Thu Veew: Saudi Prince Backs Moving Planned NYC Mosque

[PLAYER57832]

So I am correct, but you still want to say I am wrong ... and did not answer my question, either.

Sorry. First, Here is a photo of the former church. Here is a "fair and blanced" article on the subject. The most logical reason ... the church isn't bribing the officials of the corrupt port authority. PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A FOUR STORY BUILDING. PLACES OF WORSHIP ARE RARELY SKYSCRAPPERS.

Looks like you didn't bother to read through the article you posted. What happened is that the Port Authority OFFERED THE CHURCH not only new land (because the old site was in the way of the new tower complex construction), but also 60 MILLION DOLLARS and the CHURCH REJECTED THIS OFFER!
Here, an excerpt that explains it well.

"St. Nicholas Orthodox Church has always had and will continue to have the right to rebuild on its original location. The question was whether public money would be spent to build a much larger church at a separate location on the site and ensuring that construction wouldn't delay the World Trade Center further," spokesman Stephen Sigmund said in a written statement. "On that question, we worked for many years to reach an agreement and offered up to 60 million dollars of public money to build that much larger new church. After reaching what we believed was an agreement in 2008, representatives of the church wanted even more public commitments, including unacceptable approvals on the design of the Vehicle Security Center that threatened to further delay the construction on the World Trade Center and the potential for another $20 million of public funds."

Sigmund said the "final offer" was made last year, which again included $60 million.

"They rejected that offer," he said.

Yes, the church says it was still negotiating, etc, etc. BUT this church was offered 60 million to help rebuild. The Islamic Center just asked for permission, under New York City rules. Hardly discrimination against the Orthodox church!

[Phatscotty]

how did I know you would run from the question? Your deflection reveals your answer. !

No, you obviously don't know... and likely did not bother to read.

See, if YOU are entitled to claim that every Muslim is suspect, somehow to be held guilty, should have to pay a penalty because some idiots who claimed to be Muslim bombed the trade center, the YOU get to be held accountable for the idiot who bombed Oklahoma,

Not only did he share your religion, he spouted off many of the same beliefs you now spout off.

So, yes, I DID answer your question.

ok, so then you change the question.

I will ask you again.

Was it Muslims who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Muslims? (trying not to spout!)

[muy_thaiguy]

No. Why would they be? It's their show. Are you stupid?

oh, just quoting barbera walters (did you even watch?) Ya know the part where Barbera says "Hosts should NEVER do that"
I think a host doing something a "host should never do" might be grounds for firing? Maybe I am stupid tho?

Is Barbara Walters their boss? If not, then I would say the answer to your last question is "yes".

However, I was impressed with how Ms Walters handled it. He obviously didn't at all agree with O'Reilly, but still recognized that the discussion needed to happen.

I was NOT AT ALL impressed with Whoopi, Joy OR Bill in this one. All three looked like asses.

All three ARE asses.

[Woodruff]

No. Why would they be? It's their show. Are you stupid?

oh, just quoting barbera walters (did you even watch?) Ya know the part where Barbera says "Hosts should NEVER do that"
I think a host doing something a "host should never do" might be grounds for firing? Maybe I am stupid tho?

Is Barbara Walters their boss? If not, then I would say the answer to your last question is "yes".

However, I was impressed with how Ms Walters handled it. He obviously didn't at all agree with O'Reilly, but still recognized that the discussion needed to happen.

I was NOT AT ALL impressed with Whoopi, Joy OR Bill in this one. All three looked like asses.

All three ARE asses.

I've never seen Joy outside of this excerpt (I've never watched The View) and Whoopi only on Star Trek TNG...so I can't say there. But from what I've seen of O'Reilly, this was pretty typical behavior.

[tzor]

See, if YOU are entitled to claim that every Muslim is suspect, somehow to be held guilty, should have to pay a penalty because some idiots who claimed to be Muslim bombed the trade center, the YOU get to be held accountable for the idiot who bombed Oklahoma,

Hold it right there Player, where did you get that "every" and who the hell is talking about "suspect?" I don't think anyone (other than you) would leap from the proposition that "Muslims hijacked and flew planes into specific targets" to imply that all Muslims would (if they could) hijack planes and crash them. But it does imply that Muslims need to be aware of this fact and how it can be seen by some as a very sensitive issue because of this fact.

We can, for example, use this same reasoning with the South. Not everyone who fought for the Confederacy owned a slave, nor did they like the institution. (The Civil war was actually fought because the South rejected Lincoln's massive tarriffs; Lincoln was actually pushing a constitutional amewndment that would have prohibited the Federal Government from deciding the slave issue one way or another. These tarriffs place a great burden on non industrialized states that rely on imports for manufactured goods and exports of their own products. This wasn't the first time there was a threat of succession from the south because of tarriffs.) Still the use and display of the flag of the Confederacy is considered a sensitive issue to this day.

If this is sensitive to people who were never even indirectly involved with slavery that happened generations ago, can you imagine what it is like for people who actually lost their loved ones? Can you? Emotional scars never really heal, they just lie in wait for some bastard to open them anew; to rip their hearts out once more and to step on them with hob nailed boots. That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

[Woodruff]

That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

In my experience, liberals are far more empathetic than conservatives, to be honest. It really goes with "the territory", in fact.

[Phatscotty]

That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

In my experience, liberals are far more empathetic than conservatives, to be honest. It really goes with "the territory", in fact.

no way dude.

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.

problem is, little wussies want to whine and complain when a good teacher pushes a student to try harder. many times the students wants to and does give up. You just cant teach everyone to fish, but taking fish from people who DID stick with the program and try harder and rose to the challenge of the teacher and giving their fish to people who never pitch in with the work is not the right answer.

It's not right and left. It's right and wrong. It is wrong to take peoples earnings, period.

[john9blue]

I think they should be allowed to build the mosque... but that show is completely retarded to begin with. What else would you expect from a panel of crazy woman hosts? At least they didn't start a catfight.

[Phatscotty]

I think they should be allowed to build the mosque... but that show is completely retarded to begin with. What else would you expect from a panel of crazy woman hosts? At least they didn't start a catfight.

She did not have to introduce what she knew would be an explosive topic. More revealing was Joy Behars denial of the poll of Americans against the mosque(70%).

Anyone who does not realize the difference between what people want/dont want and what right people have/dont have is kind of lame. Oh, the democrats are running on it?

[Woodruff]

That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

In my experience, liberals are far more empathetic than conservatives, to be honest. It really goes with "the territory", in fact.

no way dude.

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.

problem is, little wussies want to whine and complain when a good teacher pushes a student to try harder. many times the students wants to and does give up. You just cant teach everyone to fish, but taking fish from people who DID stick with the program and try harder and rose to the challenge of the teacher and giving their fish to people who never pitch in with the work is not the right answer.

Were you trying to convince me that you're confused as to exactly what "empathy" is?

[Phatscotty]

That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

In my experience, liberals are far more empathetic than conservatives, to be honest. It really goes with "the territory", in fact.

no way dude.

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.

problem is, little wussies want to whine and complain when a good teacher pushes a student to try harder. many times the students wants to and does give up. You just cant teach everyone to fish, but taking fish from people who DID stick with the program and try harder and rose to the challenge of the teacher and giving their fish to people who never pitch in with the work is not the right answer.

Were you trying to convince me that you're confused as to exactly what "empathy" is?

No, I almost noted in advance that is was a loose analogy, but figured you'd get the gist because it's related. (now you argue back it isnt related. of which then it will go to moot"

The part about how TAKING PEOPLES EARNING IS WRONG, well, I say that as many times as possible.

[Phatscotty]

anyone see the joy behar clip from her CNN show later that day with Jesse Ventura?

[jay_a2j]

As the bald fat guy in clip 2 said, Bill misspoke but apologized. Whoppie and Bahar did not apologize. Bill corrected himself by saying "Muslim extremists". But lets take the issue at hand. Do you think 70% of Americans don't want the mosque at ground zero because they hate the religion of Islam? Um hardly. It's because the terrorists who attacked us on 911 were extremists of that religion and it would be insensitive to the victims families (and people in general) to then erect a mosque at that location. Just as building a Nazi memorial at Auschwitz following WWII would be insensitive. Or building child day care facilities at Catholic churches. Or erecting a Japanese museum at Pearl Harbor after the fact. Come on, use your heads people!

[PLAYER57832]

See, if YOU are entitled to claim that every Muslim is suspect, somehow to be held guilty, should have to pay a penalty because some idiots who claimed to be Muslim bombed the trade center, the YOU get to be held accountable for the idiot who bombed Oklahoma,

Hold it right there Player, where did you get that "every" and who the hell is talking about "suspect?" I don't think anyone (other than you) would leap from the proposition that "Muslims hijacked and flew planes into specific targets" to imply that all Muslims would (if they could) hijack planes and crash them. But it does imply that Muslims need to be aware of this fact and how it can be seen by some as a very sensitive issue because of this fact.

You claim the right to punish ALL Muslims for that act, by denying them the right to build a center -- a center that would serve more than just Muslims, by-the-way.

Per the rest-- stick to something you actually know. You know a lot, but you have never lived in the south and know only academic information.

[PLAYER57832]

That's the problem with you liberal bastards; for all your fluffy language you can't emphasize worth a shit. Your philosphy blinds you to the real pain of others.

In my experience, liberals are far more empathetic than conservatives, to be honest. It really goes with "the territory", in fact.

no way dude.

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.

No, that is what Republicans have worked for 40 years to convince people is true. But, it has no bearing on what people who truly are liberal actually espouse.

The FACTS are that the Repulican leadership, despite claims to the contrary, have been quite happy to simply hand out cash, food stamps, etc, because they knew it would be spend and eventually fill the coffers of the wealthy. Trickle UP very much works and they know it!

Liberals have made mistakes, missteps, but have always tried to push programs that would get people out of poverty, out of bad circumstances. They were the first to bring in drug rehab centers, to try detoxificaition instead of jail. (in the 60's and 70's, remember it was largely naive kids who too often got caught up in the acid and so forth drug experimentation). They were the ones, before that working to get alcholics treatment as well.

Liberals began headstart, worked to show that kids brought up in the slums, etc were not inherently stupid, but lacked the opportunities of many other children. Add in some lead and other poisoning issues...

So, AGAIN, try actually looking at facts.

problem is, little wussies want to whine and complain when a good teacher pushes a student to try harder. many times the students wants to and does give up. You just cant teach everyone to fish

,
Actually, you pretty much can.

but taking fish from people who DID stick with the program and try harder and rose to the challenge of the teacher and giving their fish to people who never pitch in with the work is not the right answer.

Well, then you best not vote Republican or Tea Party, because despite all their claims to the contrary, that is EXACTLY what they want to do.

They may cut your taxes, but they open the way to high interest rates on credit cards, destroy what little pollution protections we have, refuse to require companies to prepare for clean-ups in the worst case scenarios BEFORE they even allow various permits AND are all in favor of condemning properties so some wealthy people can put in shopping malls or building developments in the name of "economic benefits".. never mind how long that property has been held in a family.

They "cut government" by turning over formerly government jobs to contractors like Haliburton that charge far, FAR more than government workers ever would and often don't even do as good a job.

It's not right and left. It's right and wrong. It is wrong to take peoples earnings, period.

Yes, but the Republicans work pretty hard to do it. Too bad folks like you ensure they succeed.

You claim to be so brilliant as to have seen all the economic downturns in advance (never mind that most liberals did well before that), but you are utterly blind to the political realities that have gotten us into this huge mess. You see nothing but your ideology.

[PLAYER57832]

As the bald fat guy in clip 2 said, Bill misspoke but apologized. Whoppie and Bahar did not apologize.

Apoligize for being offended that he tied Muslim extremists to Muslims and then tried to pretend it was jsut a "minor error"? Why should they!

Bill corrected himself by saying "Muslim extremists".

Yeah.. AFTER first defending it, and this is absolutely not the first time he has made such an "error."

But lets take the issue at hand. Do you think 70% of Americans don't want the mosque at ground zero because they hate the religion of Islam?

#1IT IS NOT A MOSQUE, it is a community center.
#2. those figures are wrong, not sampled from a true representative sample AND based on pure misinformation, as evidenced (among other things) by the reference to "Mosque" instead of "cummunity center", which is what it actually.

#3. Hatred? no, but they do oppose it because they unfamiliar with Islam and the reality around the community center. Folks like Glenn Beck have worked hard to promote the idiocy and they, sadly believe him instead of bothering to look into the reality. Reading what actually happens takes time. Listening to Glenn Beck takes a few seconds.

Um hardly. It's because the terrorists who attacked us on 911 were extremists of that religion and it would be insensitive to the victims families (and people in general) to then erect a mosque at that location. Just as building a Nazi memorial at Auschwitz following WWII would be insensitive.

This is NOT a memorial to Al Qaeda. How dare you even try to claim that the Nazis are somehow equivalent to the entire Muslim faith! A community center dedicated to education and peace seems to be a very fitting memorial and response to the hatred espoused by Al-Qaeda.

YOUR type of intolerance is EXACTLY why Al-Queada and other extremists are gaining recruits. We know of the impact of bullying, oppression. How much more harmful when it is your entire religion being condemned! Just like with standard bullying, not every child who experiences it turns to violance. BUT, it sure leaves kids open to hearing such messages. AND, when you have your religion to back you, it is very, very easy for a teenager to decide that there is little option but violance.

EVERYONE who insists on not drawing a line between moderate Muslims and Al Qaeda is feeding into that very hatred and anger. It is intolerance that breed extremism, not tolerance, not acceptance.

Or building child day care facilities at Catholic churches.

Done.

Or erecting a Japanese museum at Pearl Harbor after the fact. Come on, use your heads people!

You obviously are not. Actually, there is mention of Japan and its history very much at Pearl Harbor already.

[Metsfanmax]

I will ask you again.

Was it Muslims who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Muslims? (trying not to spout!)

It is true that the people who attacked us were Islamic. But it is clearly false to say that the entire group of people is to blame for one what particular subset did. Therefore, no, it was not "Muslims" who attacked us on 9/11. That statement is as ridiculous as saying "Was it men who attacked us on 9/11, or was it women?" and implying that male chauvinism is really the culprit here. Here's an incomplete list of similarly asinine questions:

- Was it people with hair who attacked us on 9-11, or was it bald people? (DEATH TO THOSE WITH HAIR)

- Was it Afghanis who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Afghanis? (DEATH TO AFGHANISTAN)

- Was it a group of 19 people who hijacked the plane and attacked us, or was it not a group of 19? (I FUCKING HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE GET TOGETHER IN GROUPS OF 19)

[Johnny Rockets]

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
But then take back 50% of it.

Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.
Then they will buy the fish from you; after they sell you the bait.
And the rods.
And the license.
And rent you the boat.
Then they take That Money and buy cheaper fish over seas. Then call you fucking lazy for being unemployed.

Fucking grand eh?

f*ck fishing. Steal their cattle.

JRock

[PLAYER57832]

, but taking fish from people who DID stick with the program and try harder and rose to the challenge of the teacher and giving their fish to people who never pitch in with the work is not the right answer.

It's not right and left. It's right and wrong. It is wrong to take peoples earnings, period.

The irony here has apparently gone straight over your head.

You DO realize that the reason why just about EVERY stream, EVERY fish population in the US, both inland and at sea is at risk is a FAILURE of government controls?

Because, it really is just like the Tea Party AND the Republicans to crow about "teaching people to fish", while ensuring there just are not more fish worth eating. (sorry, but when I am advised to partake of no more than 1 a month and not to feed any to my children under 3... I frankly decline!)

[PLAYER57832]

Liberal are more likely to prefer giving of fish
But then take back 50% of it.

NO, but asking for 10-20% which will then be cycled back into programs to ensure that everyone can learn to fish in the future AND that stocks are maintained and rebuilt.. you betcha!

Conservatives are more likely to prefer teaching how to fish.
Then they will buy the fish from you; after they sell you the bait.
And the rods.
And the license.
And rent you the boat.
Then they take That Money and buy cheaper fish over seas. Then call you fucking lazy for being unemployed.

Actually,
They will out up a sign offering "free fishing lessons", but then when you go, you find that its only a 5 minute trial and, oh yes, if you forget to cancel at exactly 5 minutes, then you will be charged the full rate for each additional hour or piece of an hour.

THEN they will charge you to lease the gear, put the line in the water, etc. ... and not bother with maintaining or restoring anything but their own little private area. IF that areas should happen to pollute those downstream.. tough!

But, should you decide not to fish... well, then you are just a "deadbeat". Never mind that your grandfather and great grandfather fed their families on that same stream. They had to sell it when their kid had a burst appendix, so "too bad!".. they are just a bunch of deadbeat lazy idiots who deserve nothing.

[Phatscotty]

I will ask you again.

Was it Muslims who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Muslims? (trying not to spout!)

It is true that the people who attacked us were Islamic. But it is clearly false to say that the entire group of people is to blame for one what particular subset did.

Never said that, never believed that. Don't know why you would jump from the facts to something I never said (entire group is to blame)

Insane non-sequitur though

[Metsfanmax]

I will ask you again.

Was it Muslims who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Muslims? (trying not to spout!)

It is true that the people who attacked us were Islamic. But it is clearly false to say that the entire group of people is to blame for one what particular subset did.

Never said that, never believed that. Don't know why you would jump from the facts to something I never said (entire group is to blame)

Insane non-sequitur though

I'm not saying you did say that. I'm saying Bill O'Reilly said that, or if not, strongly implied it, and that's why they walked off the show.

[Phatscotty]

I will ask you again.

Was it Muslims who attacked us on 9-11, or was it non-Muslims? (trying not to spout!)

It is true that the people who attacked us were Islamic. But it is clearly false to say that the entire group of people is to blame for one what particular subset did.

Never said that, never believed that. Don't know why you would jump from the facts to something I never said (entire group is to blame)

Insane non-sequitur though

I'm not saying you did say that. I'm saying Bill O'Reilly said that, or if not, strongly implied it, and that's why they walked off the show.

he also specified immediately it was muslim extremists. That argument was about as heated as it gets, and stoked all the way by whoopi. It's okay he focused more on keeping his composure than speaking politically correct with an opposing finger in his face, and whoopi in fact LUNGED at Orielly first yelling over him....

context is everything...

[jay_a2j]

Ok, I already knew Player wouldn't get it. This is no surprise. We will just have to deal with her until they find a cure for what ails her.

[tzor]

There is a cure ... she needs an excorsicm.