It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation"

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 05:03 AM

Originally posted by sassyncute

Outgrown? Its not a pair of underpants. What that means is that their are too many Islamic people in that area now. Which should be discouraging to everyone else as multiculturalism should be treated like a making a nice cup of coffee.

You add a touch of milk and a touch of sugar but not enough to overpower the taste and texture of the actual coffee.

So basically what your saying here now is that we should force these people out of this neighborhood because there are too many for you to be comfortable? The thing that disturbs me the most is you cannot even comprehend how many levels of wrong what you just said is. This is the mentality that every hate group displays, there is nothing moderate about your views at all, be like me, believe like me, or you do not get any rights like me. There is nothing sassy and cute about anything you just said its more like ignorant and disfigured.

[edit on 8/13/2010 by Jovi1]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 05:28 AM
Here is an 8-minute CNN Radio interview with the spokesman for Park51, Oz Sultan.

Interview with 'ground zero mosque' spokesman

It appears there will be transparency in the funding, and in addition, they will be applying for...

Sultan said they are committed to a transparent fundraising process and they will not take any money from any source that is on the Treasury Department’s watch list. He claimed they will even apply for Homeland Security funding available for terrorist abatement programs.

Fundraising is not beginning for a few months yet. Domestic funding is the priority...state, local, and federal money. They will comply with the Treasury Department and will not take money from anyone on any watch lists.

There will be transparency at all steps.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 06:27 AM

Originally posted by explosivo
Wrong. Most NY'ers obviously are too busy to go out and protest, but they ar surely having some very big problems with this. Specially the relatives of people who died in the attack.

Please stop speaking for New Yorkers.

9/11 Families Who Support Park51 Community Center

Clearly some have issues and some do not. Such is the nature of free expression in this country. You can whine about it all you want and they can build it. That makes this country awesome!

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 09:12 AM

Here is yesterday’s interview with Fareed Zakaria on Anderson Cooper’s 360 Show on CNN talking about the failure of the Anti-Defamation League to uphold it’s own Mission Statement and him returning his Hubert Humphrey First Amendment Freedom’s Award from the Anti-Defamation League in protest.

In the interview he explains Rauf’s long standing relationship with the U.S. Government, including the fact that Rauf conducts Sensitivity Training with the FBI to help them detect more easily the tell tale signs of radical Islam.

By all honest accounts Rauf is a moderate to liberal in Muslim Terms.

Which is why the U.S. Government has sent him overseas three times now to speak to Muslims about life in America, his trip is not for the purpose of raising funds for the Mosque, but as an official emissary of the U.S. Government promoting a wider understanding of America to the Islamic World.

Between helping with FBI Training and assisting the State Department it would appear Rauf is a far more civic minded American than most.

To bad the Anti-Defamation League is not interested in American Rights like the First, the very first Amendment to the Constitution, Freedom of Religion.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]


The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion.


[edit on 13/8/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:26 PM
" they will even apply for Homeland Security funding available for terrorist abatement programs."

please correct me here but that sounds like taxpayer dime is being used to build this.

and as such isnt a no no ?

thought any federal funds were not suppose to go to any religion bad for believing that taxpayers funds arent suppose to be used like that when those funds are being used left and right to build mosques overseas and now here ..........silly me

maybe i misread that.

build a mosque to lower terrorism? fat chance of that happening

[edit on 13-8-2010 by neo96]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by neo96
please correct me here but that sounds like taxpayer dime is being used to build this.

Since you haven't given any source or context for that quote, it's hard to know exactly what you're talking about.

But I imagine that it's the interfaith portion of the project that would apply for such funds. Remember, the managing board of the Park51 part of the project will be composed of non-Muslims as well as Muslims.

Also remember that "applying for" funds does not equate to "receiving funds".

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:54 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

read the above post with the link


you know its that little thing called SEPERATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE

[edit on 13-8-2010 by neo96]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:07 PM
reply to post by neo96

Sorry, that took a while since "the above post with the link" isn't a very precise way of putting it -- you could have said "~Lucidity's post" for instance.

But as I guessed in my last post, that's the Park51 spokesperson, Oz Sultan, talking.

edit: to reply to your edit

The Park51 project will have a board of directors to include Christians and Jews as well as Muslims. It's not a religious institution. Also see my previous comment about "applying for funds" is not the same as "receiving funds".

[edit on 8/13/2010 by americandingbat]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:20 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

for hundreds of years one the most important foundations of this country was the seperation of church and state....

that means no taxpayer funds can be used to any one religion

wether its 1 or 100

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by neo96

I'm not sure that even makes sense: "can be used to support any one religion ... whether it's 1 or 100".

It's not any one religion, or any multiple religions. It's a community center. Should government money only go to groups of agnostics?

But really, what's the point in arguing about this? They plan on applying for some funding from a federal program to combat terrorism. We have no way to know that they will get that funding, so isn't this just a distraction?

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:36 PM
reply to post by neo96

GWB thought it was a very large concern that Islamophobia might creep into the country after 9/11. Maybe that's why the funding is there on the federal level. That's a guess. If you're that concerned I'm sure you could look it up. Didn''t he say it was available for all outreach centers? I'd have to listen again. Did you listen?

Do you think "terrorists" wake up one morning, yawn, stretch, and decide to be terrorists? You might want to read the study discussed here to start your information gathering.

[edit on 8/13/2010 by ~Lucidity]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 02:47 PM
reply to post by ~Lucidity

lucidity whatever respect i had for you and your views ive just thrown out the window.... because this is the second time youve started talking down to me.

because you dont like what i have to say.

i still appreciate all your help for helping me getting my footing on ats but heres where we part ways.

i guess the only opinions allowed or tolerated are the ones who just love the imam,islam or anyone who shares your beleifs.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by neo96]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by neo96

i still appreciate all your help for helping me getting my footing on ats but heres where we part ways.

i guess the only opinions allowed or tolerated are the ones who just love the imam,islam or anyone who shares your beleifs.

On ATS members research facts and debunk falsehoods on a very wide variety of topics. Most do this without letting emotions cloud their judgement.

A number of the things you have purported in this thread have been debunked and proven false through just a small amount of cursory research.

Part of that has to do with the poor quality of the sources you have gotten your information from, and a seeming inability to even quote those sources accurately, that you then mix with a lot of conjecture and opinion.

The fact is people's decisions are only as good as the quality and accuracy of information they base them on.

Here on ATS members spend a lot of time to look for the facts from reputable sources, research out the laws and mechanisms and logistics of things, and generally frown on making decisions just on assumption or opinion.

A number of posters have been almost entirely wrong about everything they have stated, from the date it is planned to open, from where it is actually located, to who is actually paying for it, to what it actually is and on and on and on.

The great thing about America is you are free to express an opinion, even one based on false assumptions and distortions and lies.

Even one based on bigotry and racism, religious intollerance and blind hate.

However it will still be just an opinion, and when you tell others you are of that opinion because of information that has been proved false, that is what it is.

ATS is about denying ignorance, not embracing it.

It won't and doesn't matter what kind of pack some posters run in, or how many people share that opinion and support it.

People are still going to look at the sources, people are still going to debunk things that aren't true, and people are still going to make quality decisions based on facts.

They aren't going to react to the peer pressure, they aren't going to decide based on how many stars someone gets or doesn't get, they are going to look for facts, and keep looking for them, and keeping looking for them, and keep looking for them to get the very best most accurate information there is out there.

That's what happens on ATS.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:41 PM
An Iranian Connection to the Cordoba House Ground Zero Mosque?

(Translated from the Arabic by Walid Shoebat)

If someone in the Middle East cries out, “where is the law”, he knows that the law exists. The only law that the Muslim needs exists already in the Koran and the Hadith. People asked me right after the 9/11 attack as to why do movements with political agendas carry [Islamic] religious names? Why call it ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ or ‘Hezbollah (Party of Allah)’ or ‘Hamas’ or ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’? I answer them this—that the trend towards Islamic law and justice begins in religious movements, because secularism had failed to deliver what the Muslim wants, which is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
by Feisal Abdul Rauf

From an article titled “Sharing The Essence Of Our Beliefs” by Feisal Abdul Rauf, Al-Ghad Newspaper in Jordan, 5/9/2009

and from the American thinker,

In 1965, funding from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Libya helped Rauf's father secure two-thirds of the block at 96th Street and 3rd Avenue. Rauf withheld the information about the Islamic donors until 1984. In fact, all 46 Islamic nations have financed the 96th Street mosque. Perhaps this explains Rauf's current refusal to explain who is funding the Ground Zero mosque.

Furthermore, according to the Washington Times, "using U.S. taxpayer dollars, our State Department is helping to rebuild mosques" in Tanzania, Iraq, and Egypt. For example, the U.S. government helped save the Amr Eben El Aas Mosque in Cairo. The "mosque's namesake was the Muslim conqueror of Christian Egypt." How does one justify American taxpayer money going to Muslim oil states, who since 1973 have earned thirteen trillion dollars as a result of sitting atop reserves of oil? In addition, Daisy Khan, Rauf's wife, "apparently never filed a required informational return or regular annual report: 'shocking for a charity with over $1 million in grants just last year.'"

EDITORIAL: Tax dollars to build mosques
U.S. underwrites fundraising tour for Islamic shrine at Ground Zero

Ground Zero Imam: ‘I Don’t Believe in Religious Dialogue’

Abdul Rauf continued: “Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.” He added:

New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad … so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Sharia.

I don't see what is not to see, either some people are deaf dumb and blind, or you have an agenda.

[edit on 033131p://bFriday2010 by Stormdancer777]

[edit on 043131p://bFriday2010 by Stormdancer777]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:59 PM
Dr. Muhammad Abdul Rauf (1917-2004)

Rauf’s father, Dr. Muhammad Abdul Rauf (1917-2004) — an Egyptian contemporary of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna — conveyed to Feisal his family’s long tradition of radicalism, which he acquired at Islam’s closest equivalent to the Vatican, Al-Azhar University.

He was born in 1917 in Egypt. His family is the descendant of Imam Hassan bin Ali, the grandson of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.

"Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."—Muslim Brotherhood

Rauf fled Egypt’s 1948 crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood.

MB doctrines require “flexibility” — adapting to each environment on local terms, especially in North America — to force Islamic law on the masses globally. Hiding financing sources are perfect examples of taqiyya, a theologically encouraged practice of deception to advance theocratic, fascist Islamic doctrines.

Like his father, Rauf is probably a stealth Muslim Brother, as are most MB members.

[edit on 043131p://bFriday2010 by Stormdancer777]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 04:11 PM
reply to post by neo96

I call em as I see em. To make the comments you did, it doesn't appear you listened to that 8-minute audio. And your repeatedly making other comments you do, about things covered multiple times by multiple people in this thread and yours would make many think you haven't read. Toodles.

[edit on 8/13/2010 by ~Lucidity]

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 04:24 PM

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
Hey guys, We won.

They all went to bed.

This is a game to you? That's just sad man. This is a serious issue and not to be toyed with. If we can't address this properly we are not doing it, nor ATS, justice. It's not just us here guy. We've got readers that aren't members. Do you want THEM to take you seriously? Or when they see your posts will they just skip over them because they don't want to waste their time. Think about that.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 04:49 PM
reply to post by Stormdancer777

Except it isn’t his father we are talking about.

If you want to talk about radical fathers and hold son’s accountable for them, then the situation with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is far more serious. His father was not just a radical Zionist but a Zionist Terrorist involved in the murders of British, Jewish and Palestinian Citizens. Plus Emanuel is a dual Israeli and U.S. Citizen, unlike Rauf who is a U.S. Citizen ONLY, and while Rauf is just a religious leader, Rahm Emanuel is sitting in the White House with the President’s ear.

So once again, what we see here is for RELIGIOUS reasons only people making mountains out of molehills (Rauf) and mountains into molehills (Emanuel).

Makes one wonder about the dual standards being employed, of course the Anti-Defamation League would have a fit if you tried to cast dispersions on Emanuel, but they don’t mind slandering any other person from any other religion.

What a world.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 07:51 PM

President Barack Obama on Friday offered his support for a controversial project to build a mosque near Ground Zero, in the face of opposition from the families of 9/11 victims. “I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country,” Obama was expected to say, according to remarks prepared for delivery at a White House dinner marking the Islamic holiday of Ramadan. “That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances.”

For more information...

The master has spoken, this will go forward no matter what anyone says or thinks.

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:16 PM
reply to post by Aquarius1

this just reaffirms my beliefs about mr obama and the imam and the mosque

now i am to the point of contempt for mr obama and all pro mosque supporters.

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in