Police probe threats against New York Islamic center backers

Source: cnn.com

Not satisfied with using the 1st Amendment to try and strip other people of their 1st Amendment rights. Seems that people have started to take it a step further and actually threaten the Imam and his wife.

Because apparently having different beliefs in this country and wanting to create an Islamic cultural center anywhere in America is frowned upon by people who believe that their way is the only way it can be and anyone else should be killed.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if some wackjob out there decided to take matters into his own hands and do something stupid. The level of intolerance in this country has in my opinion risen to dangerous levels. People who mix their faith and politics have also gone completely nutty.

Seems that some people would rather strip everyone of their rights than to actually accept and tolerate other cultures and beliefs in what used to be the land of the free.

Originally posted by whatukno
The level of intolerance in this country has in my opinion risen to dangerous levels. People who mix their faith and politics have also gone completely nutty.

I think you nailed it whatukno. Dangerous levels indeed, and faith and politics leads to...

It took the USA 191 years to run up a trillion dollar deficit from 1791 to 1982.
It took 4 more years to double that figure.
Dangerous levels indeed creating a new paradigm in which drastic measures are seemingly are percieved by some as their obligation ... due to what? Biological obligations???

The greater the diversity, the larger the group, the more accurate the average consensus will be to the truth.


I think some organizations and corporations are capitolizing on exploiting human behavior to get money and power to engage in activities to promote their own agendas and objectives.

Seems that some people would rather strip everyone of their rights than to actually accept and tolerate other cultures and beliefs in what used to be the land of the free.

Freedom is defined by the laws one must adhere to and conform to in order to be compliant with the mandatory expectations that G.O.D. (Government Of Dollars) subjugates it's members of society to, and reinforces via M.S.M. (Mental Systems Manipulators) in almost all facits of media. And how many laws are there specifically, and can I expect to learn the rules of the game within one lifetime? eh... but I could be mistaken.

Ya, politics and religion should not mix, but there is no seperation in reality. If people shoot a person in a church, they are still arrested and convicted under state laws.

some observations and thoughts,
ET
_________________________-

P.S. ...

Two Towers = l l
Ground zero = O

add those symbols together = lOl

LOL



Symbolism, and neuro-linguistical dual/multiple meanings. (helps with psychological warfare and social engineering ... or to subconsciously induce and invoke hate, anger, and rage to make associations with mass murder on a horrible scale with laughing out loud)

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

P.S. ...

Two Towers = l l
Ground zero = O

add those symbols together = lOl

LOL

Symbolism, and neuro-linguistical dual/multiple meanings. (helps with psychological warfare and social engineering ... or to subconsciously induce and invoke hate, anger, and rage to make associations with mass murder on a horrible scale with laughing out loud)

Ahh I see, so tolerance towards islam at any cost eh, even the ability to laugh out loud at the death of thousands of people who's deaths were glorified by fanatical segments of the religion.

I'm sure both you and WYK are aware that death threats are illegal. Usually an act perpetrated by criminals or people with criminal intent.

But as once more, tolerance towards islam at any cost, even if it means grouping the people who feel insulted at the premise of an islamic monument so close to ground zero in with murderers or people with murderous intent.

Well done, the pair of you. Well done indeed.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


Yes, I believe the problem is a deadly combination of ignorance, intolerance, distrust, religion, and bigotry. I believe these traits are running rampant through this society being egged on by people who have a lot to gain if the loud minority of our society gets it's way and wants to strip other people of their constitutionally protected rights.

It's funny how they play people. For instance, inflate the problem of illegal immigration, then when people are sufficiently freaked out and enraged about it, they pass a law that strips everyone of their 4th Amendment right to be secure in their personal papers and effects.

Same goes here, they are trying to enrage the public about the idiotic fear of sharia law taking over the United States, what law do you think they will go after if enough people demand that they do something about it?

reply to post by badw0lf

Ahh I see, so tolerance towards islam at any cost eh, even the ability to laugh out loud at the death of thousands of people who's deaths were glorified by fanatical segments of the religion.

Actually it's more like protect the 1st Amendment at any cost. You know, freedom? The freedom to believe and practice any religion you choose?

I'm sure both you and WYK are aware that death threats are illegal. Usually an act perpetrated by criminals or people with criminal intent.

1) Most use WUK,

2) Yes, death threats are illegal, hence the point of this thread. But it seems that some people don't understand that death threats are illegal even if they are levied towards religions that you don't agree with.

But as once more, tolerance towards islam at any cost, even if it means grouping the people who feel insulted at the premise of an islamic monument so close to ground zero in with murderers or people with murderous intent.

Why not? That's exactly what intolerant bigots are doing when they protest mosques all over the country. They are lumping all Muslims in with the nutty extremists who are murderers with murderous intent.

Originally posted by badw0lf
Ahh I see, so tolerance towards islam at any cost eh, even the ability to laugh out loud at the death of thousands of people who's deaths were glorified by fanatical segments of the religion.

I'm not sure how you got that out of my post. I did not help build the world trade towers, that I know of. They were finished prior to my birth in the same year, 1971. I did not help term the phrase ground zero, that catch phrase was fed to us. I did not dub the acronym lol which means , I just utilize the communications others seem to "agree" upon which do help insert connotations unconsciously with rage and anger, perhaps enough to fuel wars and be the extent of others wills on a massive scale for decades.

I'm sure both you and WYK are aware that death threats are illegal. Usually an act perpetrated by criminals or people with criminal intent.

You have brought entirely too many preconceptions to this dialogue. I have my doubts that you being "sure" about comparing me to anything or anyone is an absolute. Your statement of an absolute may be based upon malformed logic in an attempt to associate me with something in order to further the agenda(s) you align yourself with in this particular discussion.

But as once more, tolerance towards islam at any cost, even if it means grouping the people who feel insulted at the premise of an islamic monument so close to ground zero in with murderers or people with murderous intent.

If the real experts and real fire inspectors were permited to do their job and they agreed with the "official" findings, then I may be ready to join a few million people willing to force a few billion off the planet, and show them they have no home here, but for now information, truth, and disclosure about everything was not permitted and evidence was destroyed, and not even the basics of any fire investigation according to the NFPA international standards were permitted.

Well done, the pair of you. Well done indeed.

I was just sharing some observations and personal opinions I share about this subject. Having spent more than three years in warzones myself, I don't think people who do not know war intimately know the full scale of the ramifications of it.

There are no rules in war, not one.

For Example:
How many laws are there, specifically? And what do they mean when all held in context together simultaneously?
You have 0% chance of living long enough to learn all the mandatory expectations (laws) you need to conform to in order to be a law abiding citizen. And for as long as this holds true, there will be those who are not playing by any rules what so ever, but the general public does not need to be aware of this, and it is usually outside the scope of their imaginations anyways.

My tolerance for anything at all costs? My reverence for life has no bounds that I know of, however tolerance and reverence are not synonymous with eachother. I'm not prepared to dismiss totally the faith of billions as containing no truth what so ever.

Too bad those who write the laws are not politically correct.
Too bad those who wrote the holy books were not politically corrects, either.

Sure, we can pretend and suffer the delusion that there is seperation between church and state, but if somebody kills someone in a church they are still going to get arrested and convicted under state law.

thoughts things & stuff,
ET

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by badw0lf

 

Ahh I see, so tolerance towards islam at any cost eh, even the ability to laugh out loud at the death of thousands of people who's deaths were glorified by fanatical segments of the religion.

Actually it's more like protect the 1st Amendment at any cost. You know, freedom? The freedom to believe and practice any religion you choose?

Sure it is. So is the right to free speech and the right to protest. However, it is underhanded to slyly attribute a murderous criminal intent of a few criminals to those who practice free speech when they state their opposition and insult to this monument to islam, by alluding that they have now succumb to making death threats.

Bringing in death threats that are not legal let alone protected under your constitution, and insinuating that those who express their right to speak out against the idea of a monument to a religion that has a rather vocal stance on how it views the west, in an area where that very same religion has been held in high regard by small segments of communities WORLD WIDE for it's alleged participation in the death of thousands of innocent people, as being part of a group of criminals or people with criminal intent and therefore trying to add shame to the concept of their expression of free speech?

But, as it stands, it goes ONE way only. Your way or no way. Tolerate the opinions of the US.. Bah, who cares.. Tolerate the opinions of islam - Oh how far shall we bend, master?

I'm sure both you and WYK are aware that death threats are illegal. Usually an act perpetrated by criminals or people with criminal intent.

1) Most use WUK,

I prefer not to say U for You.. It's Lazy. But I will remember in future, since I also don't prefer 0 to o.

2) Yes, death threats are illegal, hence the point of this thread. But it seems that some people don't understand that death threats are illegal even if they are levied towards religions that you don't agree with.

But you attribute the actions to the entire people who are in disagreement with this proposed building.

And hoping that by association, you can get away with it.

you can't.

You do not get to take away the right of the ordinary person to feel insulted by this idea, by attributing to them the intent of criminals. No you don't.

But as once more, tolerance towards islam at any cost, even if it means grouping the people who feel insulted at the premise of an islamic monument so close to ground zero in with murderers or people with murderous intent.

Why not? That's exactly what intolerant bigots are doing when they protest mosques all over the country. They are lumping all Muslims in with the nutty extremists who are murderers with murderous intent.

I see.. Broadening the brush to bring in favourable incentive. Or including an agenda bias - if they can do it, so can we ? Surely you would not imply that. Because if you do, then you justify the reactions of those who are criminally inclined and make such threats.

Lets face it - religions are going to bare the brunt of ignorance world wide. Ad nauseum.

Islam has made it's bed, the so called moderate element have not lifted a finger in opposition, and if we were worried about christians or zoroastrians hell bent on wiping out the concept of western civilisation as prescribed by their doctrines, we would be having the same exact conversation about them, but we are not.

But lets not throw ignorance towards ignorance hoping mine is bigger than yours.

Death threats towards those involved in the mosque at GZ, are in no way a reflection on the law abiding citizen who feels insulted at the actions of this. As your OP alluded to. Which I responded to. (and the fact that people think they can laugh at the deaths of thousands of people because they disagree with something...)

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher
if the real experts and real fire inspectors were permited to do their job and they agreed with the "official" findings, then I may be ready to join a few million people willing to force a few billion off the planet, and show them they have no home here, but for now information, truth, and disclosure about everything was not permitted and evidence was destroyed, and not even the basics of any fire investigation according to the NFPA international standards were permitted.

I may just trim my reply to this one point, since nothing else you have said makes any sense what so ever. In fact I will.

I am NOT interested in this. I do not care, and will not be dragged into a OS/CS argument.

people died. You don't LOL about that. I'm not interested in the bulk of what you said as it was either meaningless or beside the point.

neuroliguisitcs need less of you and more people who fully understand the concept.

Originally posted by badw0lf
people died. You don't LOL about that.

One or more of us seems to have had a breakdown in communication. I was not laughing out loud about it, I was inferring that correlations in associations between the two and their imagery have been made.

neuroliguisitcs need less of you and more people who fully understand the concept.

you are so cute and adorable.

pleasantries,
ET

reply to post by badw0lf

Sure it is. So is the right to free speech and the right to protest. However, it is underhanded to slyly attribute a murderous criminal intent of a few criminals to those who practice free speech when they state their opposition and insult to this monument to islam, by alluding that they have now succumb to making death threats.

Yes, the right to free speech and to protest is covered under the same exact 1st Amendment as the one these same people want to forcibly strip from others. They already are willing to rip this right away from other citizens of the United States, doesn't seem to me like a huge leap from protesting against something to people making death threats.

Bringing in death threats that are not legal let alone protected under your constitution...

That is right it's not protected under our Constitution, that is why I made this thread, to educate people that this is going on. Maybe, someone will read this thread and instead of becoming an extremist, will instead think about what they are doing and perhaps learn some tolerance for other people and cultures.

and insinuating that those who express their right to speak out against the idea of a monument to a religion that has a rather vocal stance on how it views the west, in an area where that very same religion has been held in high regard by small segments of communities WORLD WIDE for it's alleged participation in the death of thousands of innocent people, as being part of a group of criminals or people with criminal intent and therefore trying to add shame to the concept of their expression of free speech?

Disliking the United States isn't anything new, fact is, many of the same people that are protesting this Islamic Center and Mosque, (see how I am stating what it actually is, and not stating it as a monument to islam ) also dislike the way that the US is going politically. They feel frightened by any change whatsoever. Fact of the matter is, many of these people are terrified of just about anything too different from their narrow world view.

Intolerance has no place in a free society, it's either free for everyone, or free for no one. If we allow bigotry hate, and intolerance to win, sharia law is the least of our collective worries. A few extremists who hate the United States and expound on it's evils will be right, if we aren't a tolerant and free society, how can we say that we are any better than theocratic regimes that we claim to fight against?

But you attribute the actions to the entire people who are in disagreement with this proposed building.

Why shouldn't I? Could it be true that because of the people protesting the building some nutcases have decided to escalate this to death threats?

And hoping that by association, you can get away with it.

Isn't that exactly what they and you are doing? Associating all Muslims to terrorism is just as equatable as saying that all protesters are in the same bed as people who today are making death threats, that tomorrow might not just be making threats.

you can't.

Sure I can, watch...

All protesters to the proposed Islamic Center and Mosque are extremists just as those that would make death threats are extremists.

You do not get to take away the right of the ordinary person to feel insulted by this idea, by attributing to them the intent of criminals. No you don't.

Just did.

Islam has made it's bed, the so called moderate element have not lifted a finger in opposition, and if we were worried about christians or zoroastrians hell bent on wiping out the concept of western civilisation as prescribed by their doctrines, we would be having the same exact conversation about them, but we are not.

Moderate Muslims have spoken out a lot against extremism, you just refuse to listen. Do all Christians have to constantly apologize for the actions of The Army of God, or the Westboro Baptist Church? Do all Australians have to constantly apologize for Yahoo Serious? And Christians do have the same agenda, it's just going the other direction on the planet, from west to east. Are all Christians bad? Of course not, but there are some that are. Do we punish all Christians for the idiocy of a few? No of course we don't. Because we realize that the majority of Christians aren't violent insane jackasses.

Originally posted by whatukno
Intolerance has no place in a free society, it's either free for everyone, or free for no one.

This is a link to a picture of a pig:


See whatukno, I can state the obvious, too.











BUT... Sometimes people just don't believe the obvious and have to go see for themselves.

Originally posted by Esoteric Teacher

Originally posted by badw0lf
people died. You don't LOL about that.

One or more of us seems to have had a breakdown in communication. I was not laughing out loud about it, I was inferring that correlations in associations between the two and their imagery have been made.

I'm sure it made an effective statement to those who understand what LOL means. Otherwise, I really do not get the point.

Twin towers ll
GZ O
= lol - sure means nothing more than an insinuation to me. Lol at the twin towers?

I'm SURE once again you get the meaning.

neuroliguisitcs need less of you and more people who fully understand the concept.

you are so cute and adorable.

No you are... Even while you are confusing NLP with something else...

And I don't know what to make of your Edit... Oo

Originally posted by whatukno
, doesn't seem to me like a huge leap from protesting against something to people making death threats.

But then, what about those innocent folk? You know, the people who DON'T want to kill anyone but are still rightfully insulted?

Bah to them, let them eat shame.....

Thanks for effectively enhancing the point.

Bringing in death threats that are not legal let alone protected under your constitution...

That is right it's not protected under our Constitution, that is why I made this thread, to educate people that this is going on. Maybe, someone will read this thread and instead of becoming an extremist, will instead think about what they are doing and perhaps learn some tolerance for other people and cultures.

Perhaps. We can hope. But you didn't word it that way. You made it clear that you intended to include everyone who does not agree with this building, is somehow part of this mindset to want death threats... Are we really going to go round for round in circles??

You know exactly what your intent was.

Make anyone who disagrees with this islamic building feel guilty because they must somehow NOW be associated with these criminals who call for death threats.

?

and insinuating that those who express their right to speak out against the idea of a monument to a religion that has a rather vocal stance on how it views the west, in an area where that very same religion has been held in high regard by small segments of communities WORLD WIDE for it's alleged participation in the death of thousands of innocent people, as being part of a group of criminals or people with criminal intent and therefore trying to add shame to the concept of their expression of free speech?

Disliking the United States isn't anything new, fact is, many of the same people that are protesting this Islamic Center and Mosque, (see how I am stating what it actually is, and not stating it as a monument to islam

) also dislike the way that the US is going politically. They feel frightened by any change whatsoever. Fact of the matter is, many of these people are terrified of just about anything too different from their narrow world view.

Intolerance has no place in a free society, it's either free for everyone, or free for no one. If we allow bigotry hate, and intolerance to win, sharia law is the least of our collective worries. A few extremists who hate the United States and expound on it's evils will be right, if we aren't a tolerant and free society, how can we say that we are any better than theocratic regimes that we claim to fight against?

Potahto, potayto...

Islamic fun house for all I care, You are still not getting it.

I dont care if it's a hindu curry house - my point relies on the people who say they don't want it. You quite happily ignore them, in favour of just getting along.

Ya know, sometimes just getting along is laying down while a man shoots you in the back of your head. Don't argue, just accept it.

Other times, it's when people come to a decision - based on ALL wishes.... This is the former and not the latter.

Forcing your rose coloured intent will make people rally. And you don't like it.

So instead of coming to a middle ground - since there is none - you start attributing criminal intent to those against the idea,

Let me refresh your memory WUK.

Not satisfied with using the 1st Amendment to try and strip other people of their 1st Amendment rights. Seems that people have started to take it a step further and actually threaten the Imam and his wife.

But only the people who tried the 1'st Amendment and were told by ludicrous laws and social left wing outrage, are targets in that blanket statement.

So, which way is it. All for one and one for all, or all for one and else you can stfu?


Ugh too long now, my point is clear, lets refine the thing...

reply to post by whatukno


Well done WUK! S&F.

I just cannot get my mind around the logic of people who can, for any reason, seek to rob another of their Constitutional rights. Don't these people understand that once a precedent is set for withholding rights from any group of people, for any reason - no matter how apparently justified or rational - it only sets us all up for having our own rights summarily dismissed in the same manner!!!

Let me state that again... When you happily rob somebody else of their rights, no matter what, you are only diminishing your own freedom.

All this blah, blah, blah Shariah law, blah, blah, blah, unfair playing field justifies short-cuts, blah blah blah, nation based on Christian ideals which don't match up to Muslim values blah blah... It makes me sick to my stomach.

And what's worse is that supposed Patriots... People who profess to love this country, are willing to shred the very founding principles that it is based on, solely over a building? A building most of them don't even know the actual facts about??? I'm up to *here* with explaining that the supposed Ground Zero, Cordoba Terrorist Funded Victory Mosque is in, reality, NONE of those things.

C'mon people, you'd think that passionate hatred and fear would at least be enough of an impetus to motivate a few folks to get their facts straight.

When it gets to the point where well intentioned people find themselves making death threats against fellow American citizens, in the name of freedom?!? Well maybe it's time to turn off the television, take a deep breathe and actually take the time to know and understand the truth before you continue going off half cocked.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


Lol wd WUK indeed.

Just ignore everything else and embrace a good old fashioned hug.

yeah, then we;re all good.

Aww..

Anyway, the real world is out there, I'm back to it.... this rose coloured glass shenanigans can wait.

Originally posted by badw0lf

No you are... Even while you are confusing NLP with something else...

And I don't know what to make of your Edit... Oo

Thanks for entertaining what I was trying to share none the less, and a star for that post
To me neuro=brain, and linguistics=communications/language, although a little off topic, I was just trying to relay that perhaps there are relationships between the imagery and symbols of both, an anchor. There is more to NPL than what I know of, totally, and some intracellular relationships may be more than just left to right language. But, I may be wrong.

thanks,
ET

Funny.................maybe it's not got to do with the mosque. Maybe, just maybe it's got to be about him being a tax delinquent slum lord, and he really made some of his tennants mad. It doioesn't necessarily have to be about the mosque...................as an interesting observation...............I wonder...............did you mean that protesting something makes one an exremist? Seems, kind of one sided doesn't it...........ah well, I guess we'll have to wonder until they fabricate enough evidence to let us know what those threats are/were?