an abusive father and a detached drunken bitch for a mother but its not ideal. A man can love a man as another man, but I don't think a man should love a man as a woman. Its two men, not a man and a woman. Totally different creatures.

I don't know about this one. A gay (two men) couple used to lived down the road from me. They raised seven kids from that house, and each and every one of them went to college and made something out of their respective life. That's an accomplishment no matter how you look at it. I mean, I don't live in an area where nobody goes to college, nor do I live in an area where everybody does. The fact that all seven of them went to college and now have successful careers (with some having families) is something that most heterosexual couples wouldn't be able to obtain.

I disagree with you on your definition of a "family." I think a family is anybody that loves you and gives you strong support, moral or otherwise. Whether you're gay or straight doesn't factor into this as much. Of course, growing up as the child of a gay couple is probably incredibly difficult and no doubt leads to a shitload of teasing and confusion, but in the end I think it makes the kid stronger, especially if the family actually supports them.

On Gun Control. I won't lie. Guns scare me. I'm always afraid a little bit when I see a gun. But I'd rather have my own gun and police my own life then have some government enforcer be responsible for my safety. Police should have guns. But they shouldn't be expected to defend me. I'll defend me. When I need back up I'll call five oh. If a burglar breaks into my house I'll decide whether I need to shoot him or not thank you. I'll be damned if I go to jail for shooting someone who entered my home unlawfully. Every man's home is his castle. Every citizen should have a gun. That's the difference between a citizen and a serf. A citizen doesn't need to put up with bullshit. Cosign. That being said, we need to think about what is meant by "every citizen should have a gun." In the house? Definitely. But on them at all times? I don't know. Concealed? Definitely not. You also have to think about the mindset you get when you buy a gun. I've never owned my own gun, but I've held them down before, and that shit fucks with your mental. I started thinking wild reckless thoughts whenever I held it, and whenever I would be out with my friends while holding, I could feel myself being on some other shit. I was angrier, more suspicious of others, quicker to snap on somebody, and any time anything would go slightly against plan, I'd be questioning whether I'd have to use the gun or not. I'm not trying to give you some speech and shit - if you can hold with no problems, do it. But at the same time, there's a lot of people out there (myself included) who can't handle that shit, and just having a gun in their possession could lead to some catastrophic and tragic incidents.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-08-2010, 01:56 AM
Russia probably lost a third of its population (about 50 of 170 million) in the Great Patriotic War. We lost one third of a percent of 130 million and we had Britain on our side who lost about 1 percent of 50 million. We had the numeric and industrial superiority. The war would have dragged out quite a bit but it would have been for the best. I'm Russian. I'm not going to say they aren't the toughest bastards on earth, but I think end game we had Russia in the pocket.

On the family thing I just think that a woman and a man both have very different perspectives which are useful in raising children. Ideally I'd want my son to know what it means to be a man from both sides of the story. Raising kids is good cop/bad cop. A son needs a hard ass for a father to instill virtue and a softer mother so he doesn't go nuts. A daughter needs a dad who will protect and spoil her and a mother who will explain that weird bleeding thing... Gays can do it. I'm just saying a gay man isn't a woman. Its just not the same. Its not bad its just not the same. Its not a knock its just how I see it. Plenty of people are shitty parents. Plenty of gays could do better, they can look after a kid, and they won't turn him gay or something. I really don't know whether I think its equal. I think ideally kids should be raised by their parents. If not possible then sure. But I don't think the gay marriage will ever been equal in the eyes of the people to traditional marriage. I think its normal that men hate their father and have weird feelings for their mother. In a subconscious Freud way.

I agree on the gun thing. I think whenever weapons are near at hand Enyo whispers in the ears of men. Its like if I'm ever near a cop facing away from me I'm one of those people who fights the voice of insanity in my head that says "grab it, see what he does". I know I'm not the only person who feels that way I've heard a comedian mention it as one of his problems. I can't explain it. I don't think its the devil or anything. There's a part of man deep down that wants to reach out and choke something.

Its like in The Dark Night when the Joker explains he's a dog chasing cars but has no idea what to do if he caught one. That sort of primal insanity lives in every man. We suppress it, but it rears its head whenever it shouldn't. Its the part of the body that wants to die just to see what it feels like. Its like your inner child's evil twin. Its not very smart and it always makes bad choices. Its the devil on your shoulder.

food for thought
08-10-2010, 11:42 PM
LOL

i was watching Colbert just now and he had a guest on. after he introduced him, his first question was, "first of all sir, what are you doing so close to the vicinity of ground zero with a muslim name?"

ahahahah

Colbert and Stewart are classic

Stewart clowned the fuck out of these racist ass people too on tonights show lol he killed it

THUGNIFICENT
08-11-2010, 09:08 PM
Stewart ethered them. Didn't catch Colbert.

EAGLE EYE
08-14-2010, 02:53 AM
I think the Muslim community needs to face the fact that they stand no chance at educating the general public about their religion or way of life here in the states. It's a daunting task to make your average middle class citizen to exercise logic, patience, or critical thinking when so much anger and fear is attached to certain key words that pop up in conversations.

As far as I'm concerned, building this Mosque WILL do nothing more fuel the anger and make matters worse in the coming years. Although I agree they are well within their rights and have the support of the 1st amendment. Yet it's simply naive and plain arrogant to not gauge or take the collective emotional temperature of the opposing sides into consideration.

I also don't want to see the Islamization that's happened in Europe (shift) to the USA. It's already fucked up enough here with a predominant Christian population who impose their ideologies and belief systems onto the general public every chance they get.



BTW this guy's video has over 3 million views and the one below is what the GOP is pushing. Surprised these haven't been posted by now. This is gonna turn into a real mess.


vjS0Novt3X4
mjGJPPRD3u0

Frank Sobotka
08-14-2010, 08:16 AM
I predict a 'civil war' in the islamic community, like when all those people split the catholic church around the end of the dark ages, after this happens the "reformed islam" - the rational ones - will fit in pretty well in western society and mosques will be no problem

Professor Poopsnagle
08-14-2010, 08:30 AM
KTL isn't ready for Pat Condell.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-14-2010, 09:15 AM
The fucked thing to remember is even if no one believed in God we'd still have cultural clash. Ultimately its not about Christianity and Islam its about Civilization vs a bunch of stone age Dune Coons. If the middle east wasn't fucked up we'd all vacation there its a nice place geographically (other then the never ending featureless deserts.) I only know one person who lives in Kuwait and she's a hot rich white girl whose daddy is making figures there. Though that probably makes me an expert with regard to tusken raiders.

http://starsmedia.ign.com/stars/image/article/836/836923/angry-tusken-raider_001_1195607714.jpg


ALLALLALLALLALLALLALLALLA!


"Those Tuskens walk like men, but they're vicious, mindless monsters."
―Cliegg Lars

THUGNIFICENT
08-14-2010, 01:57 PM
vjS0Novt3X4
mjGJPPRD3u0

Damn. Some people are wild.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-14-2010, 02:41 PM
http://www.johntedwards.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/crusades.jpg

http://i42.tinypic.com/8wk17o.jpg

I was totally fine with it until I heard it's name was Cordoba. Then I realized its not paranoid if they're really out to get you.

Deus Vult!

Professor Poopsnagle
08-14-2010, 10:17 PM
They changed the name now... figures...

But still, why build it so fucking close to Ground Zero. Fucking plane parts were found all over that area. I read a story about some faggit opening a gay bar next to the mosque, that would be funny as fuck.

food for thought
08-14-2010, 10:40 PM
i still dont see what the big deal is. i think americans are blowing this way out of proportion.

they want to target and discriminate against muslims because their faulty ass government told them islam attacked their freedom on 9/11.

they are over 2 million muslim-americans. how can you shit on their whole existance because supposedly a hijacker named mohammed atta with his goons was muslim?

These american-muslims(i cant believe they even made that term) fight and die in your wars. its a religion and they act like its a nationality. bunch of stupid ass fuckers with no mental capacity to question what they are told. fucking idiots. YOU PEOPLE ARE THE SCUM OF THE PLANET EARTH.

http://pakistanisforpeace.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/muslim-american-soldier-dead.jpg

they fight in your armies and die in your racist imperialist wars.

they sacrifice theirs lives for the country just like everybody else. but smh at 2010 America discrimating against their own kind. BLATANT AS FUCK TOO. NOT GIVING A FUCK. like everything is normal. would three blocks be enough space? how about 4?

fuck niggers, fucking mexicans taking our jobs, and fuck muslims because they hate us for our freedom right?

fuckers deserve to burn slow in hell thats my word. die slow.

id rather chill with a muslim instead of a racist ass fuck like you people any day.

Professor Poopsnagle
08-14-2010, 10:48 PM
So much anger in your post. If this mosque wasn't built so close to ground zero, no one would mind, but it's an act of provocation, that's for sure. What's racist against being anti Islam anyway? It's not a race.

food for thought
08-14-2010, 10:58 PM
aahahhah.

"we hate Niggers, Muslims, and Mexicans bro."

"whats the problem?"

"this is america bro."

yeaa.

Professor Poopsnagle
08-15-2010, 10:18 AM
Eh what?

THUGNIFICENT
08-15-2010, 11:30 AM
I don't get what he meant with that last post, but I agree with the one before.

What's racist against being anti Islam anyway? It's not a race.

I think because most Islamic people are Arabic, so by extension if you have a passionate hatred for Islamic people, chances are you'll end up disliking a large amount of Arabs by extension, which will probably transfer into racism before long.

Professor Poopsnagle
08-15-2010, 12:14 PM
I don't get what he meant with that last post, but I agree with the one before.



I think because most Islamic people are Arabic, so by extension if you have a passionate hatred for Islamic people, chances are you'll end up disliking a large amount of Arabs by extension, which will probably transfer into racism before long.
So if I hate rap music, I'm racist because most rappers are black?

A lot of Muslims are not Arabic, some are Persian, Somalian, even China has 20 million Muslims. Look, I'm anti Islamic, but I don't have anything against Muslims, just their religion. Or any other religion for that matter. And as far as racism goes, Islam is the most racist ideology in the World. The Koran is a book full of anti-Semitic teachings, It even makes distinction between skin colour (darker skin is slaves, light brown is the most Arabic and thus the most pure) I don't feel like looking up and quoting the surahs and writings, but it's definitely not the religion of peace. Just look at the Islamic countries over the World...

food for thought
08-15-2010, 01:13 PM
ahahah

i was drunk when i posted here last night lol

THUGNIFICENT
08-15-2010, 05:54 PM
So if I hate rap music, I'm racist because most rappers are black?

A lot of Muslims are not Arabic, some are Persian, Somalian, even China has 20 million Muslims. Look, I'm anti Islamic, but I don't have anything against Muslims, just their religion. Or any other religion for that matter. And as far as racism goes, Islam is the most racist ideology in the World. The Koran is a book full of anti-Semitic teachings, It even makes distinction between skin colour (darker skin is slaves, light brown is the most Arabic and thus the most pure) I don't feel like looking up and quoting the surahs and writings, but it's definitely not the religion of peace. Just look at the Islamic countries over the World...
Yo I agree with you on the fact that the Koran preaches violence (as does the Bible and every other religion, for the most part) no matter what its readers say. But the majority of the world's Islamic population is Arabic. I feel like if somebody is exclusively anti-Islam but not anti-Christian etc., chances are that there is - at the very least - a racial element to their feelings.

Professor Poopsnagle
08-15-2010, 06:11 PM
If someone is exclusively anti Islamic, that person is probably of an other religion. If a white person only listens to classical music and hates rap, doesn't mean that person hates blacks. Just as much as hating the religion of Islam isn't the same as hating Muslims. Hatred towards Muslims isn't racist neither, as they're not a race. If you call it racism, you're only deflating the meaning of the word racism.

Queen Of Poetry
08-16-2010, 08:32 AM
Ok here is my feelings on the mosque (good, bad or indifferent).

As a New Yorker and someone who lost a family in the 9/11 attacks, I think it's tasteless for the Muslims to want to have a mosque there. But on the same note, this is America and they have the freedom to practice their beliefs anywhere they choose. I'm not sure why they pick that particular spot though............



All these years later that place is still a hard area to be. I go there b/c my cousins body was never found so that is where she is and when I do go there the emotions r still raw and hard.


Now I know that Muslims didn't cause this pain, but instead it was a very specific group (and please don't get started on the "theories" out there b/c I can't deal with that).......

Unfortunately, some folks can't seem to get this thru their heads and never will......that's like sayin that all Catholics r a bunch of child fuckers..........no they aren't..........a few were but not all.

I think that if Muslims have chosen this area then fine...........but don't be surprised when the crazy/racist folks come out and protest. U put it there after all these opinions have come out, then u accept what comes with it. B/c just like they have the right to have their mosque there, folks have the right to voice their opinions.

Frank Sobotka
08-16-2010, 08:37 AM
If americans think muslims can't have a mosque near Ground Zero because a few terrorists killed 2000 of your people can you imagine how the iraqi's feel?

Professor Poopsnagle
08-16-2010, 10:04 AM
Fallacy ^

The thing is, why have it build as close as possible to GZ. It's provocative and at the very least tactless.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-16-2010, 10:30 AM
Ok here is my feelings on the mosque (good, bad or indifferent).

As a New Yorker and someone who lost a family in the 9/11 attacks, I think it's tasteless for the Muslims to want to have a mosque there. But on the same note, this is America and they have the freedom to practice their beliefs anywhere they choose. I'm not sure why they pick that particular spot though............



All these years later that place is still a hard area to be. I go there b/c my cousins body was never found so that is where she is and when I do go there the emotions r still raw and hard.


Now I know that Muslims didn't cause this pain, but instead it was a very specific group (and please don't get started on the "theories" out there b/c I can't deal with that).......

Unfortunately, some folks can't seem to get this thru their heads and never will......that's like sayin that all Catholics r a bunch of child fuckers..........no they aren't..........a few were but not all.

I think that if Muslims have chosen this area then fine...........but don't be surprised when the crazy/racist folks come out and protest. U put it there after all these opinions have come out, then u accept what comes with it. B/c just like they have the right to have their mosque there, folks have the right to voice their opinions.

Its not a theory Queen. They're building a huge Islamic complex (fine) in a financial district. That's unusual but reasonable. There are Muslims who work there who might go there and others might become interested and look into it. Fine. But they're doing it on the 10th anniversary of 911. Honoring the victims? Now we're getting into weird territory but not insane. It would be nice to see an Islamic outpouring of good will once in a while instead of Just defending themselves saying "we're not ALL crazy." Then their name is the Cordoba House. Cordoba being the old capital of Islam in Spain. Which of course they "liberated" from the Europeans.

It stinks of symbolism. Legal but less the benign.


If americans think muslims can't have a mosque near Ground Zero because a few terrorists killed 2000 of your people can you imagine how the iraqi's feel?

3000 killed and 6000 wounded. Much larger then Pearl Harbor which was about 2500 killed and 1300 wounded. A million Japanese died for that insult over the next four years. We've been more then civil to the Afghans. Most of the deaths in the Iraq war have been caused by insurgents. We've simply been trying to maintain the peace for a decade.

Don't try and spin it into something its not.

Queen Of Poetry
08-16-2010, 11:13 AM
Its not a theory Queen. They're building a huge Islamic complex (fine) in a financial district.


Oh sweetie no..........my comment about the theories was referring to folks who think that Bin Laden didn't do this and the American govt. did.........that's what I meant. I know where they want the mosque...........I just don't want to hear these theories about who is responsible for the 9/11 attacks b/c in my mind, it was Bin Laden......my brain cannot wrap around the idea that our govt. killed all those folks including my cousin..........

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-16-2010, 11:18 AM
Yeah I'm the same. Bin Laden worked for the CIA in the 80s as a buffer against the Soviet Union and everyone thinks therefore he had to still be on their payroll now. But it doesn't make sense. It would be like assuming Saddam was still our guy when we invaded. He was our buffer against Iranian expansion of power but he outgrew his boots and tried to take over kuwait so we put him on his ass. Then Bush II said "you know what fuck it lets kill the bastard he's just mouthing off and he's eventually going to do something stupid."

It was the same in ww2. We were using Hitler as a buffer against Russia but he outgrew his boots when he seized Poland and we cleaned his clock. And again, we used Russia against Germany to maintain control of shit. Most of America's enemies were previously our allies. That's why we kick their ass so hard. Commoners don't understand Machiavelli.

J.T.S.
08-16-2010, 12:11 PM
all Catholics r a bunch of child fuckers

i'd say 80 percent of them are!!

TheBoarzHeadBoy
08-16-2010, 01:02 PM
Christ compels you to shut your mouth.

My Pope is Infallible.

http://brianakira.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/pope.jpg

LoTec
08-17-2010, 05:31 PM
We've been more then civil to the Afghans. Most of the deaths in the Iraq war have been caused by insurgents. We've simply been trying to maintain the peace for a decade.

Don't try and spin it into something its not.

wow