Obama backs mosque near ground zero

  • Thread starter Thread starter Musicadmirer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
He may very well have pulled one of the most artful cons of all time.

The Progressives annointed him as the chosen one to become President because he had little known reputation and they thought he was a progressive. The Progressives’ (who are actually Regressives) plan is to control people’s attitudes and beliefs by steering people away from the depth of responsible individualism and into acting on the basic instincts for selfish brain pleasurism via shallow amusements of love-less sex, drugs, etc., hence, all the aforementioned propaganda messages present in the unelected progressive media, while annointing and labeling these same viewers as “open-minded,” so they could be seduced into shallow basic instincts without suspecting it. Once the glee from the shallow amusement wears off, the addict needs another fix. And he better get it soon, or he’s going to get arrogant and start making demands. So much for democracy.

Notice how “anything goes” and “politically correct” contradict each other. If one thinks or says something against the unelected party line, you are told you are “not correct,” but if they approve your outrageous shallow behavior, well then “anything goes” is the justification. But because the unelected media repeats the same messages over and over until it becomes ingrained into people’s beliefs, too few people open their minds to question their motives. We don’t need them. Why would progressives do this? Answer: they prefer to control thoughts, attitudes, and beliefs rather than religion, to ruin relationships to create a nanny state where they control everything, as a form of population control and dependency on govt., to create soft people who believe they are too weak to do it without govt. help. Then people pretend to be shocked when so many people become distracted away from true love and fall into an addiction of the basic instincts.
 
Answer: they prefer to control thoughts, attitudes, and beliefs rather than religion, to ruin relationships to create a nanny state where they control everything, as a form of population control and dependency on govt., to create soft people who believe they are too weak to do it without govt. help. Then people pretend to be shocked when so many people become distracted away from true love and fall into an addiction of the basic instincts.
Modern liberalism is a religion. It’s god is nature at its most sacred sacrament is child sacrifice. This religion wants the government to collect the tithes rather than have people decide on how much and to whom they want to give. It is for sure the religion of anything goes. The only sin this religion recognizes is believing there is sin
 
True, true…

Thirteenth Century jurist Ibn Taymiya, often quoted by Osama bin Laden, wrote that spoils of war “received the name of fay since Allah had taken them away from the infidels in order to restore them to the Muslims… [The] infidels forfeit their persons and their belongings which they do not use in Allah’s service to the faithful believers who serve Allah and unto whom Allah restitutes what is theirs…”

This creed dictated that in conquered regions, ancient religious sites be confiscated and infidels banned from using them. Thus, the Dome of the Rock was constructed on the ruins of the Temple Mount in 691 AD., Al-Aqsa Mosque over the Basilica of St. Mary in 712, AD, and the Grand Mosque of Damascus, was built over the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in 715 AD.

In India, the Vikramasli temple was razed to the ground in the 13th Century, and its foundation- stones thrown into the Ganges. According to scholar K.S. Lal, thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed and their stones used to build mosques.

Muslim scribes recount the detestation on a church in Georgia in 1551 by Safavid Shah Tahmasp. “The Shah and his nobles went to see the church and slew twenty evil priests and broke the bell of 17 maunds…and destroyed the doors of iron and gold and sent them to the treasury.”

Only when infidels surrendered could they preserve religious buildings, and then only if a clause specifically allowed them, but in that case modifications and improvements were prohibited. Furthermore, 11th Century jurist Abu Al-Hasan Al Mawardi wrote that non-Muslim dhimmis “are not allowed to erect new synagogues or churches in the territory of Islam and any built are to be demolished without compensation.”
youtube.com/watch?v=Ib9rofXQl6w&feature=player_embedded

Muslims build mosques as symbols of conquest. That is what this mosque is.

Once again… Obama is on the wrong side.
 
I don’t think the man had any choice but to back it. It’s easy for some pundit to rant and rave about it, but when it gets down to it I think it would be kind of scary to say: “No. You can’t build a religious center here because we don’t like your religion.” We can’t pick and choose on such things, or at least shouldn’t in the U.S.
I agree. There appears to be far more feeling nationally against the religion than about any religion’s establishing a religious center there. I suspect that one would hear little criticism if it were a Catholic or Protestant group building a religious center at the site.
 
Muslims build mosques as symbols of conquest. That is what this mosque is.
Oh? The Muslims bought a house in Brooklyn a block away from my mother’s house, had it demolished and built a mosque there that, architecturally, fits in with the neighborhood.

How is providing a house of prayer for some of the local merchants who are Turks and Syrians a symbol of conquest? I, for one, fail to see how.
 
Oh? The Muslims bought a house in Brooklyn a block away from my mother’s house, had it demolished and built a mosque there that, architecturally, fits in with the neighborhood.

How is providing a house of prayer for some of the local merchants who are Turks and Syrians a symbol of conquest? I, for one, fail to see how.
If you found out that the mosque was built using funds tied to terrorist groups would you still feel the same way?
 
Oh? The Muslims bought a house in Brooklyn a block away from my mother’s house, had it demolished and built a mosque there that, architecturally, fits in with the neighborhood.

How is providing a house of prayer for some of the local merchants who are Turks and Syrians a symbol of conquest? I, for one, fail to see how.
I understand that this building is to be 31 stories high. I think it is a symbol of conquest. You can think anything you like. I don’t deny their right to build a mosque, I question the reason to put it near Ground Zero.
 
Oh? The Muslims bought a house in Brooklyn a block away from my mother’s house, had it demolished and built a mosque there that, architecturally, fits in with the neighborhood.

How is providing a house of prayer for some of the local merchants who are Turks and Syrians a symbol of conquest? I, for one, fail to see how.
Muslims have always built mosques on the sites of their conquests. The Prophet Muhammad himself made the Ka’aba, a pagan pantheon, into a mosque after he captured Mecca in 630 CE. The Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem was deliberately built near the Temple Mount, the holiest places in Judaism. The Ummayad mosque in Damascus was built on the site of the Church of Saint John. Babri mosque in Ayodhya, India was built by demolishing a Hindu temple at the site of Hinduism’s Lord Rama’s birthplace. They built mosques on the sites of thousands of temples throughout India.

The request to build a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center is not accidental. It is astute and deliberate, as is the decision to call the place Cordoba House. Cordoba is city in Spain that resonates mightily in Muslim history. It was the capital of the Islamic empire in Spain. It was the place where Islam established its first caliphate in Europe. The Grand Cordoba Mosque was built where a Visigoth Christian church stood.
 
I agree. There appears to be far more feeling nationally against the religion than about any religion’s establishing a religious center there. I suspect that one would hear little criticism if it were a Catholic or Protestant group building a religious center at the site.
Don’t think those religions you mention have as part of their creed to rid the world of “infidels”.
 
bbarrick8383;6948938I:
want to know for a fact, through a complete investigation, that the money and this imam have no terrorist ties. That includes beliefs that are questionable, such as the young lady above. If there are none, I do not oppose it.
There is absolutely no reason to suspect terrorist ties. Do you have any evidence of terrorist ties, or extremist statements from those involved in the project? If you do not then there is no reason for suspicion, beyond a overarching dislike of Muslims. “The funding situation” is not a reason to oppose the centre because you have failed to explained what “the funding situation” is beyond speculative accusations.
 
There is absolutely no reason to suspect terrorist ties. Do you have any evidence of terrorist ties, or extremist statements from those involved in the project? If you do not then there is no reason for suspicion, beyond a overarching dislike of Muslims. “The funding situation” is not a reason to oppose the centre because you have failed to explained what “the funding situation” is beyond speculative accusations.
One ways to end the speculation immediately is for him to release where the funding is coming from. People speculate that the funding comes from terrorists-again that could be cleared up in a minute
 
Muslims have always built mosques on the sites of their conquests. The Prophet Muhammad himself made the Ka’aba, a pagan pantheon, into a mosque after he captured Mecca in 630 CE.
How comfortable would you be if someone were to judge your religion based on, say, the crusades, the inquisition, or even St Bartholomew Days Massacre. What if someone said: “Catholics have a long history of intolerance, just look at how they forced people to convert during the Inquisition, and where do you think the phrase ‘kill them all and let God sort them out’ comes from? A monk in the Crusades.”

You would say: those actions were based on bad interpretations of Catholicism, and took place hundreds of years ago! But why should they listen to you, you are an intolerant Catholic.

This is what you are doing to the Muslims. Refusing to listen to what they say just because they are Muslim.
 
One ways to end the speculation immediately is for him to release where the funding is coming from. People speculate that the funding comes from terrorists-again that could be cleared up in a minute
Right, just disclose private records for the fun of it- real American thing to ask there.

Terrorist groups funnel money into guns and explosives, not mosques- it would be more reasonable, although still baseless, to suspect that the group building the mosque supported terrorism.
 
Is it also insensitive to have Christian churches near the site of the Oklahoma City bombing?
EXCELLENT point! I can’t wait to see what kind of monument they put up to show their horror at the action.

The statue of Christ across the street with his back to the OK bombing site crying is utterly heartbreaking. Below it reads “And Jesus Wept”. It really shows that anyone that would do something so atrocious in his name is unspeakable. Unacceptable. No REAL Christian accepts such a TERRORIST attack.

I don’t live in OK, so I’m not sure if the Christian Churches went up AFTER the bombing or not.
 
One ways to end the speculation immediately is for him to release where the funding is coming from. People speculate that the funding comes from terrorists-again that could be cleared up in a minute
The burden of proof is on you. Should those involved satisfy any and every request regardless of how nonsensical?

I speculate that you have received money from white supremacist organizations. You are now obligated to publish your tax returns to eliminate these speculations.

That is not how America works. If I speculated you had white supremacist ties, people would expect me to prove your guilt, not you to prove your innocence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top