[Bridget]

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

ok first off newt failgrich (doubt that's his name) i don't know who this man is. so when i get around to reading who he is ill get back to you. also have you read a lot his work or just labeled him as a bigot because it was convenient.

also it states it in the Qur'an. read it look it up see what you think.

You made the claim, therefore you provide the evidence.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

"I don't consider something coming out of the words of a bigot to hold any respect for the truth."

this is something your gonna come to regret later just you wait. and note bad grammer.

It was a wrong choice of word but is otherwise grammatically correct. Try again.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

ok so its a Muslim building near a place where a Muslim lead terrorist attack was need i say more. sure its a place for Muslims to expand there religion im sure, before it was a mosque now its just a harmless rec center. personally i don't really mind it has a building but the statement it makes symbolically. is whats in question.

Yeah, I definitely am suspicious when someone says they want to reaffirm their position in the community, reveal that Muslim-Americans died in the September 11 attacks too, and are opening up a tolerant recreational center open to mostly Muslims, but anyone else who wishes to take part in it. Yeah, I am so suspicious of that. What are they going to do with those basketballs? Fill them up with shrapnel and drop them from the second story window? Look out! That guy's got a water-bottle. It could be a bomb in disguise. God, give me a fucking break.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

its actually just a block. don't flatter yourself. and real-estate isn't cheap in Manhattan. so i doubt that right next to ground zero is cheap either. show me the price and i might be convinced. i still doubt that they put it there because it was cheap, there are many other locations other than ground zero to put it that were cheap if not cheaper (and less offensive.). also you seem to just believe everything you are told without reading between the lines. just because they say its for everybody blah blah blah its a rec center. i don't really by all that why because that'd be taking them at face value. one i hardly ever believe anything said at face value in terms of news, government, even the pope. its all politics and frankly it shouldn't be taken at face value.

The real-estate there is comparatively cheaper than the rest of Manhatten. Many businesses have abandoned the area due to structural damage and the vibe of being so close to ground-zero. So, the real-estate is cheap. Should they move elsewhere? No, why the fuck should they? They are causing no problem. The people up in arms are the ones causing a problem. It's backwards as fuck. Also, do you have the audacity to claim I, the one arguing against the public opinion, get my opinion fed to me by news organizations? You're parroting sloganized propagandized bullshit from the news, and yet I am the one taking everything in superficially? That's fucking comedy gold right there.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

ah more propaganda. ok first off yea it does gain them publicity it also fuels the war against the usa and gives radicals something to fight for. Muslims hate Christians how do i know this because the qur'an states that being christian is punishable by death. so basically they says it not violent but wait we have this fact. (so in there view they should kill me non violent my ass.)

How does it give radicals something to fight for? Are they going to increase their efforts now that we're tolerant to moderate Muslims who don't support their extremist bullshit? I swear, if we modelled societal standards around the consequences of bigots, extremists, terrorists, and nay-sayers, then society would pretty much fucking blow. If being tolerant encourages backlash, then so be it. I'll shoot them with a peacemaker and smoke a cigar in their faces like Eastwood. That's how much I care for the opinion of the wicked. Also, show me evidence of this claim about the Quran.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

also try reading some stuff in there qur'an there also allowed to lie in the benefit of there religion. so basically they could be lying to us this whole time and we would be taken for fools. though that's just theoretically.

No thanks, I don't waste my time reading excessive fairy-tales. I can use your argument against you right now. How do I know you're not lying to me about them lying? See, I can try to make vague arguments about potential but highly unlikely scenarios too to ditch my obligation to the truth. It's so easy!

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

i think its because there offended, they think that the Muslims are disgracing America, and what happened on 9/11 was caused by radical Muslims. so them building a "rec center" there would be inappropriate as it will offend alot of people. its not about whether there all terrorists or not. its simple that it is offending people. there's other locations they could build it that's all innoc was saying. you just assumed he thought they were all terrorists. they have right to feel offended. whether you understand it or not is up to you.

If that's the problem, and it seems it is, then the wrong-doers are those being offended. If you are stupid enough to judge every Muslim and the entire religion of Isam off the actions of a mere few extremists, then you are intellectually bankrupt. That's the only reason you could be offended by this whole situation, is if you wrongfully and unfairly equate every Muslim with a terrorist and the entire religion of Islam with terrorism. You have to stop looking at offense as good-guy/bad-guy scenario. There's not always an offender when people are offended. People can delude themselves into thinking they're offended, when they haven't been. This is one case. It shouldn't offend you in the slightest, unless, of course, you're an idiot and can't think rationally.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

it's offensive because, (radical) Muslims were responsible for 9/11 attacks. and they make mosque's on or near places to claim victory over there enemy. Christians do not put churches over places to claim victory they put them there to spread there word. I'm christian i should know. however if you wanna argue that they don't in fact put up to declare victory then you've got yourself a debate.

Yes, you're right. RADICAL Muslims were responsible for the attacks. So, it shouldn't be offensive when NON-RADICAL Muslims choose to build there. Also, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...062202335.html. Also, can you provide some source or evidence that Muslims build Mosques on conquested territory? Then, can you prove that the mere cultural center being built near ground-zero is an attempt to do just that. That would be great.

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

and stop with old are all Muslims are terrorists thing its getting old its all over your posts like an old broken record player. no one said that. show me where they said that.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/implication

Originally Posted by WiFiDi

a bit violent wouldn't you say i mean its just an opinion. "tuck you in, hit you with a hammer." i really hope you don't have kids. (especially if they are republican ) are all republicans homo's really, if you believe that ya big BIGOT. (that's right i just called you that.) So why do you call us that were not all homo's. i mean absolute's are never true. so why is this magically true after all one of your main arguments is that not all Muslims are terrorists. so why are all republicans bigots? im flattered that you hate us this much really i am it only shows how much of your life you waste away on us.

so Bridget wanna know why your a bigot. for my (personal) entertainment ill give you a definition,



so from that you seem to hate homo's, republicans, and other bigots. so your also a hypocrite. and ill end with this. that's all folks, *loony toons closing scene.*

For starters, I'm a male. Second, I don't have kids, and your post merely encourages me not to. No, I didn't state all Republicans are homosexuals. I was starting that there has been a recent trend of Republicans or otherwise conservative politicans either coming out of the closet as a homosexual or being 'caught in the act'. Someone said that if Innoc was a bigot, he would have no problem admitting it, because that's who he was. I was pointing out how that was a poor conclusion, as those select Republicans or otherwise conservative politicans are who they are, yet do not admit it because of the social consequences.

I don't hate homosexuals. That would require me to be self-loathing to a degree. I do despise Republicans as well as Democrats. They're both Statists, the only difference is which part of your private life they want the government to regulate or control. They're far from their defining ideals. The simple act of being critical of some group of people doesn't make me a bigot. I have an otherwise legitimate reason that doesn't (only) attack their person. Hating on Muslims simply because they're Muslim or being too much of a pussy to explain the reasons why you disapprove of them suggests there is no legitimate reason, it's just motivated by personal hatred. Also, hating bigots doesn't make me a bigot. Being intolerant of racists doesn't make me a racist. Get your thoughts straight.

ONLY SCRATCHES LOL