Why would the author believe anything coming from the Council on American-Islamic Relations? They Lie.

CAIR's true intentions were discovered when the FBI wiretapped the notorious "Philadelphia Meeting" attended by Hamas members, supporters, and soon to be CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad. In these wiretaps, Omar Ahmad boasted of the ease in which he could create "Islamic" organizations in America, and how they did not have enough people at the time to perform the work they wanted to "hide."

Omar Ahmad and CAIR have never answered what type of "work" Ahmad intended to hide.

And just what is CAIR hiding in it's support for Project51?

Dear nicee,

CAIR relied on news reports from television stations, so they are not the original source of the information. For example, google "YouTube" and "CAIR Video: Anonymous Hate Flyers Target Kentucky Mosque Plans ". If you google "YouTube: "CAIR Video: Anonymous Hate Flyers Target Kentucky Mosque Plans" a FOX report is shown. So the attacks on the mosques are not inventions of CAIR.

In any event, it is my understanding that accusations such as yours have been levied against CAIR for years but nothing came of them. I believe CAIR has something posted on its national website about this. I also recall reading that representatives from CAIR have been invited to official government affairs from time-to-time, which seems to undermine your claims.

I do not know CAIR's position with respect to Project51, but as I am not affiliated with CAIR I'm not sure why that is relevant to my post.

Dear J. Samia,

CAIR is an issue because you trotted them out as a group that speaks for American-Muslims on the issue of "hate crimes." CAIR lies about "hate crimes" as they did with the Marietta GA mosque fire that was revealed to be set by a Muslim to "show" how Americans hate Islam. CAIR does not speak for American Muslims as they claim, - they speak for the Muslim Brotherhood and specifically Hamas. And you defend them by trotting out CAIR "postings" defending themselves against "lies and smears" yet what I say is 100 percent true about Omar Ahmad creating groups whose work they need to "hide". If you dared to do any real research you would find the complete evidence data-base of the HLF trial and specifically the damning evidence against CAIR's founders and fellow travelers.
http://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/judges/hlf2.html

I double-dare you to be an honest writer and research the CAIR evidence and then answer why you would in any way shape or form use this nefarious organization as a source for anything, let alone defend them from justified criticism.

Funny that some former haters are actually behind this mischief

A statement the same day as I read of 10 people, devoting their lives to saving and helping others, are made to kneel and then shot because they were alleged to preach Christianity.

J. Samia - Did CAIR publicly admit the mistake when the learned the truth? Did they even bother to check to se who set the fires or simply jump on the opportunity to play the victim? What did they have to say about the 10 people executed for alleged to preach Christianity?

Let us not forget that everything we were told about 9/11 events, Afghanistan, Iraq, and the weapons of mass destruction, and the atomic bomb that Iraq was "about to drop on United States in less than 45 minutes" were all totally lies. Lets not forget that half of the alleged hijackers have now been shown to be alive and well and had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks. This was reported by BBC, and other journalists around the world. Lets not forget the lies we were told about every aspect of this entire event that lead us to the wars that are themselves full of lies. Remember that little incident called the Anthrax attacks?? Those Anthrax letters were mailed "BEFORE" the 9/11 attacks and they clearly referred to the 9/11 attacks and blamed the Muslims for it! Does any one remember who sent those letters and where they got the powder from??? Go read the writings of Alan Hart and Gordon Duff. Then read Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of studies at the US Army War College who says that he is 100% certain that Mossad, Jewish neo-cons, and Israelis orchestrated and carried out the 9/11 attacks and designed them such that they will be blamed on Arabs. This is a man who knows what he is talking about. He says that Israeli and US Jews have done such operation many times in the past and blamed them on others. It is called "False Flag" terrorism. He says that the top US military people know that almost all the Terrorism events around the world are carried out by Israeli Jews and Israeli agents. So, if you are looking to blame some one for the 9/11 attacks, you are all barking up the wrong tree.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/03/19/22329/

When my son was young I absolutely adored conspiracy theories. They were a great way to get my young son interested in history:

The Freemasons and their control over the revolution was a good story. Closer to home, since we lived in Howard County, was the story of how the Vatican plotted the assassination of Lincoln with St. Charles College in Ellicott City being their meeting place. When he got a little bit older the story about the gunman in the grassy knoll gave rise to discussions of the cold war and American foreign policy.

Thanks for bringing back those fond memories Sam.

“When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” (Paul)

Sam half the 9/11 attackers alive and well? No credible journalist anywhere around the world said anything like that. the only people I heard say it were conspiracy theory wack jobs who had no evidence and have no logical arguement to support such nonsense.. I don't ever recall anyone saying Iraq was about to drop an A bomb on us in less than 45 minutes either. To be sure there are some things that were not true such as WMD in Iraq. However, that alone doesn't support the outlandish claims you suggest. Your post is full of more holes than Swiss Cheese. Maybe you could come back with some actual facts next time. Instead of a litany of empty accusations supported by name dropping people who themselves have no logical rational or reasonable arguement or credible support.

To listen to Leftist idiotarians, you'd think that opposition to Cordoba House is the hobgoblin of a few small minds on the right. Racists, fascists, Islamophobes, xenophobes, Neanderthals-- the whole Star Wars cantina of boogeymen and cranks stand opposed to poor, innocent Imam Rauf. *sob*

Absent from this fairly naked effort to demonize the vast majority of Americans is the simple fact that Cordoba House support has tanked in the polls for weeks.

The latest poll? By a margin of 61 to 26 percent, New Yorkers oppose the proposal to build the Cordoba House.
http://www.siena.edu/uploadedfiles/home/parents_and_community/community_page/sri/independent_research/Imm0710%20Release.pdf

“Large majorities of all New Yorkers, every party, region and age give a thumbs-down to the Cordoba House Mosque being built near the Ground Zero site,” said Dr. Don Levy, the institute’s director, in a press release.

This Leftist demonization campaign should be accepted for what it is-- silly, delusional and disconnected.

Support the will of the people, Mayor Bloomberg.

Explain again, why 9/11 victims families are "bigots" for defending Ground Zero from desecration by a monument to Islamo-supremacist triumphalism on their loved ones' graves?

I must've missed that part of your sniveling. Oh wait, here it is!

"A Muslim victim of 9/11: 'Build your mosque somewhere else,'"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/06/AR2010080603006.html

"I do not like harboring resentment or anger, but I do not want the death of my mother -- my best friend, my hero, my strength, my love -- to become even more politicized than it already is. To the supporters of this new Islamic cultural center, I must ask: Build your ideological monument somewhere else, far from my mother's grave, and let her rest."

Quislings don’t confront real evil; and hate those who do. You can see this on almost any school playground. The kid who confronts the school bully is often resented more than the bully. Whether out of guilt over their own cowardice or out of fear that the one who confronted the bully will provoke the bully to lash out more, those who refuse to confront the bully often resent the one who does.

Today, Leftist-Quislings express that cowardly contempt for those of us who take a hard line with Cordoba House. It’s ever our fault (you see) for provoking these bully. Better to remain supine while the sharia law advocates satisfy themselves raising money for terrorists; tormenting American widows and orphans at Ground Zero; erecting their monument to Islamo-triumphalism.

The Quisling answer: Just attack patriotic Americans as "bigots" (ad hominem) and hope the crocs eat them last.

There’s a word for that, kchses1: Cowardice.

Own it, Quislings.

Anti-Quisling the only person I see expressing contempt is you for anyone who doesn't share your view on the subject. In your analogy of the kid confronting the bully the reason they would get be resented more is that they usually carry the confrontation down to the same level or worse than the bully thereby making themselves no better or even worse. You gave a pretty good example of that in practice with your insulting tirade. As much as I don't want to see any Islamic monuement anywhere near ground zero your bullying name calling anger laced tirade makes me embarressed that we are even close to being on the same side.

The author bullies patriotic Americans (who stand against Islamo-supremacism at Ground Zero) by slandering us all as "bigots"-- and the Quisling@5:29PM has the temerity to climb up on her hind legs and howl about "contempt"?

Your contempt for the will of 9/11 victims' families is merely bullying of another form. Own it.

Don't be a cowardly, bedwetting, whining apologist for Islamo-supremacists your whole life, Quisling.

Anti-Quisling the only person doing any bullying is you. The author stated views and unlike you didn't resort any name calling. You on the other hand have done nothing but verbally attack me for pointing out that fact. The only contempt I have is for hate mongers like you who have the gall to call yourself a patriotic. You clearly don't know what the words you use mean if you did you'd realize how completely lacking any intelligence or compassion your words are. You are a traitor to everything this country was founded on. Own that facist

Dear Anonymous,

I think your interlocutor has made an interesting choice, from the vocabulary point of view. "Quisling" is a word which is exclusively used in the most rabid right-wing periodicals. It summons a bye-gone era, and indicates nostalgia. It is all a pose, or melodrama. As you have rightly described, it hardly indicates rational thought. And I say that as someone who has the nagging thought there must be about a million more appropriate places for a Mosque.

"rabid right-wing periodicals"? Oh course! That's where I read about Quisling (the infamous fascist collaborator). We were lounging around the Star Wars cantina of Leftist boogeyman with the other Neanderthals.

Apparently, folks can only avoid nagging today by waxing nostalgic for Obama's New Deal-- which (btw) is working no better than the old one.

pffl

Ravensfan Al-Anon - I do admit I had to look it up before I repsonded initially as I wasn't familar with the word. I'm not sure if this person is for real or not. I certainly hope it's just pose. The truly disheartening thing is that even if he is posing there are those who believe that kind of nonsense. I agree with you that in regards to yuor Mosque comment as well.

For those interested in a more scholarly examination of the Quisling phenonmenon among today's American Leftists, read "Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left" @
http://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Alliance-Radical-Islam-American/dp/089526076X

Don't remain ignorant of history your whole lives, Quislings for Islam.

[Quisling whined: "The author stated views and unlike you didn't resort any name calling."]

I'm sorry Quislings need a dictionary for the big words. Let me explain how logic works.

When the author attacks 9/11 victims families as "bigots"-- for having the audacity to oppose a 13-story Islamo-fascist mega-mosque on their loved ones' graves-- that author indulges ad hominem (abusive), which is logically fallacious.

The "bigot" gratuitous assertion opens the author to equally gratuitous rejoinder.

Quislings may not like being caught in the ensuing crossfire, but that's the price for sticking your illerate nose into the fray.

Don't be an illiterate apologist for apartheid Islamo-supremacism advocates your whole life, Quisling.

Anti-Quisling - How about you make a logical arguement first before trying to explain it to others. The only groups even mentioned in the article are the ADL and Operation Save America. Both have in the past pandered to bigotry just as you are doing now in the name of patriotism. I'd keep quite on making accusations of ad hominem attacks given your own posts. Here's some examples of your own abusive personal attacks.

"Leftist-Quislings express that cowardly contempt"

"Your contempt for the will of 9/11 victims' families "

"Don't be a cowardly, bedwetting, whining apologist for Islamo-supremacists your whole life, Quisling"

"We were lounging around the Star Wars cantina of Leftist boogeyman with the other Neanderthals."

"Quislings may not like being caught in the ensuing crossfire, but that's the price for sticking your illerate nose into the fray."

"Don't be an illiterate apologist for apartheid Islamo-supremacism advocates your whole life, Quisling."

Try practing what you preach. There is a difference between knowing what something means and knowing how to use it. When you can do both then try and discuss a subject like logic. Try making a logical, reasonable non-abusive arguement for why the Mosque should not be built there. That's what logical thinking people do. Since I don't really want to see it there either I'd certainly like to see a legal and logical reason why it shouldn't be allowed. Somehow I doubt you can provide one or you would have by now. Instead you make a lot of noise and call people names and try and emotionalize the subject to hide your inability to present a good arguement. You know what they say about empty barrels don't you?

Those interested in exploring the vast array of Quisling apologists can find them @
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=772

Don't remain ignorant of your role in contemporary American politics, Quislings for Islamo-supremacism.

Anti-Quisling - Are you for real or simply posing as a right-wing flag waving nutcase? I see you tried to explain logic. let me clue you in to what it really means since your explananation was a joke.

Logic is used in most intellectual activities, but is studied primarily in the disciplines of philosophy, mathematics, and computer science. Logic examines general forms which arguments may take, which forms are valid, and which are fallacies. In your case you resort to appeals to emotion

An appeal to emotion is a potential fallacy which uses the manipulation of the recipient's emotions, rather than valid logic, to win an argument. The appeal to emotion fallacy uses emotions as the basis of an argument's position without factual evidence that logically supports the major ideas endorsed by the elicitor of the argument.

Conclusively, the appeal to emotion fallacy presents a perspective intended to be superior to reason. Appeals to emotion are intended to draw visceral feelings from the acquirer of the information. And in turn, the acquirer of the information is intended to be convinced that the statements that were presented in the fallacious argument are true; solely on the basis that the statements may induce emotional stimulation such as fear, pity and joy. Though these emotions may be provoked by an appeal to emotion fallacy, substantial proof of the argument is not offered, and the argument's premises remain invalid.

If you didn't undertsand let me know and I'll try and dumb it down for you.

You really don't get it, do you?

When one flings the slander "bigot", one invites invective.

Clearly, you've also joined that sloppy reasoning club.

Abe Fox is a "bigot"? That is insane. Physician, heal thyself.

As for logic and evidence, kindly refer to the Muslim 9/11 victims' editorial (above cited).

Don't be whining Quislings for Islamo-supremacism your whole life.

Quisling has the audacity to climb up on her hind legs and howl about others "emotionilize" after his Leftist co-conspirators spent the last decade at kristallnaght-style gutter riots (masquerading as “peace” protests).

Patriotic Americans are encourage to Enter the “Leftist-fascist Hall of Shame” and recall how Leftist emotionalize.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

So, when is billionaire progressive George Soros financing the unhinged Leftist rent-a-mob rally against ObaMao’s summary execution of three (un-Mirandized) Somali teens at sea? Afterall, that tactic was clearly more “emotional” than our patriotic moistening of KSM, et.al. The one year anniversary of ObaMao’s high seas shooting spree has already passed. Get busy, Quislings.

Rage against the machine, man!

[rino spat: "nutcase"]

Physican, heal thyself.

Anti-Q, while the author of the article referred to bigotry none of the posters here, besides you, has used the word. If you feel justified in hurling invective because of something the author said then hurl it at the author, not your fellow posters. You are acting childish.

Jonah Goldberg and Anti-Quisling sitting in a tree, k-i-s-s-i-n-g. [!!!]

Anti-Quisling - You are the one who doesn't seem to get it. I never actually voiced support for the Mosque. In fact in my first post I gave you a hint at my view which I have reaffirmed in several posts. Your response has been to assume because I don't subscribe to your right-wing hate mongering that somehow makes me a collaborator to this Islamo-supremacism you keep whining about. By the way that 9/11 poster was making an emotional appeal not presenting any logical argument as to why the Mosque shouldn’t be built. I can understand the position and if it were me would probably feel the same. That article was actually able to present feelings without personal attacks. You might want to re-read that post which gave an explanation on appeals to emotion. As Dana points out you are the one tossing around the word bigot. I haven’t called anyone a bigot so your Abe Fox comment is an outright lie. Although if I were going to call someone one you certainly fit the criteria. You are also the one engaging in the abusive ad hominem attacks rather than making logical arguments. Maybe you should heed your own advice “Physician, heal thyself” Instead of presenting links to left wing nut jobs why don’t you simply do what I asked and present a logical legal argument against the Mosque.

Anti-Quisling Emotionalizing is done by both extremes the right and left. Since neither side can actually make a rational, reasonable and logical argument for their extreme views they resort to emotions. You are simply the opposite extreme from those on your Leftist-fascist Hall of Shame link.

Return Muslim-occupied Cyprus and the Hostage Ghost City of Famagusta (home of the desecrated St. Nicholas Cathedral)— then Islamo-supremacists of Cordoba House (and their Leftist-fascist allies) can howl about their alleged “right” to desecrate Ground Zero.

St. Nicholas called— he’d like his cathedral back. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Nicholas_Cathedral_Of_Cyprus

VIDEO: Famagusta, The Hostage Ghost City of Europe @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcfBJ7DimB8

Don't be a sniveling Islamo-supremacism advocate your whole life, Samia.

Leftist-fascists in NYC agencies don't hesitate to obstruct construction of houses of worship -- at least non-Islamic ones. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/08/nine-years-later-church-at-ground-zero-still-not-rebuilt-but-mad-rush-to-build-islamic-supremacist-m.html

These Leftist reprobates would sell your Catholic mother's grave to support a scatologists right to squat and plop a steaming pile of free expression.

But when patriotic Americans object to jihadists opening a 9/11 snuff porn vendor emporium (and recruitment center) on the hallowed graves of Ground Zero-- Leftists shriek with indignation!

"Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!" [Matthew 23:24]

I think we should just leave you alone to work out your tantrum through your various identities until you are exhausted.

Then you should take your meds.

Here we go again. The only way to prove patriotic Americans aren't insane is to calmly support neo-pagan KKK demands to emolate Crann Tara monuments next to MLK memorials.

The only way to prove we're not over emotional is to remain apathetic over Marxist demands to build statues of Stalin next to the Lincoln Memorial.

Apparently, the 1st amendment is just an invitation to bend over and grab your ankles? Not in my America, Jack!
Why are Leftists-- who reflexively vomit over school (*gasp*) Christmas pageants-- suddenly the arbiters of what's "reasonable" at Ground Zero?

Leftist submissiveness to Imam Rauf's Islamo-supremacist demands sends the message that Leftists are Quislings and cowards.

Are Leftist idiotarians prepared to let Cordoba House intellectually bully them into accepting Imam Rauf's false assertion-- that sharia law advocacy is (somehow) representative of moderate Muslims?

American Muslims may be the very soul of moderation. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable for secular Americans (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) to ask for more from (allegedly) “peaceful” Cordoba House jihadists than insincere bromides and disingenuous whitewashing of uncomfortable elements of Islamic sharia law, as practiced by the Cordoba House cabal and their financial sponsors.

A genuine tiny minority of anti-jihadist Muslims may be found @
http://secularislam.org/blog/post/SI_Blog/21/The-St-Petersburg-Declaration

Americans remain breathless in anticipation of the sharia law vendors of Cordoba House supporting this genuinely tiny minority of their co-religionists-- but don’t hold your breath.

"Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!" [Matthew 23:24]

A year has now passed since the Lockerbie bomber, Abdulbaset Al-Megrahi, was released from prison in Scotland... An Islamist terrorist now planning to murder more British people is able to conclude that if he is captured before or after his attack, he too can expect to be lightly punished: Some friendly doctor has only to diagnose a medical reason for his compassionate release. The handling of Megrahi illustrates the Islamification now spreading everywhere, and the incapacity throughout the democracies, and most markedly in Britain, to understand the implications, let alone confront them. It seems an omen that the proposed mosque at Ground Zero passed its last official hurdle on the very day that Megrahi celebrated his first year spent in the comfortable villa allotted to him by Qaddafi.

...It is not illegal, and nor should it be illegal, to pray in a building of your choice to whatever god you pick. But, as with the claims for minaret building in Switzerland, more is being demanded by Muslims. In point of fact, Muslims do not have to pray in a building with a tall tower that spoils the surrounding landscape. Nor do they have to pray in a large purpose-built multiplex in a place that treads very painfully across many peoples’ raw grief.

If the people who are building the ground zero mosque cared about improving Islam’s image, they would have taken their mosque elsewhere. If they cared about cultural sensitivities, reciprocity or freedom of religion, then they wouldn’t be trying to provoke people by building a mega-mosque at ground zero.

The very idea is stupid and offensive. Needlessly provocative, needlessly offensive or, at the very best, entirely needlessly thoughtless.

For Muslims, the answer to radical Islam may well be some nice official version of Islam that hasn’t yet been discovered. But for free and open societies, the answer to radical Islam is not Islam. It is free and open societies. It doesn’t matter what Muslims believe, anymore than anybody else. But it matters how they behave. If the New York mosque is anything to go by, that test at least is being failed by some American Muslims very conspicuously indeed.

[Douglas Murray is the Director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, a nonpartisan think tank founded to promote human rights, tolerance and greater cohesion among the U.K.'s ethnic and religious communities. A bestselling author, political commentator ,and columnist for Standpoint magazine, Murray writes for many other publications including the Spectator and appears regularly across the British and foreign broadcast media.]

Leftist-fascists in NYC agencies don't hesitate to obstruct construction of houses of worship -- at least non-Islamic ones. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/08/nine-years-later-church-at-ground-zero-still-not-rebuilt-but-mad-rush-to-build-islamic-supremacist-m.html

Leftist libertines would sell your Catholic mother's grave to support a scatologists right to squat and plop a steaming pile of free expression.

But when patriotic Americans object to jihadists opening a 9/11 snuff porn vendor emporium (and recruitment center) on the hallowed graves of Ground Zero-- Nicole shrieks with indignation!

"Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!" [Matthew 23:24]

I’d also like to point out how bigotted, ignorant and intolerant it is of CAIR to condemn the spiritual commitment of Muslims who faithfully obey Islam by observing honor killing fatwas.

By what authority does CAIR excommunicate (takfir) their devout jihadist brethren when they practice “honor killing” to enforce sharia fatwas endorsed by the Corboba House sharia law advocates?

Again, the prerogative to issue apostacy fatwas is granted only to Islam’s prophet, or authoritative representatives of the— which is CAIR invoking?

Have CAIR’s handlers in the Apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood approved CAIR’s anti-jihadist fatwa?

“Honor Killing” is absolutely Islamic.
http://www.islam-watch.org/SyedKamranMirza/honor_killing.htm

All of Islam will be transformed once the new "Thong Burka" hits the Muslim world.

Wow--a lot has been posted that I need to catch up on. Ramadan started this week and I'm a little behind. Building an Islamic Center/Mosque a few blocks from Ground Zero is provocative only if people equate Islam and Muslims with terrorists and terrorism. There are apparently Buddhist temples near Pearl Harbor. Over 1 billion people's faith should not be maligned because of a relatively few extremists. Do we blame Germans for the Nazis? Or Catholism for Pope Urban II and pedophilic priests? Clearly, the sensitivities of those directly affected by 9/11 need to be addressed and it sounds like the planners may have made some mistakes in this regard. No one wants to cause anyone more pain. But the solution isn't to pander to the bigotry of the Islam-bashers who are using this event as an excuse to further their own agenda.

A hundred years from now (hopefully) the memorial to 9/11 victims will still be standing, so will the hallowed ground where WTC tumbled and buried so many lives in its rubble and the mosque will coexist with the hallowed ground. The Islamists who came to topple our stately building, the devastation and grief that followed and the futility of it all is what our children will discuss--not that a mosque was built where it all happened.. Anti-Quisling needs an anti-antipathy and anti-hostility pill--The mosque will be no more than a reminder that men will destroy and rebuild in cycles, that violence will come and go and folks like Anti Quisling are closest in mind set and philosophy to the destroyers than to the builders--Islam doesn't necessarily have a monopoly on the extremists. I see you are spreading the wealth around anti Quisling. You need a good spittoon man(or woman)as the case may be--you froth too much at the mouth.
R Anon

I do believe something will go down and think that we all need to look at ourselves and relaize it should be different

http://getsomefree.weebly.com/

Dear CAIR-ful,

“Honor Killing” is NOT absolutely Islamic. Islamic teachings hold the exact opposite. What I find interesting is that apparently Hindu Indians commit far more so-called honor killings than Muslims due to the caste system, yet we don't see Hinduism blamed.