Crickey Children, it is one thing to attack eack other on each and every thread, but to bring up multiple threads and condense them into one homogenous lump, is well a Bridge Too Far, maybe, possibly, perhaps.

You'll notice that Harcourt jumped in here to attack out of nowhere. He just keeps trolling, trying to pull others into his tedious game. But I guess every forum needs their own little pet troll around and he fits the bill.

Hey Koheesti,

I don't personally think Harcourt is a Troll, just as much as I don't think you, Chuck or UG are Trolls.

What I think is you have all got yourselves into a cycle of retaliatory strikes and like the middle east or Ireland, you do not know how to extricate yourselves.

You all have strong beliefs, but it would help if you actually listened to the other side, you might not agree with it, but it might, just might have some bearing and creedence.

Why don't we all concentrate on the issue at hand, any issue, and try and discuss it without petty schoolboy swipes and one line idiocy.

Just my view and if you think anyone is a Troll with bad intentions, pull apart their thread constructively not abusively.

Moss

Did anyone here bother to note that the Glenn Beck praised Rauf, the head of this proposed cultural center in the past? Or that the Imam's wife is a vocal proponent of women's rights under Islam?

The media watchdog group Media Matters highlighted a 2006 segment from ABC's "Good Morning America" in which Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and conservative TV host Glenn Beck discussed the need to separate moderate Islam from the extremist elements of the religion. Both Beck -- who has emerged as a leading critic of the imam's Cordoba House project -- and Rauf seem to be speaking with a shared voice on the need to elevate moderate Islamic elements. At one point, Beck appears to gesture toward Imam Rauf as he discusses the "good Muslims" who make up the "vast majority" of Islam's believers.

Isn't the proposed site almost two blocks away from Ground Zero? To a New Yorker that's a long way.

Apart from that, just how far away is far enough?

The landing gear from the hijacked plane hit he building on the site.

Brilliant reposte, sharp, incisive, to the point, answers the question posed on every level, leaving nobody in any doubt regarding the righteousness of the selected response.

Thanks for the effusive praise. I like to remain humble, but my answer did point out that the Burlington Coat factory also sustained damage from the terrorist attack which is why many people equate it with Ground Zero. It is certainly not a place to build a Mosque by an Imam who has blamed the U.S for 9/11.

timestamp='1282602633' post='3834248']

Did anyone here bother to note that the Glenn Beck praised Rauf, the head of this proposed cultural center in the past? Or that the Imam's wife is a vocal proponent of women's rights under Islam?

That is nice to know, but this is certainly not the first time in history that someone has changed their mind when presented with new evidence about someone or something. I was sympathetic to the red shirts until shortly before May 19 - not any more.

The debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque.

Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be "sensitive" requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from "ground zero.

Ron Paul

the entire post on his website is interesting reading.

Charles Krauthammer No Mosqe at Ground Zero

A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).

When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there [blogger Note: and the first responders who sacrificed their lives there trying to save others] -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.

That's why Disney's 1993 proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition that feared vulgarization of the Civil War. It's why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It's why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.

And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place; it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign.

...Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and onetime imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists?

...Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.

complete article: http://vivechristusr...-at-ground.html

Ron Paul

the entire post on his website is interesting reading.

As always RP is clear & to the point IMHO

Thanks for the heads up always like to keep track of RP

As you said the whole article is good reading...I liked this as it is classic RP

In my opinion it has come from the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia and are compelled to constantly justify it.

They never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars. A select quote from soldiers from in Afghanistan and Iraq expressing concern over the mosque is pure propaganda and an affront to their bravery and sacrifice.

The claim is that we are in the Middle East to protect our liberties is misleading. To continue this charade, millions of Muslims are indicted and we are obligated to rescue them from their religious and political leaders. And, we’re supposed to believe that abusing our liberties here at home and pursuing unconstitutional wars overseas will solve our problems.

The nineteen suicide bombers didn’t come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iran. Fifteen came from our ally Saudi Arabia, a country that harbors strong American resentment, yet we invade and occupy Iraq where no al Qaeda existed prior to 9/11.

Hey Koheesti,

I don't personally think Harcourt is a Troll, just as much as I don't think you, Chuck or UG are Trolls.

What I think is you have all got yourselves into a cycle of retaliatory strikes and like the middle east or Ireland, you do not know how to extricate yourselves.

You all have strong beliefs, but it would help if you actually listened to the other side, you might not agree with it, but it might, just might have some bearing and creedence.

Why don't we all concentrate on the issue at hand, any issue, and try and discuss it without petty schoolboy swipes and one line idiocy.

Just my view and if you think anyone is a Troll with bad intentions, pull apart their thread constructively not abusively.

Moss

I understand where you're coming from. I think if you research the threads one thing you will find that myself and others do in fact listen to him or Alex. That's the problem. They've made an unfounded accusation, I asked for proof to back it up and then the merry-go-round begins. If I wasn't listening, I would never get into any of these skirmishes. Trying to goad people into a bandwidth-wasting forum slug fest over nothing is a troll tactic. There, that's me backing up my accusation that he is a troll. There used to be a thread on here about how a few on the left here refuse to answer questions so having a meaningful dialogue with those people is nearly impossible.

Of all the rules they have around here I would add one more, "make an accusation and fail to back it up with any evidence and you get a week vacation". Like when Harcourt called me a racist the other day. Back where I come from, he'd probably be banned for that without backing it up. Racism isn't a sensitive topic around here so he got away with it and I didn't push the issue.

Oh and by the by, she is the first Muslim Miss USA

She is against building the Al Queda mosque near Ground Zero. That and the hot picture are relevant enough for me.

Well I must say its the first time I have thought about having sex with a muslim She looks way better without the Burka on no wonder they want them to wear them things if they all look like that

I would be willing to marry her and have lots of little Muslims running around.

I would be willing to marry her and have lots of little Muslims running around.

FINALLY were on the same page and agree 100% UG

I would be willing to marry her and have lots of little Muslims running around.

She is such a FOX. Might even be worth converting to Islam for.

Hey Koheesti,

I don't personally think Harcourt is a Troll, just as much as I don't think you, Chuck or UG are Trolls.

What I think is you have all got yourselves into a cycle of retaliatory strikes and like the middle east or Ireland, you do not know how to extricate yourselves.

You all have strong beliefs, but it would help if you actually listened to the other side, you might not agree with it, but it might, just might have some bearing and creedence.

Why don't we all concentrate on the issue at hand, any issue, and try and discuss it without petty schoolboy swipes and one line idiocy.

Just my view and if you think anyone is a Troll with bad intentions, pull apart their thread constructively not abusively.

Moss

I understand where you're coming from. I think if you research the threads one thing you will find that myself and others do in fact listen to him or Alex. That's the problem. They've made an unfounded accusation, I asked for proof to back it up and then the merry-go-round begins. If I wasn't listening, I would never get into any of these skirmishes. Trying to goad people into a bandwidth-wasting forum slug fest over nothing is a troll tactic. There, that's me backing up my accusation that he is a troll. There used to be a thread on here about how a few on the left here refuse to answer questions so having a meaningful dialogue with those people is nearly impossible.

Of all the rules they have around here I would add one more, "make an accusation and fail to back it up with any evidence and you get a week vacation". Like when Harcourt called me a racist the other day. Back where I come from, he'd probably be banned for that without backing it up. Racism isn't a sensitive topic around here so he got away with it and I didn't push the issue.

Would you be bold enough to make an unambiguous statement that you can't wriggle out of, such as, "If Harcourt (or anyone else) can quote me with saying anything that a reasonable person could construe as showing me to be racist, or a collection of quotes that together draw a picture of someone that appears to be racist, then I will take a self-imposed holiday for one month"?

Isn't the proposed site almost two blocks away from Ground Zero? To a New Yorker that's a long way.

Apart from that, just how far away is far enough?

The landing gear from the hijacked plane hit he building on the site.

Brilliant reposte, sharp, incisive, to the point, answers the question posed on every level, leaving nobody in any doubt regarding the righteousness of the selected response.

Thanks for the effusive praise. I like to remain humble, but my answer did point out that the Burlington Coat factory also sustained damage from the terrorist attack which is why many people equate it with Ground Zero. It is certainly not a place to build a Mosque by an Imam who has blamed the U.S for 9/11.

It pointed out that wreckage landed on the site, OK. You then follow up with a statement that it is not a place to build a Mosque, OK I can understand that sentiment, at this time I don't agree, two blocks is a long way.

What I am struggling with is your final comment. Just because individuals are using it for hyperbole and for comment that any political organisation would use in any situation in any part of the world, is not a reason for blocking in all other parts a reasonable thing to do.

Is this particular Imam, financing the project.

And finally, how far is far enough away?

Hey Koheesti,

I don't personally think Harcourt is a Troll, just as much as I don't think you, Chuck or UG are Trolls.

What I think is you have all got yourselves into a cycle of retaliatory strikes and like the middle east or Ireland, you do not know how to extricate yourselves.

You all have strong beliefs, but it would help if you actually listened to the other side, you might not agree with it, but it might, just might have some bearing and creedence.

Why don't we all concentrate on the issue at hand, any issue, and try and discuss it without petty schoolboy swipes and one line idiocy.

Just my view and if you think anyone is a Troll with bad intentions, pull apart their thread constructively not abusively.

Moss

I understand where you're coming from. I think if you research the threads one thing you will find that myself and others do in fact listen to him or Alex. That's the problem. They've made an unfounded accusation, I asked for proof to back it up and then the merry-go-round begins. If I wasn't listening, I would never get into any of these skirmishes. Trying to goad people into a bandwidth-wasting forum slug fest over nothing is a troll tactic. There, that's me backing up my accusation that he is a troll. There used to be a thread on here about how a few on the left here refuse to answer questions so having a meaningful dialogue with those people is nearly impossible.

Of all the rules they have around here I would add one more, "make an accusation and fail to back it up with any evidence and you get a week vacation". Like when Harcourt called me a racist the other day. Back where I come from, he'd probably be banned for that without backing it up. Racism isn't a sensitive topic around here so he got away with it and I didn't push the issue.

I am not one for encouraging suspension, however if accusations are made, they must be backed up by solid evidence.

If they are not, and they are called out with still no supportive evidence, they are shown to be short in the arguement, I still think there is no need for vitriolic hand grenades.

But without researching, Harcourt did you call Koheesti a rasist and if so, any evidence?

Well I must say its the first time I have thought about having sex with a muslim

Do you always ask their religion first?

Well I must say its the first time I have thought about having sex with a muslim

Do you always ask their religion first?

I admire your self control

Hey Koheesti,

I don't personally think Harcourt is a Troll, just as much as I don't think you, Chuck or UG are Trolls.

What I think is you have all got yourselves into a cycle of retaliatory strikes and like the middle east or Ireland, you do not know how to extricate yourselves.

You all have strong beliefs, but it would help if you actually listened to the other side, you might not agree with it, but it might, just might have some bearing and creedence.

Why don't we all concentrate on the issue at hand, any issue, and try and discuss it without petty schoolboy swipes and one line idiocy.

Just my view and if you think anyone is a Troll with bad intentions, pull apart their thread constructively not abusively.

Moss

I understand where you're coming from. I think if you research the threads one thing you will find that myself and others do in fact listen to him or Alex. That's the problem. They've made an unfounded accusation, I asked for proof to back it up and then the merry-go-round begins. If I wasn't listening, I would never get into any of these skirmishes. Trying to goad people into a bandwidth-wasting forum slug fest over nothing is a troll tactic. There, that's me backing up my accusation that he is a troll. There used to be a thread on here about how a few on the left here refuse to answer questions so having a meaningful dialogue with those people is nearly impossible.

Of all the rules they have around here I would add one more, "make an accusation and fail to back it up with any evidence and you get a week vacation". Like when Harcourt called me a racist the other day. Back where I come from, he'd probably be banned for that without backing it up. Racism isn't a sensitive topic around here so he got away with it and I didn't push the issue.

Would you be bold enough to make an unambiguous statement that you can't wriggle out of, such as, "If Harcourt (or anyone else) can quote me with saying anything that a reasonable person could construe as showing me to be racist, or a collection of quotes that together draw a picture of someone that appears to be racist, then I will take a self-imposed holiday for one month"?

OK Harcourt, show me something that states unequivacably that Koheesti states he is a racist and I will challenge him to take a self imposed exile for a week.

On the condition that if you can't, you do a weeks self imposed exile.

How about it guy's?

I understand where you're coming from. I think if you research the threads one thing you will find that myself and others do in fact listen to him or Alex. That's the problem. They've made an unfounded accusation, I asked for proof to back it up and then the merry-go-round begins. If I wasn't listening, I would never get into any of these skirmishes. Trying to goad people into a bandwidth-wasting forum slug fest over nothing is a troll tactic. There, that's me backing up my accusation that he is a troll. There used to be a thread on here about how a few on the left here refuse to answer questions so having a meaningful dialogue with those people is nearly impossible.

Of all the rules they have around here I would add one more, "make an accusation and fail to back it up with any evidence and you get a week vacation". Like when Harcourt called me a racist the other day. Back where I come from, he'd probably be banned for that without backing it up. Racism isn't a sensitive topic around here so he got away with it and I didn't push the issue.

Would you be bold enough to make an unambiguous statement that you can't wriggle out of, such as, "If Harcourt (or anyone else) can quote me with saying anything that a reasonable person could construe as showing me to be racist, or a collection of quotes that together draw a picture of someone that appears to be racist, then I will take a self-imposed holiday for one month"?

OK Harcourt, show me something that states unequivacably that Koheesti states he is a racist and I will challenge him to take a self imposed exile for a week.

On the condition that if you can't, you do a weeks self imposed exile.

How about it guy's?

Well, I'm not a racist so I have no idea what proof could be offered that I am. I am curious to see what he comes up with though.

btw - I don't see that post of H's that you show above in your reply?

FYI - From post #13 in this thread...

I'm sure you would love to see more KKK establishments. You have made your racism obvious several times in the past.

Here koheesti

and I must say, that is taking things waaay too far, even for OOB. And I, for one, am more than willing to mete out warns and suspensions for this kind of behavior so I suggest the nasty name calling be dropped IMMEDIATELY

Here koheesti http://www.thaivisa....ost__p__3822797

and I must say, that is taking things waaay too far, even for OOB. And I, for one, am more than willing to mete out warns and suspensions for this kind of behavior so I suggest the nasty name calling be dropped IMMEDIATELY

Yep, that's where he wrote, "You have made your racism obvious several times in the past.". A Muslim group has the same legal and constitutional right to build a mosque near ground zero that the KKK has to build near the NAACP HQ. Both are in bad taste and intended to incite but technically legal. Just because they are legal doesn't mean they should be done.

But without researching, Harcourt did you call Koheesti a rasist and if so, any evidence?

Harcourt calls anyone who does not agree with him a racist over again and never provides the slightest evidence to support his insults. It is not like this is anything new.

Fascinating:

http://www.kingdom.net/en/mng_ExecChairman.asp

His Royal Highness Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Alsaud

Chairman, Kingdom Holding Company

Yesterday morning on Fox & Friends, Fox News contributor Dan Senor observed that The Kingdom Foundation, whose chairman is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, is a funder for the Cordoba House Initiative.

“The Kingdom Foundation, so you know, is this Saudi organization, headed up by the guy that tried to give Rudy Giuliani $10 million after 9/11 that was sent back, funds radical madrassas all over the world,” Senor said. “And he funds this imam,” Fox host Brian Kilmeade chimed in.

and yet

CAIRO — The Saudi billionaire whose investment firm is one of the biggest stakeholders in Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. said he is looking to expand his alliances with the media giant, in the latest indication that his appetite for growth remains robust even as his company retrenches.

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a nephew of the Saudi king and who was listed last year by Forbes as the world's 22nd richest person, met with News Corp.'s chief executive Rupert Murdoch on Jan. 14 in a meeting that "touched upon future potential alliances with News Corp.," according to a statement released by his Kingdom Holding Co. late Saturday.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/18/saudi-prince-alwaleed-bin_1_n_426891.html

RIYADH: Rotana Holding Chairman Prince Alwaleed headed recently a board of directors meeting attended by News Corporation executives.

http://arabnews.com/saudiarabia/article111262.ece

It looks like FOX News is fair and honest after all.

Or hypocrites

It is pretty obvious that he is not controlling what they report, so let him invest his money. They make no bones about being capitalists.

Actually, if you watch the Fox news show, they name the foundation over and over again but never mention the name of the man in charge. I just found the link interesting, especially when you consider Fox news employs specious reasoning to create links between various organizations to prove their terrorist links, using their same reasoning, one could come to the exact same conclusions about Fox.

But up to you. As far as I am concerned Fox is pure propaganda. I get my news from other sources.

Actually, if you watch the Fox news show, they name the foundation over and over again but never mention the name of the man in charge. I just found the link interesting, especially when you consider Fox news employs specious reasoning to create links between various organizations to prove their terrorist links, using their same reasoning, one could come to the exact same conclusions about Fox.

But up to you. As far as I am concerned Fox is pure propaganda. I get my news from other sources.

Would you care to share your other sources with us?

Or hypocrites

How do you come to that conclusion? A news channel going after someone who is "one of their biggest stakeholders" is not hypocrisy.