Debate goes on over the “Cordoba House”. Haven’t heard of it? That’s the press’ and the pols’ new secret code word for the Ground Zero Mosque. There have been growing calls for, despite the media’s attempts to hush them up, an investigation as to where the money is coming from to build this monstrosity. House Halfwit Nancy Pelosi has already called for an investigation into who is funding the opposition to the mosque and New Yawk Mayor Michael “Judenrat” Bloomberg calls any investigations of the mosque “un-American”.
Pelosi, that great Constitutional scholar, stated, “The freedom of religion is a Constitutional right. Where a place of worship is located is a local decision.”
Unless, of course, the local decision occurs in Utah. Then the federal courts have to step in.
SALT LAKE CITY -- The 14 crosses erected along Utah roads to commemorate fallen state Highway Patrol troopers convey a state preference for Christianity and are a violation of the U.S. Constitution, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.
"This may lead the reasonable observer to fear that Christians are likely to receive preferential treatment from the UHP," the justices wrote.
Speaking of preferential treatment, in another local decision:
Sharia (Islamic) Law in New Jersey Court: Muslim husband rapes, beats, sexually abuses wife, judge sees no sexual assault because Islam forbids wives to refuse sex.
Pelosi and the National Organization for Women immediately leaped to the defense of the abused young woman and issued the following strongly worded statement, and I quote: “ .”
Fortunately, the police did stop the terrible abuses of this young man, an obvious threat to the safety and security of the crime-ridden steaming cesspool that is Chicago, the ol’ stomping grounds of that pillar of political virtue of virtue, Imam Barack Hussein Hoover Obama.
A Chicago man says he's fighting charges of disorderly conduct for simply standing on a public sidewalk and praying.
We can see from the photos just who are the most dangerous villains and threat to our way of life. So, we can thank Gaia the Earth Mother that our beloved, non-intrusive, fair and Democratic government knows what's best for us.
14 comments:
Not sure what you are saying in these last two postings. If you are saying that hypocrisy abounds, I agree. Ops normal. And that applies to both “sides” of this issue. However, we either side with liberty or we side with tyrants and usurpers. To side with liberty, one must respect private property. That means unless these moslems aggress against someone else's property let them go ahead and build their facility, unmolested. If someone wants to rail against the construction of Cordoba House, he is siding with tyranny and against private property. Without private property, there are no human rights and such a man should not complain when his rights or property are violated. To do so otherwise, is indeed hypocrisy.
Some notes:
1. When I say “property” I'm including a man's person and body as his own property in addition to physical possessions.
2. Go here: http://mises.org/resources/1179/The-Ethics-of-Liberty. Download Murray Rothbard's, Ethics of Liberty. Read it. Rothbard discusses, in detail, property and human rights and gives excellent insight to natural law.
3. Go to Google maps. Search for “World Trade Center”. Two blocks to the NE at 51 Park Place you will find the old Burlington Coat Factory, the proposed site of Cordoba House. Drag that little man figure onto the map and walk the streets. Notice they'll be right next door to an “Amish Market”.
Private property, they should be able to build within local rules.
But if money is being funneled from the Wahhabi bastards or Hamas or any other terrorist organization, then it's a national security.
I read a comment on another article regarding Pelosi and her obvious misuse of the investigative powers of Congress, "Nancy Pelosi can investigate her lips on my ass."
Can't disagree with that sentiment.
Stranded,
On your Nancy Pelosi comment...you'd let those ugly lips touch your ass?
On funding. Just did a quick internet search. Here' my initial take. The place will never be built. Why? The lack of funding details is suspicious. I think that there may be some sort scam in the works. Someone (Imam Feisal, etal?) may be trying to gather donations for a project that doesn't stand a snowballs chance in hell of ever being built. The Cordoba Initiative has assets of a measly $20,000. That means Feisal still has to raise...subtract 2, carry the 10...oh yeah, he still needs to raise $100,000,000. Half the needed space was bought for about a $5 million, but another $10-20 million is needed to buy the other half. Then they still need that $100 big ones to demolish and build. Short story, after a long and difficult struggle, I mean jihad, the project will fail and all of those donations will go to line someone's pockets.
Totally unrelated to the above remarks...Ron Paul's take on the issue, Ron Paul: Left and the Right Demagogue Mosque, Islam at http://dailypaul.com/node/142790.
Charlie, the last two posts were about hypocrisy, but now I see how they could be about property as well.
I agree that private property is a primary foundation of freedom. I haven't researched it, but was once told that the Founder argued over making the phrase, "Life, Liberty and Property" rather than the ambiguously worded Pursuit of Happiness, which the government has taken such delight in "interpreting".
I would have to argue, though, they we don't have the right to private property anymore. The government "allows" us to reside on "our" property if we pay them what they deem we owe them or until they change their minds.
Don't pay your property taxes? Off you go. Local politicians decide they can raise more tax revenue by turning your neighborhood into a strip mall. Ala Kelo, off you go. Some environmental bureaucracy decides your family farm is ideal habitat for the endangered 3-toed mugwort? You now cannot farm, develop or basically do anything to your property, and no one will buy it, and you'll wind up being unable to pay your taxes so....
I think the first post did make a viable comment on property rights. When the man seeks "permission" from the government in the form of "permits" to do what he wishes with his own "property", he is denied. When he claims to be a member of a government-approved, politically-correct, media-endorsed, liberal-sensitive "minority" "religion" the local politicians fall all over themselves to not offend and grant him "permission" to do the exact same thing. Thus, some property owners are more equal than others.
Aside from property, Islam is at war with America, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. But when only one side is actively engaged in war while the other side refuses to even admit that there IS a war, the latter is already defeated.
I agree with your statement on property rights vs. government. Gives one a real perspective on how far we've descended into tyranny. Government by the state, national, state, county, etc, is nothing more than monopoly on criminal activity. All statist laws are ultimately enforced at the point of a gun. Try and really resist a jay walking citation if you want proof.
The whole permission from government thing via permits, licenses, etc are a pet peeve of mine. I agree with you. Ir's all about power and control. Besides your example for building permits, think about “marriage licenses”. Since when I do I need the government's permission to take a wife? Don't care if she is ever officially recognized as such or I her husband. Again, another demonstration of the tyrannical nature of statist government.
On your last point. To say Islam is at war with the United States is a rather broad and impossible to prove assertion. Let's say for example that the religious roles are reversed. The US is an Islamic nation and the present day Moslems are what we have represented by the present state of Christianity in this country. From this new perspective, we would now be saying that Christianity is at war with the US. From our actual familiarity with Christianity we would be perplexed. All of Christianity is at war? How could that be done? Is Christianity so unified that all of it has declared war on the US? Obviously, this isn't the case. Christendom is in fact split into so many branches and sects that this would be impossible. Now we could have, for instance, a Baptist church, in say Topeka that has been holding press conferences, staging demonstrations, and in general ranting about the evils of the US. They might even say things like, “We of the Westboro Baptist Church have declared war on the infidels of the fascist nation of the United States. We are united with all baptists in this regard and call on all of our fellow Christians to do the same”. Back to reality. Islam encompasses a rather large percentage (~20%) of the world's population. I really doubt any significant portion of them feel that they are at war with the US. Just like those crazy baptists, there are Islamic nut jobs out there ranting, raving, and making threats. Let them rail. Keep an eye on them. Anyone tries to attack this country, to bad for them. We'll write their moms and let them know they had nice funerals.
Now, if you want to talk about US policy and actions as related to the causes of terrorism, that's another long discussion.
Bet you never thought your post would lead to such a long discussion!
Sorry about multiple deleted entries. I kept getting error messages when I tried to post so naturally I kept pounding computer keys until the thing submitted. Take that blogspot!
Charles, I agree with Nancy kissing his ass.
Bawb can certainly defend his statement about a war with Islam, but I'd like to add to this.
Islam, or at least the Wahhabi sect, is certainly at war with the west, especially with the Great Satan (USA) and little Satan (Israel), whether or not we want to recognize it. Television throughout the middle-east promote this thought and it's financed by the Wahhabi sects from our "ally" Saudi Arabia. It's preached from their mosques and from their leaders.
The root of all of this is the fact that western culture has thrived in the past 500 years while Islam has culturally been stuck in the 13th century.
And they hate it. And it gnaws at those even "westernized."
If Muhammad, the greatest prophet, can't have a successful people, while the infidels thrive and subjugated them (ie the British, one of the principles of the Crusades) and carved up their land, that thought throws Islam, as a belief system, out the window. In many minds, this can't be reconciled and that is why Israel cannot be in Palestine (a false argument) and the west must be destroyed.
The difference between the west and Islam is that we had a Reformation, while Islam hasn't. For the most part: the west embraces the Judeo-Christian theme that all men are created equal, (although in a fallen state.) Islam does not. Christians no longer convert by the sword, but by persuasion. The Saudi's execute those who have converted away from Islam. Visit the Voice of the Martyrs as a reference.
As a culture, we certainly are in danger from Wahhabi teachings and from the institution of Sharia law. Both are rooted in the Koran and Hadith.
So, in a sense, Bawb, you are correct that we are at war with Islam.
1. Mosque a long shot to be built at http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41238.html. Short version, promoters are incompetent.
2. Wahhabi = nut job. Not liked much at all by rest of Mohamed's adherents. Scanned through bin Laden's 1996 and 1998 fatwas. Amidst the “praise Allah's” and Koran quotes, he does outline his reasons for being pissed off at the US and Israel. Not once does he mention that his animosity is due to Islam's lack of a “reformation” (or did you mean “renaissance”) or that they are stuck in the 13th century while the rest of the world moved on.
3. The myth, as popularized by Bush, is that “they” hate us because we are free. Not so much. Most of Islam is upset, and I think rightly so, because of the imperial presence and bully-like attitude of the US in the Middle East. We have been illegally interfering with other countries' sovereignties for decades, many, many times in violent ways. I would even go so far as to say, that if we had minded our own business, “terrorism” would be next to nonexistent.
4. The other big item that really pisses off many Moslems is our unwavering support of Zionism. Neither side on this issue is hardly innocent, but Israel has, by far, carried out most of the atrocities.
5. BTW, I'm not anti-Semitic. I just don't support Zionism. God will decide when he will bring His chosen back into that land. It's not man's place to try and urge the process along. Right now Israel is back in the land in sin.
6. I've read tons of the Voice of the Martyrs stuff, for years. Interesting group. Good reporting on Christian discrimination, much of it sadly tragic. But they also have an inability to accurately explain the gospel and seem to promote a very lop sided version of the history of Palestine. I now view them as neocon shills in sheep's clothing. It took a lot of personal study to overcome their slant and my own cultural bias.
7. IF we cleaned up our own house first, back to our Libertarian founding, stayed out of “foreign entanglements”, and traded fairly and equitably with any and all nations, that would go a long way towards peace. But I'm not holding my breath. I'm betting that things are soon about to get real ugly. Not sure what your religious viewpoint is, but I am convinced that we are living in the end times. Man's time is at an end and only He who sits waiting at the right hand of the Father can bring peace.
8. And it's okay if you think I'm nuts. I'm used to it by now.
Property rights are significantly eroded over here as well. If the government wants it, you have no rights apart from 'reasonable' compensation, but one of the worst abuses is the regulation of what you are allowed to do on your own property.
"Vegetation management acts" are the most significant at the moment, with thousands of farmers facing ruin and as the states enacted these laws and they don't actually take the properties off them, they have no right to compensation for vast swathes of land they are not allowed to farm.
The whole thing is insidious, in some ways in that I am starting to hear farmers referring to themselves as custodians of the land, rather than owners. This is something handed to them by the heads of the farming organisations, who like to get all politically correct once they find a seat close to the high table with a reasonable prospect of some pretty decent crumbs if they toe the line.
Generally these groups have been as useless as tits on a boar pig.
While we all have the right to register our opinions on the mosque, I think we need to be weary of agendas of the national politicians who are doing so. Some big-government Republicans are using opposition to the mosque as cover for the fact that there is no difference between them and the Dems.
Gene Healy had a good piece at Cato.org wherein he mentions: "In a recent (pre-campaign?) appearance in Des Moines, Iowa, Newt Gingrich denounced Obama's 'secular socialist machine,' but, when asked, he declined to specify federal programs he would cut.
"You see, cutting government is hard, and often unpopular. No surprise, then, that Boehner would rather play urban planner than embrace Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan's 'road map' for shrinking middle-class entitlements."
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12063
Oh, Bawb, the thing you were thinking of in a previous comment was the Declaration's "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" being based on John Locke's concept of "life, liberty, and property." Not all the founders were fond of T.Jeff's stylistic change of it.
"The genius of you Americans is that you never make clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which make us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them which we are missing."
Gamal Abdel Nasser
I agree that our incoherent foreign policy, when an ambassador's qualifications are based solely on the size of his campaign contributions rather than his knowledge of the local customs and when we go around the world randomly backing one regime or another (Saddam was our buddy when we hated Iran more) and flattening things apparently at random in the self-appointed role of international policeman, loses many more friends than it wins. Ask a real cop. One of the most dangerous things to do is to run into the middle of a domestic fight and try to break it up.
The realization of this still doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy about Islam. The fact that the politicians, mainstream press, and assorted lefties have to pimp this whole Religion of Peace business so continually and so hard makes me automatically skeptical. The party line does not have a long record of honesty nor acting in the interests of the American people.
The holy month of Ramadan, which goes till Sept 10 this year, is, according to the politicians, media hacks, and other assorted liberals, a time when: "Muslims ask forgiveness for past sins, pray for guidance and help in refraining from everyday evils, and try to purify themselves through self-restraint and good deeds."
Thus far during Ramadam the good deeds scorecard for Religion-based terrorist acts is Islam=86, all other religions combined=0. Body count is Islam=379, all other religions combined=0.
It is very true that not every Muslim is a terrorist. It was also true that not every German was a Nazi. That didn't much matter in the end result.
1. None of us is as stupid as all of us together.
2. When the right hand is waving in the air, "Hey, look at me!" you have to check to see what the left hand is doing.
Umm, Bawb, I question your bodycounts. I don't have a figure off-hand, but the never-ending "Troubles" in Northern Ireland led to many deaths of civilians and soldiers alike, and had some religious motivation. A Hindu assassinated Gandhi, and Hindu terrorists have sparked religious violence in India. Orthodox Christians raped and slaughtered Bosnians. Closer to home, U.S. "Christians" have assassinated abortion doctors and nurses. I am hard pressed to find a religion whose adherents haven't committed unspeakable acts.
I don't buy every positive statement about Islam. Like every other religion, interpretations of its holy scriptures can be twisted and distorted, and some people use it for hateful purposes. Still, I've met dozens of good people who find comfort and peace in Islam, and who been motivated by their religion to practice charity and lead exemplary lives.
The average Muslim is not responsible for 9/11, any more than the average Christian is responsible for molestation of children by Catholic priests.
Post a Comment