And? LOL that could apply to anything I don't personally endorse.

Christians are the most tolerant people in the world. Do Muslims allow Christian Churches to be built in their Countries? NO.
Do Muslims treat any other religions as equals? NO.
Why has the compassionate Mayor Bloomberg held up permits for allowing a Greek Orthodox Church to be rebuilt in the same area that the new Mosque will be located? Why can't Muslims assimilate into our society and become Americans?

They do not only hate us , they choose to kill us when they have the opportunity. They kill with airplanes, human bombs, IED's, rockets, mortars - they kill children, heck, they strap bomb belts on their own children - they kill with knives, slitting throats and filming it for You Tube.

Please forgive me for not being all the way up to speed on the discussion but was any other pertinent reason provided for placing a mosque close to ground zero other than relgious freedom? What is the benifit analysis for doing this? Is it to help bring about healing from the horrible event, to promote understanding that the muslim community as a whole does not condone the action? What really is the reason behind it. We in this country take the concept of being free to such extremes at times and use sematics and creative interpretation of the constitution to ones own end. I feel that before a decision is made a lucid well articulated summary of why the proximity of the mosque to ground zero is important to its overall location as oppossed to being placed somewhere else should be presented. Like it or not the perception will always be that a select few that practice the muslim religon perptrated this travesty on American soil at that location; that is never going to change. You couple that with the current climate in world affairs today and the perception that some who practice the muslim religeon do not suscribe to the beliefs and ideals of typical American society and furthermore openly spew hatred towards our country. This brings me back to my point, at the end of the day what is the overwhelming positive effect that this will bring about? And why will placing the mosque somewhere else not accomplish the same thing

The Muslims came to America 9 years ago and MURDERED almost 3,000 people. And now they want to build a community center two blocks away from Ground Zero and open it on Sept 11th 2011, the tenth anniversary of their crime. This is not an issue of tolerance, they are coming here to rub their crime in our faces. You'd be hard pressed to find any tolerance from them toward anyone who is not a follower of their backwards, ignorant, war like culture. If that building goes up, then I say that it must come down. Give them a taste of their own medicine.

"Christians are the most tolerant people in the world."
Are you serious?

I have to agree with "I know You", the day that it is proposed to open seems a slap in the face to those families who lost love ones and is almost overtly seeming to celebrate a "triumph" Wrong place, wrong time.

Even the Muslim families, HMJC?

It would probably come as a surprise to most here that the largest shareholder in Newscorp outside of the Murdoch family has himself contributed to Imam of the Muslim Community Center at ground zero. But we all know Faux News can't pass up an opportunity to drive a wedge between groups of people, especially when the GOP has so much at stake in the next election. After all, since Newscorp has been caught donating so much money to the Republican Governors' Assn., any facade of "fair and balanced" has been relegated to where it belongs--the dustbin.

It isn't fair to blame the whole of Islam for the 911 attacks. This is just a wedge issue for people who thrive on that sort of thing.

I would also add that, no, Christians are not and have not been the most tolerant people in the world--not even in the United States. In fact, it has been only recently that Native Peoples living in the U.S. have enjoyed freedom of religion. to read more about this, go to: http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?i...

Freedom of religion MUST be protected at all costs.

Co-owner of Fox News Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, the main benefactor behind The Kingdom Foundation, owns a $2.3 billion stake in News Corp. In turn, News Corp. purchased a $70 million stake in a Saudi media company owned by Al-Waleed in February 2010.

Fox News is using their network earnings to help benefit the the man who will likely fund construction of the Islamic center. The television network remains quiet. But, for those that don't remember Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, he's the very same man who tried to give $10 million to former New York City Mayor Rudy Guiliani after he suggested that the 9/11 attack occured because of bad foreign policies by the United States.

Americans who oppose construction of Cordoba House should stop watching Fox News.
The second largest shareholder in News Corp. — the parent company of Fox News — has donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to causes linked to the imam planning to build a Muslim community center and mosque near Ground Zero in Manhattan, says a report from Yahoo!News.

According to the report from Yahoo!’s John Cook, Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, who owns seven percent of News Corp., “has directly funded [Imam Feisal Abdul] Rauf’s projects to the tune of more than $300,000

Americans who oppose construction of Cordoba House should stop watching Fox News.

So if Fox News is "in the pocket" of "the man who will likely fund construction of the Islamic center," how can we explain why Fox News seems to be the most vocal network news OPPONENT of building a mosque near ground zero? Do you think Fox News and all of its liberal and conservative commentators/contributors are just putting up a smokescreen to disguise the fact that their bosses support building the mosque? If so, I think you are giving them way too much credit for being able to hold this "conspiracy" together. Also, I do occasionally watch Fox News and CNN, but I watch The Daily Show and MSNBC - the news outfits that seem to be trying to tag Fox News with ground zero mosque support - RARELY. I wouldn't believe ANY story coming out of the latter two sources about purported Fox News executives motives for providing funding to Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and his various business entities - which seem to be a primary source of the controversy. This story is not as simple as it is being portrayed, and is way overblown - as indicated by the fact that islamic services have been and are currently being held in a non-denominational chapel in the heart of the Pentagon, which was also a 9/11 target. Nobody seems to care anything about that.

(See: www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/0821/pentago...)

In my opinion, the "Mosque at Ground Zero" is a story which should have limited "legs," but which has been launched into the stratosphere of the news cycle by President Obama's ham-handed handling of press inquiries about it. Mr. Obama still hasn't learned when to keep his mouth shut - especially about topics which cause people to remember that his middle name is "Hussein." When he takes time to provide an opinion on topics like this - no matter how confusing that opinion might be - it only cranks up his opponents, and provides opportunities for polarization and hate-mongering.

sebekm, News Corp (parent company of Fox News) supports the GOP. The base of the GOP is populated with people who oftentimes harbor a lot of prejudices, including prejudices against Muslims, which affect the choices they make in the voting booth.

What News Corp and the GOP would like the Republican base to do is to is associate President Obama with Muslims, associate the Democratic party with Muslims, and associate all Muslims with 911--thereby painting all with the same brush. In addition, they would like to paint all liberals and progressives as being soft on terror and silly in their defense of freedom of religion. In order to achieve this end, they play to the xenophobic tendencies of many in the Republican base.

Of course, even when they get into office, plenty of Republican officeholders, most notably the Bush family, maintain close ties with Muslims--most notably members of the Saudi royal family but also other fellow investors in the energy industry, just as an example. These Arab allies, most of whom are themselves part of dictatorial regimes and resented intensely by the people they govern, know their relationships with American politicians are secure and so say little to nothing about it. They see it for what it is: political game-playing. At the same time, these same Republican politicians like to publicly play the various "sides" against each other--for example by saying, on the one hand, that Islam is a peaceful religion and, on the other, that "islamofascism" is putting the world in peril.

Again, News Corp has proven its bias by giving a truckload of money to the Republican Governors' Assn, the sole purpose of which is to get Republicans elected! Hopefully, they will lose their status in the White House Press pool as a result.

Keep in mind I never said it was fair to blame all of Islam for the 9/11 tragedy however, Multitudes of "fundamentalist" Islam groups attack American ideals and our way of life DAILY. You are skirting around my question of why does the center have to go where they are proposing to achieve its purpose? Why does it have to open on the proposed date? I once again ask that someone present a valid argument that warrants eliciting potential hard feelings and possible unrest....

HMJC, I think they should be left to build the community center or do whatever they see fit that is within the law with the site. THEY OWN THE LAND. We have freedom of religion in this country. It is in everyone's interests to make sure that no one impedes them in this endeavor. I am not interested in having one religion preferred over the other, which is what a lot of people seem to want.

Murrelet - and the owners, directors, and bigwigs of CBS, ABC, CNN, NBC (and it's sub-news orgs), and the other liberal news media outlets DON'T support the Democratic Party with all the cash (i.e,. TRUCKLOADS) and influence they can muster? I don't know how old you are, but I've been watching "network news" for nearly 50 years - PLUS I was born and raised in one of the most liberal/Democratic strongholds outside of New England - Chicago, Illinois. Believe me, I KNOW LIBERAL NEWS BIAS WHEN I SEE IT, so let's not get into a debate about who is worse in their bias - Fox News or everybody else.

I repeat that I am not a Fox News "junkie," and over the years I have come to trust the television "network news" less and less. But in my experience, Fox News is the least of all evils.

sebekm, no, not to the degree Newscorp has recently done. You might watch a lot of TV, sebekm, but you clearly don't follow the reality of what is going on with regard to News Corp and the GOP. We are talking about lots of cold, hard, cash--to the Republican Governors' Assn--the sole purpose of which is to get Republicans elected to office. See article below by By Rachel Weiner of the "Washington Post."
**************************************
Fox parent News Corp. donates $1 million to Republican Governors' Association

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2...

"Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. gave $1 million to the Republican Governors Association (RGA) this year, Bloomberg reported. The company owns Fox News and the New York Post. (You can see the full IRS filing here.)

The filings show that the RGA raised $58 million between Jan. 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010. The Democratic Governors Association raised $40 million during the same period.

"News Corporation believes in the power of free markets, and the RGA's pro-business agenda supports our priorities at this most critical time for our economy," a spokesperson told Politico.

News Corp's Political Action Committee, News America-Fox PAC, has given to Democrats and Republicans, but in far smaller sums, Yahoo's Michael Calderone reports: "The PAC has given $48,000 to Democrats running for House seats this year and $40,700 to Republicans. In Senate races, the PAC contributed $30,500 to Democrats and $25,500 to Republicans."

The RGA has a new ad going up in Florida today, hitting Democratic candidate Alex Sink."

********************************************

And to HMJC - the argument about why the mosque has to open on the proposed site is that the proponents/builders want it there. That's it. End of story. Now - if they wanted to have a great PR coup - they could do what the "moderate" muslims give a lot of lip service to but never seem to follow up on: They could make a theme of the "islamic center" the CONDEMNATION of the 9/11 attacks and all forms of violence in support of islam. One way to do this is for them to have a large exhibit at the main entrance (inside) the center which explains WHY it is wrong to use violence in the name of Allah. And in the true spirit of community relations, they could solicit and obtain testimonials from the family members of 9/11 victims which support the PEACEFUL practice of islam.

Of course, in this day and age something like this could NEVER happen. But in my opinion, the President could go a long way toward demonstrating the type of leadership he was elected to provide if he supported this kind of initiative, instead of giving a legalistic statement about how the builders can "constitutionally" do what they want.

Murrellet - you seem very hung up on Fox News and the GOP. Just about as aggravated as I have been over many years about how every other news outlet has promoted the "lefty view." In my view, Fox News - as they have stated - was founded in an attempt to provide another view. They may not always be "fair," but they - by existing - do provide some balance.

Once you know where all of the news outlets are coming from, you can sift and filter and TRY to find out what the REAL story is.

And if you look at ALL the corporate political contribution tote boards - and include the personal contributions of the "liberal" (i.e., NON-Fox News) network news executives and employees - my sense is that it all seem to balance out in the end. As far as I am concerned, Rupert Murdoch can give his money to whomever he wants. I really don't care - just as I really don't care where the executives of CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, as well as the vast majority of the rich in the entertainment industry make their donations (but I can guarantee you that the vast majority is not going to the GOP).

I was born and raised a Democrat in a Democratic Party stronghold, but I have turned out just the way my parents said I would. They believed in the old adage: If you ever create any wealth in your life, you will NEVER be a Democrat. WEll - I am not "wealthy" by any stretch of the imagination - nor am I a registered Republican - but at my current age and status in life, I find that Fox News aggravates me less with their "news coverage" than anybody else. That's why it is my opinion that they are the least of all evils.

Nighty night.

sebekm, There isn't and never has been a writer alive without a bias. However, there are many who DON'T GIVE A MILLION DOLLARS TO THE REPUBLICAN GOVERNORS' ASSN AND THEN CLAIM TO BE "FAIR AND BALANCED!"

This is why News Corp (Faux News) is in danger of losing its place in the White House Press Pool. You might not think it is fair, but this is what is happening.

Kinda sounds like that George Soros dude. Oh, wait...he supports the Democratic party.

To quote Benjamin Franklin, you have a republic "if you can keep it." It is us individually who must choose over and over to do good or bad, or to support good or bad organizations. It is US who elect good or bad leaders.

If Fox News loses its place in the White House Press Pool, it's because the Obama administration doesn't like its seedy underbelly being exposed. As a practical matter, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for them to be given the boot from the pool. I don't think the Obama adminstration has the ability (or the guts) to make it happen. If anybody should have been kicked out of the White House Press Pool, it was Helen Thomas - and the Repubirats couldn't make that happen either.

Again: Both the Democruds and the Repubirats have their sources of campaign funding, and as in "making sausage," it's a dirty business. And I repeat: I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S BUTT WHO GIVES WHAT TO WHOM. I'll leave keeping track of that to you - since you seem to enjoy it so much. Over the years, what I have seen is that both parties seem to be able to come up with the funds they need to take and retake national elected office.

I agree that there isn't and never has been a writer alive without a bias. SO WHAT'S YOUR POINT? That's exactly what I was saying: If I'm stuck with consuming biased "news," I'll take the Fox News bias every time. To paraphrase Boozy Barley Blair in "The Russia House": I prefer Fox News.....it's as biased as all the rest, but there's less b.s." The FNC bias is presented openly - not with a "wink and a nod" in the insidious, underhanded way the others work it in through what they cover and how. When you can so openly see what you're getting, it makes it easier to sift and filter.

Finally, always remember: "Commentary" and "analysis" is NOT "news." So you exclude people like O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck in the discussion of "news" presentation. (I never watch those guys anyway - and I lump them in with the news "twisters" like Olbermann, Maddow, Savage, Begala, Carville, Cafferty, etc.)

Iknowyou States:

"The Muslims came to America 9 years ago and MURDERED almost 3,000 people. And now they want to build a community center two blocks away from Ground Zero and open it on Sept 11th 2011, the tenth anniversary of their crime. This is not an issue of tolerance, they are coming here to rub their crime in our faces. You'd be hard pressed to find any tolerance from them toward anyone who is not a follower of their backwards, ignorant, war like culture. If that building goes up, then I say that it must come down. Give them a taste of their own medicine."

My friend, you are playing a very dangerous game here.

Let's hope it IS a game.....

For those of you who only follow the Constitution when you find it convenient, I put this to you. You say that anyone who supports the right for Muslims to build a center two blocks from Ground Zero is (fill in your insult here), because Muslims hate America, If you wish to be consistent (which I seriously doubt), then please support the effort to close down Westboro Baptist Church. They are unabashed about their hatred of America and the freedoms it possesses.

Muslims who support Shariah Law do not support human or civil rights according to our Constitution. (forced female circumcision, no rights for females to drive or get an education, cannot socialize with men if husband is not present).

IKY, the United States doesn't exactly have a spotless record with regard to religious freedom and human rights. The link I provided above speaks to such abuse, perpetrated on Native Peoples by the government of the United States. Of course The United States' abuse of Native Americans' human rights, even aside from restricting their religious liberty, is no secret.

Given this history, I will never support any effort to curtail the religious freedom of anyone in this country. Everyone here is equal before the law, regardless of the faith or lack thereof professed.

sebekm, The White House Correspondents' Association will make the decision regarding Faux News' placement in the White House press pool.

What continues to get lost in the dialouge here is that this is about more than freedom of religon. This building has a definite potential to cause undue distress to thousands of families that were affected by the 9/11 tragedy. Placing this mosque at this location WILL elicit unrest, hard feelings, and will make it difficult to function as envisioned. To say that the developers have no resposibilty to consider the negitive impact this may induce is irresponsible. Any develpoment has to petetion the perspective city to infrom them of thier intent as oppossed to " this is my land and this is what I am going to build here" If that were the case we would have strip clubs next to day care centers! I once again ask why does the developer have no culpability to at least demonstrate that the benifit of this facility far outweighs any potential negitive impact. Hiding behind the constitution and citing that this is only about my rights being infringed upon is ludicrous. Most Americans actually have zero idea of what having your freedom impinged on looks like. Our Grandparents and most Soldiers (like myself) have seen first hand cultures that are not free and because of this we truly value and understand the gift that we have. Make no mistake though, freedom is not a one size fits all. Every situation has circumstances that must be considered. Every situation does not apply. There is more to this debate that freedom of religon. It deals with a culture that only embraces our "freedom" to the point of what is benificial to thier cause. I once again close with this, I am not 100% against the mosque being put up but I would like to know more about why as to the where and when besides "it's my land and it's freedom of religon.

This Muslim nonsense is getting ridiculous. If these people want to build a mosque so badly, then let them build it in Iraq or Saudi Arabia! Forget political correctness. Although I support free speech and equality, how about some common sense as well?

I am sure you would feel differently, HMJC, if you were personally from a group that has experienced religious discrimination, even codified religious discrimination, in this country. There is always some rationale behind this kind of activity which always has to do with ignorance and fear.

I have mentioned one example of codified religious restriction in the United States, which ended relatively recently. Of course, there were "reasons" why many white, Christian, Americans felt it "necessary" to criminalize Native religions, force them to behave like Christian white people, etc. Truly, ANY group that is unfortunate enough to be deemed the "other" by the masses, especially to the point where they are treated differently under the law, is in potentially serious trouble in terms of the preservation of their religious liberty and human rights.

In addition, there are many more examples of prejudices leading to unequal treatment that isn't codified. Consider how long it took for a Jew to become a Supreme Court Justice or for a Roman Catholic to become President. For that matter, no Jew has ever been elected to that office--and neither has any Mormon. This certainly cannot be because there is a lack of qualified people or that Jews, Catholics and Mormons are not loyal Americans. Rather, it is due to the prejudices of many, the ignorance and fear of many, with regard to those they deem the "other."

What's next, the Statue Of Liberty wearing a veil?

I think there is a dictatorship or fascist state waiting for you somewhere, IKY.

Let's be honest. The mosque issue is all about a fringe group that wants to exert its religious influence on American culture. Any decent Muslim should know that Ground Zero is a completely inappropriate place to build a mosque! This isn't bigotry-its common sense. Are there not other locations to build this thing?

Many of those practicing "The Religion of Peace" (Islam) haven't found their way out of the 7th Century. It's sad but true... Stoning people to death is common for many Islamic regimes. Along with an entire laundry list of brutal acts.

That's your opinion, IKY, not "the truth."

There are many good Muslims. I will not deny that. I could only wish that more Muslims would speak out against the brutality practiced by many in their religion. Especially the brutality they practice against women.

Murrelet two things, one, I am not sure what "white christian Americans" have to do with the discussion as I do not recall that demographic being the driving force to not have the mosque built. Many races and creeds were affected by the 9/11 tragedy. Two, the right to practice the muslim religon is not being questioned in this discussion. It is about the location, the timing of the opening, and the circumstances that surround the topic. You still have of yet to discuss whether or not the developer has a responsibilty to weigh the potential negitive effect this could elicit as part of thier due process.

HMJC,

White Christian Americans have a long and storied history of taking it upon themselves to determine how people should live, worship, etc--and which members of religious, ethnic and racial groups get to enjoy the full benefit of the rights guaranteed in the US Constitution.

Again, since I am very much aware that, until VERY RECENTLY, Native Americans were not able to legally practice their religions, since I know the repression that Christians have imposed on people RIGHT IN THIS VERY COUNTRY, I will never be on the side of telling any group they are less than American, have less rights to free and unfettered practice of their religion than anyone else. They own the land. They can build what they want on it. IT IS THEIR RIGHT--a RIGHT NO ONE WOULD QUESTION, SAY, IF SOMEONE BELONGING TO THE SAME ETHNIC OR RELIGIOUS GROUP AS Timothy McVeigh belonged to wanted to build a community center or house or worship in the vicinity of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. After all, if someone were to smear whatever group that is by associating it with McVeigh, the general response would be of the nonsensical nature of equating one deranged white (probably Christian) guy with an entire group of people

The idea that the muslims who own this land should not be free to do what they want with it because some feel it offensive, insensitive or whatever is just another manifestation of the same old "different rules for different groups" idea that has been with this country for ages. It is based on prejudice, ignorance and fear--not on the law.

I have said this many times: this is a nation of laws--not of men. That means that all are equal before the law, regardless of the prejudices held by the masses.

Murrelet,

you have made it very clear that since past indisgressions have occured it appears it is ok to disregard consideration for the families that lost those dearest to them because don't forget, they are victoms as well. In the end the mosque will probally go up and to what end who knows. I find it offensive though that developers in this case are being portrayed as the victom as they are the farthest from that. Your comparision of Timothy McViegh and radical islam is faulty as to the fact that radical isalmic groups threaten, degrade, and denouce our way of life everyday. Like it or not that is the way it is. I am going to leave it at this because to be truthful I do not feel that our opinions will meet anywhere close to the middle. But that is the great thing about being an American, I don't have to agree with you, nor you with I

HMJC

The land is zoned for establishments such as community centers. The people in question, who happen to be Muslim, own the land.

Again, we have freedom of religion and therefore the law can never read anything like "zoned for X except in the case of Muslim houses of worship of community centers."

Again, since I know very well the rationale given for stripping Native Peoples of their cultures in attempts to make them as close to white Christians as possible, since I know that their religions were criminalizded and it could not be legally practiced in this country until very recently, I will never go along with the rationale I see now for essentially doing the same to Muslims. I have read it all before and too many people have already suffered the results of this kind of prejudice.

The WHCA is in the pocket of the Obama administration. NOBODY will get boxed out (or let in) without their "approval."

......and here's an example:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=139657

Oh Wah, sebekm. Murdoch's propaganda machine might lose its place of prestige in the WH press corps, which it should never have gotten in the first place.

They are as "qualified" as anyone else to have the "prestige" (such as it is) to be a part of that rat pack.

But I'm beginning to be glad that it bothers you all so much.

Have a nice day!

Many people do things in the name of "their God". What we should all be worried about is truly trying to live the way "our God" says to live. I am not your judge and you are not mine. However, the one judging me is watching me at all times--we would all do well to remember that.

Judge Not - Lest YE be Judged!

Muslims do not believe in freedom of religion:

“I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah” (Al Bukhari vol. 4:196) Quote - Mohammad