It really is amazing that Nancy Pelosi represents a “safe” Democrat seat, because the woman is positively Orwellian. She thinks anyone who opposes the Ground Zero mosque should be investigated.
[audio:pelosi-on-mosque.mp3]“There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City.”
Poor Nancy. After throwing trillions of tax dollars in a misguided attempt to save the economy, she seems to a bit confused by the concept of opposition that’s funded privately.
Source: Washington Times
View Comments (96)
Excellent. Thanks!
There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism , as long as we know which fish to fry
Speaking of fish, something about the whole mosque affair smells suspicious.
Put on your thinking caps, boys and girls. It's time for a what if... question.
WHAT IF the planners / backers of this proposed mosque knew/assumed that there would be a massive public outcry and that ultimately it would not be built on the proposed site?
On the positive side it has "outted" many public figures as being pro-islam or islamic sympathisers, most notably the Half-Cracker™ President and Nancy the faithful Democrat lap-dog.
What would they stand to gain by the negative publicity and by the mosque not being built at the chosen site? There seems to be more to this than meets the eye.
Your comments, please.
I don't think they're that smart. Knowing Idiot Amin's in love with the muslim world is not news.
They may or may not get mileage from being turned down -- but they aren't getting turned down. The building won't even repeatedly catch fire -- we as a people are much too decent for that. However, I would like to mention that if anybody in that part of NYC wants to form a Vietnamese Potbellied Pig Pet lover's club, and walk them every day on a certain street, I'd be happy to buy their pet a treat. Something with prunes in it. I guess I'm not a nice person.
So Deb, did you come up with that idea on your own? It is much better than all the other ideas I've ever read by anybody else.
What is your issue with me? Seems like you are projecting some personal problems onto me. Are you roommates with Sam? I DO think it would be a better idea to research the funding for this planned mosque, rather than Americans who oppose it, and feel the comment is in line with the original article. Get over yourself.
Never meant to poke you in the eye or anything like that. Well, I maybe got a little bit too sarcastic with the last comment, but hey, we are actually more on the same page than not. Your slap at me about some kind of association with that putz sam, who has gotten a few jabs from me, is taken as deserved for my swat at you.
I still think, at my age of 53, that suggesting an idea is better than another should be left to the people reading it, not writing it, especially if it is not an original idea. I hope that doesn't raise your ire.
Regarding the multiple times I have seen the 'I have a better idea' statement, I've seen it several times in posts here and several other sites. Must be a different Deb.
Whatever means work to prevent the building of this travesty is a good idea.
Please accept my apology for any offense you have taken from me.
This is the only site on which I use DEB, so perhaps that is part of the confusion. I have noted I am not the only one here as well. I originally posted in response to the article title-Nancy wants to investigate us, I have a better idea, lets investigate the builders and funding. Perhaps that got lost in all the other back and forth. I accept your apology for me taking offense (hehe-go back and read-that is what you said!) so lets start with a clean slate. Oh, and I AM older than you! :P
I have a better idea. Why don't we investigate where the millions to build this mosque are comng from. That seems to be a more reasonable idea.
Works for me.
Burning a quran is blasphemy in the eyes of muslims. Burning human beings is obedience to the quran. Muslims burn Buddhists, Christians, Hindi, Jews, atheists and anybody else that does not submit to islam.
What would the reaction to the attack on the United States by the cult of islam have been if they had flown a couple fully fueled jet airliners into the houses of congress?
Actually, probably the same. I'm not a fan of Congress, but I would have a serious issue with an attack on barrier island off South Padre in Texas. NO ATTACKS ON US SOIL! Has everyone forgotten that the last time we were attacked on US soil, we declared war (for real war, not the current hand wringing, afraid of pissing people off war) on Japan? Who incidentally was negotiating a peace treaty with us right up until they tried to bomb Pearl Harbor off the map.
Hawai'i was not a state in the Union at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Obviously, bombing the crup out of our fleet was an attack against the U.S.
Just one of those pesky details some spoot head might call you on. From me it is a friendly note for clarification.
Now on to my original, intended to be rhetorical, question about what the U.S. response might have been if they had actually killed a huge number of our elected officials;
I doubt the military response would have been even remotely 'the same'. Our borders would have clamped tightly closed and there likely would have been martial law imposed. The armed forces of the U.S. would have been mobilized to the highest threat level and the feces would have hit the fan everywhere we had an arrow pointing on the intel tactical maps. The caves of every cowering mussy would rapidly have be converted to their tombs.
I suspect Israel would have taken the opportunity to slap the all kinds of ass around, too.
Hawaii WAS a US territory, just as Alaska was for several decades prior to statehood. And like Puerto Rico and the American Virgin Islands still are.
Territory. Not State. States got Constitutional guarantees of protection. Territories did not. States had elected representation. Territories did not. It is a silly argument you're trying to make here, Deb.
I've noticed many of your comments start or contain this; "I have a better idea." Thinking so very highly of your great mind indicates immaturity and/or arrogance, or that you work for the Ford Motor Company promotions department.
Only one of my postings (over the last 2 years or so) have said "I have a better idea." I consider myself to be smart, but probably not brilliant. I am well educated, but have a fair amount of common sense, and over the years I have had a wide exposure to other beliefs, cultures, and theories. I am well read in a variety of subjects and I study history. I am probably older than you. So why do you have such an issue with me? Are you threatened? I can't see why-this is only an internet site. Its not like I can take you job or something. Reflect on your behaviour- become more self aware. Its a good thing.
Put my name at the top of the list , Dont misspell my name , I'll even give you my address . We are going to burn the wicked witch of the west , at the stake come november
Hey..........Botox brain..............I'm against it....why dont you fly over to my house & investigate me....bitch
When she loses the Speaker's gavel when the Republicans retake the house, she will probably be investigated. Will anyone else laugh when her supporters call it a "witch hunt"?
And her little dog too !! ;-)
"I'm melting! I'm melting!"
If the shoe fits....
Investigate me, bitch!
I wish someone would investigate Nancy Pelosi.
I am put off by a lot of this anti-muslim talk, though. Yes, the Koran says to kill all infidels, but the bible says to cut off your hand if it causes you to sin (I'm sure there's some worse things in there, but that was the first thing that came to my mind). It's all about how you interpret it. Don't forget about Norther Ireland, where Catholics and Protestants (I think. I'm not too familiar with that conflict) were killing each other.
Don't get me wrong. I'm completely against the mosque on ground zero. We just might be going a little overboard with all this anti-Islam talk.
This is not anti islam talk it is anti THIS ONE MOSQUE IN THIS ONE PLACE talk.
The horrible and evil parts of the religion is part of the conversation because of the IMPLICATIONS of that in the building of this mosque.
Yes so Christianity and Judaism (and what nots) are not perfect DUE to human intervention and design and misuse of their respective faiths, but that doesn't mean that there is in any way MORAL EQUIVALENCY here and that is where you made your mistake.
You in my opinion are equating the 9/11 murders to these other issues as being moral equivalent and it isn't.
The conflicts in Ireland between "Christians" (and the conflicts in all reality were more about politics than religion) cannot be equated to radical muslims murdering people from COMPLETELY different religions and COUNTRIES than their own.
You are also interpreting the cutting off the hand thing as well. It has no equivalency to killing all infidels. One thing a hand is not the same as a life (which is what Jesus wanted to save read below). Second thing the hand isn't meant to be cut off IN ORDER TO SUBJUGATE a person into becoming a Christian or as a punishment for not being a Christian, which is what Muslims do to non Muslims or what they are told in their Koran to do to non muslims or to punish fellow muslims for crimes.
Third that was a teaching Jesus gave to people about sin, if a part of your body causes you to sin it is better to cut it off and not have it attached to you than for your entire life to be condemned, yes you would be temporaly maimed but you would gain your life salvation. It has nothing to do with cutting someone else's hand it is meant to be taking as a personal lesson. It is extreme because that is what Jesus was all about, and I am sure that people wonder about it, but He doesn't say YOU HAVE TO DO IT OR ELSE He says it would be better for the hand to be off than for your entire soul and spirit to be condemned.
Another big difference is plain in your statement "...Yes, the Koran says to kill all infidels, but the bible says to cut off your hand if it causes you to sin.." is that the bible doesn't say because your hand caused you to sin someone else is commanded to cut off your hand, it is a self made decision. The islammers don't ask you if they should cut it off, they just do it. The bible reference sends a message that you should correct your ways, not that someone else is to impose that change on you.
And again, the religion was a convenient label in Northern Ireland. The Prods were British citizens, who wanted to unite Ireland under the British flag because it gave them more money, power and opportunity. The Catholics were Irish natives who wanted Ireland returned to an independant state, United as Irish, because they wer getting screwed and suffered much discrimination (that is seriously the Cliff notes version-this went on for a hundered years, but that's the gist of it). The religion was a way to develop and us vs them mentality.
Nope. Not too much anti islam talk anywhere. It isn't a religion. Check into bare naked islam for some telling work. Islam is not here to be nice neighbors. They are here to control every aspect of all things. "Freedom can go to hell" is the mantra. islam will rule the world is the chant. They hate freedom. They oppress everybody that does not submit. they lie until enough people believe it. Jihad is every muslim mans duty! Read about it before you suggest they just another religious group. It is a cut of death.
Islam is not just a religion but a whole way of life - political, social, economic. Granted that only a percentage of muslims are radicals, but as the saying goes "the squeeky wheel gets the grease". The videos of Middle East muslims celebrating and dancing in the streets after receiving news of the 9/11 attacks did nothing for their general public image but rather grouped them with the terrorists. The fact that the stated goal of islam, as stated in the koran, is world domination under shariah law also goes against them.
Just as there are RINO's ( Republicans in name only ) there are moderate muslims who go along with the public observances out of cultural tradition or fear of reprisal but lack inner conviction. The problem is that some borderline "moderates" can be stirred up and "radicalized" by extremist rhetoric.
As you said "Yes, the Koran says to kill all infidels, but the bible says to cut off your hand if it causes you to sin ". The 2 statements are worlds apart. One says to kill unbelievers, the other is saying it's better to go to personal extremes if necessary to restrain yourself from doing wrong. Whole lotta difference, yes?
The blogosphere is hyperactive with Ground Zero Mosque posts. It's impossible for one person to keep up with them (I've tried!). If you use Google Blog Search for 'Ground Zero Mosque' set to the last hour, they come up faster than you can comment on them.
Most of the posts seem to be against the Victory Mosque, but many of these bloggers are working on gut feel only, and are obviously not Islamically Aware, being confused about the true nature of Islam and regarding it as just another religion.
If we counterjihadists all spent an hour a day commenting on recent posts and pointing the bloggers in the right direction, then we could do a great educational job. You can find links to resources HERE
Thanks for that link. Can't get enough information sources for this. Good to have checking points for accuracy and all that. Thanks again.
So... she wants to unpoliticize this by using the power (and the tax dollars) from the government to investigate private citizens who would prefer this mosque was not built near the Ground Zero site... uhm.
I know that she is going to be wondering why is it that she lost her power and prestige because she is obviously not all there.
It could just be that 60-70% of Congress is clinically insane and/or pandering to a growing immigrant muslim population to buy votes.
Re investigating private citizens - remember the Homeland Security list that got leaked labeling returning military, Bible-believing Christians, pro-lifers etc as potential terrorists? Same thing here. The Socialist Left is afraid of any Americans that oppose their "TRUE WAY". This is just round 1. As someone once said " You ain't seen nothing yet." Looks like the gloves are coming off.
O'Reilly asked how come the Left (as they are now) exist in this country? They are in power and/or affect the conversation and history of the country, but why in all reality they are a minority. A very powerful minority though. So we have become a country that is ruled by the few (in truth as it was designed), but unfortunate the few are crazy and out of control. They took control but also control was given to them by not saying nor doing anything to prevent the madness and this is the result. Now that Obamie is in power they feel invincible so they do not fear the people, but I hope that soon that will change.
"It could just be that 60-70% of Congress is clinically insane..."
Insane indeed. Too bad Insane Clown Posse has already trademarked the name...it fits Congress to a T.
Insane Clown Posse...I love it!