Don1977 Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 But in all fairness, It wouldn't be right for the Japanese to build a mosque or place of worship at Pearl Harbor either.....for example....
JPINFV Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 Considering that we're talking American values, which supposedly includes pesky things like rights and the rule of law, and considering that you don't seem to care about those things, I don't see how this conversation can go anywhere but circles, especially since you apparently want to ignore things like rights and due process. You know what's really strange. Apparently people think that because I'm against government intervention I'm for the mosque. I'd like to find someone find where I said that they should build it there, just that they legally could. But in all fairness, It wouldn't be right for the Japanese to build a mosque or place of worship at Pearl Harbor either.....for example.... You mean like the cultural center a short 8 miles from the USS Arizona memorial? So less distance if you just want to go to Hickam airfield or just the border of the actual harbor? http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=japanese+culture&sll=21.308247,-157.842121&sspn=0.075165,0.154324&ie=UTF8&hq=japanese+culture&hnear=&ll=21.310166,-157.842121&spn=0.071166,0.154324&z=13&iwloc=A Alternatively, how dare the Pacific Aviation Museum in the middle of Pearl Harbor include such things as authetic Japanese Zeros in their exhibits, including one on a Japanese carrier setting. In fact, according to the website, it's the first thing seen when a visitor enters the exhibit space. ZOMG USA!USA!USA!USA! http://www.pacificaviationmuseum.org/exhibits/info.html
HERBIE1 Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 Considering that we're talking American values, which supposedly includes pesky things like rights and the rule of law, and considering that you don't seem to care about those things, I don't see how this conversation can go anywhere but circles, especially since you apparently want to ignore things like rights and due process. You know what's really strange. Apparently people think that because I'm against government intervention I'm for the mosque. I'd like to find someone find where I said that they should build it there, just that they legally could. You mean like the cultural center a short 8 miles from the USS Arizona memorial? So less distance if you just want to go to Hickam airfield or just the border of the actual harbor? http://maps.google.c...24&z=13&iwloc=A Alternatively, how dare the Pacific Aviation Museum in the middle of Pearl Harbor include such things as authetic Japanese Zeros in their exhibits, including one on a Japanese carrier setting. In fact, according to the website, it's the first thing seen when a visitor enters the exhibit space. ZOMG USA!USA!USA!USA! http://www.pacificav...ibits/info.html 8 miles? Not quite the same as 2 blocks. *Sigh* This mosque will happen. Not because it SHOULD be built, and not because so many people support the idea of putting it there. It will be built because the new paradigm for this country is to bend over backwards to appear "tolerant" to the rest of the planet. The opinions of others are more important than the feelings of our own people. I'm surprised that we haven't yet apologized to Bin Laden and AQ for allowing such monstrously decadent symbols of capitalism to tempt them into an attack. Yes, it will happen- despite the fact that a CNN poll of New Yorkers said that 68% of them thought the building of this mosque at that location was WRONG. Then again, going against the will of the people seems to be the trend lately. This isn't a Constitutional law issue, this isn't a zoning issue- nothing legally prevents this from happening. That's what Obama can only say he supports the idea- the government has no real say in this. 1
JPINFV Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 This isn't a Constitutional law issue, this isn't a zoning issue- nothing legally prevents this from happening. That's what Obama can only say he supports the idea- the government has no real say in this. Then people need to stop running to the government in an attempt to stop it, which has been my point the entire time.
HERBIE1 Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 Then people need to stop running to the government in an attempt to stop it, which has been my point the entire time. I should have been more specific. This is not a FEDERAL government issue. If Bloomberg wants, he can claim eminent domain and ban the building of the mosque at that location. In other words, it will never happen. I'm not a New Yorker, but I'm guessing that even if Bloomberg received all types of blow back from the citizens, I don't think he's the typical politician. He doesn't need the job, he does not need the money, so unless he has aspirations of moving up in politics, he does not care what folks think. He is a business man, so this has to be about money. There is more to this story- guaranteed.
JPINFV Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 (edited) If Bloomberg wants, he can claim eminent domain and ban the building of the mosque at that location. In other words, it will never happen. Not quite. First, the 14th amendment expands rights past limiting specifically "congress" to limiting the states as well, and in practice cities (see McDonald v Chicago for Chicago's attempted end run around the 2nd Amendment, Skokie for the 1st Amendment, and plenty of other times where cities attempted to restrict the rights of citizens). Additionally, eminent domain won't work either. The Cottonwood Christian Center vs City of Cypress that I quoted earlier was a case where a city in Southern California attempted to use eminent domain for the purpose of redevelopment against a plot of land bought by a church to build a bigger house of worship. Cypress was shot down and in the end settled by trading a larger plot of land elsewhere, but they were still shot down in a court of law. I'm willing to bet that Bloomberg knows that using ED in this case for this reason is so far contrary to the Constitution that he won't even float the idea. Edited August 15, 2010 by JPINFV
Richard B the EMT Posted August 15, 2010 Posted August 15, 2010 I'm not a New Yorker, but I'm guessing that even if Bloomberg received all types of blow back from the citizens, I don't think he's the typical politician. He doesn't need the job, he does not need the money, so unless he has aspirations of moving up in politics, he does not care what folks think. He is a business man, so this has to be about money. There is more to this story- guaranteed. Bloomberg, supported by a number of members of the New York City Council, already has given a one finger salute to the people of the city. We voted for "Term Limits", restricting city elected officials to 2 four year terms, which was why Rudy Giuliani, Bloomberg's predecessor, was not allowed to run again. They conspired and voted against the will of the people, and changed the law back, and ran again. Shockingly, the bastards won reelection. "Mayor Mike" has also gone on the record that he doesn't aspire to higher office. He also is on record for the inequal enforcement of the law, specifically, my home community is a public beach under the NYC Department of Parks. Their rules prohibit consumption of alcohol, such as beer or wine, on park grounds. As I am usually the designated driver anyway, this doesn't really affect me. However, "Bloomy" has attended various concerts in Central Park, at which both beer and wine were served. NYPD LEOs were at both, and either arrested the offenders, or poured out the alcoholic beverages...in Rockaway. In Central Park, not one action was taken against the drinkers. His comment to the inequality of Rockaway Peninsula residents drinking on the beach versus Central Park event attendees was, "Nobody ever drowned in a Tuba". As in Herbie1's statement, he DOESN"T care what people think. JPINFV added a comment while I was still typing. Eminent Domain itself has come into question. It is one thing to condemn a neighborhood, to allow the construction of an interstate highway, hopefully to the benefit and betterment of all. Robert Moses did that from the 1930s to the early 1960s. However, recently, some community used Eminent Domain to condemn a bunch of private houses, to put up some "Big Box" store. Instead of for the public good, this was for private industry. I think I heard that this case is supposed to go to the US Supreme Court. (Sorry, I am forgetful as to which community, and which store.)
Just Plain Ruff Posted August 17, 2010 Posted August 17, 2010 Again the mosque will be built after lots of legal wrangling and law suits and people shaking the bully pulpit and all that but in the end, the mosque builders don't give a good god dang about anyone but themselves. They don't care how many people are against it they just want the damn thing built and they have American political correctness in their corner. It's a kiss my ass thought process from the organizers and who gives a god darn what sensitivities it affects. Boy will we be surprised when a dirty bomb goes off in the basement of this building and kills even more than the 9/11 attacks. That will be the crowning glory of this mosque. And if that happens we can all go back to our sensitivities and say "We thought they meant no harm, it was a cultural outreach center. They said they meant no harm" If the above situation happens we only have ourselves to blame on this one. Remember giving away rights is easy, it's getting them back when you realize what the damage of taking them away which is the hard part. Once gone, they don't come back.
JPINFV Posted August 17, 2010 Posted August 17, 2010 They don't care how many people are against it they just want the damn thing built and they have American political correctness in their corner. If by "in their corner" I hope you don't mean that to include the government refusing to step in and stop it. Boy will we be surprised when a dirty bomb goes off in the basement of this building and kills even more than the 9/11 attacks. That will be the crowning glory of this mosque. What makes you certain that this will ever happen? Remember giving away rights is easy, it's getting them back when you realize what the damage of taking them away which is the hard part. Once gone, they don't come back. What rights are being given away by letting the mosque be built?
HERBIE1 Posted August 17, 2010 Posted August 17, 2010 Maybe Richard can shed some light on this, but does this not prove that the push to build this mosque is nothing but a blatant attempt to appease the Muslims and show how PC this country has become under our apologist in chief? This Iman advocates things like the US becoming Sharia compliant. He thinks the US was complicit and/or responsible for what happened on 9/11. The mosque has been fast tracked, and everyone from the president to Bloomberg have given their approval on the project. But a Greek Orthodox church, that was crushed when WTC #2 collapsed, STILL cannot be built. Red tape, restrictions, politics, bureaucracy have stalled the project. They placed height restrictions on the church, were told it needed to be downsized(it could not be higher than the 9/11 memorial), yet no such restrictions were made for the mosque. WHY? Mosque moves forward, yet church in Limbo http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=38462
Recommended Posts