What the Mega-Mosque at Ground Zero Means to Worldwide Islam

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-09/14/c_13493106.htm

 

Exactly, the Muslims desire that specific spot because it is their intention to have a victory monument to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.


If the piece of land did not matter and only the so called community center was all that was important then why would they care where it is built? Obiously the only thing they care about is being close to the attack site.



You have to know your screwed up when your on the same side of an arguement with Builder who is so stupid he believes 9/11 was an inside job.

 

Can you feel the love?

 

But your in good company Builder, one of the imams who preachs and will preach at this mosque is on record as also saying that 9/11 was an inside job and Muslims had nothing to do with it.


As I keep saying, it is up to the Muslims to stand up to their radical elements but they can't aven agree they have radical elements, some of the people directly involved with this ground zero Mosque can't even call a terrorist a terrorist or even admit it was their extreme elements who attacked us.


If they refuse to agree on the most basic of facts, how can we build bridges or even call them blameless?




Nobody has said "don't build the Mosque" all they have said is not that specific spot because of it's sensative nature. But these radicals don't want to build their Mosque anywhere else, they flat refuse any other spot, now why are they so stuck on that specific location if it is not very important to them to be on ground zero?





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


And why should we be the only people to show tolerance? One idiot in Florida wants to burn a Quran and all Muslims blame all Americans? Really?


And did you see where this so called moderate Muslim said attacks would happen if they could not build their Mosque on that exact spot?


Ya, it seems pretty clear they are the people who need to work on their tolerance.

 

I can see ya now, Marshall, with one six shooter in your right hand, an' one o' the same in the other hand.

Not flinchin' not fussin'. Just a'waitin'.

 

Your not that far from the truth, while we had a very strong leader who was very clear about his being willing to knock the crap out of people, we didn't have any attacks, the terrorists lost almost all interest in coming to America to attack us, but during weak Presidents like Clinton and Obama, we have attack, after attack, after attack.


If appeasement was going to work, why do they still want to attack us with the most soft on Muslims President to ever serve in that office? You would think attacks would go down but even Iran slapped Obama in the face. All that big talk from Obama about how he was going to reach out to Iran and show how the agressive stance of the Bush Whitehouse was the real problem was proven to be BS. Iran is just as, if not more insulting to Obama with all his groveling as he was with Bush.

 

Are you on crystal meth? or what?

Sounds to me like you're just craving attention, my friend.

I'm sure that in a country as populated and proud as your own, there's gotta be some place that would welcome your kinda propaganda with open arms.

Good luck with your search.

Builder, signing out now. Seeya on the board sometime, chum.

 

Being as your the wacko talking about 9/11 conspiracies and such that would make you the attention whore my friend, not me.


I offered you pure fact, under Clinton we had tons of attacks and the biggest attack of 9/11 was planned and the terrorists were here in America during almost all of his two terms. So the result of 8 years of a progressive mostly kissing their behinds was more attacks and the 9/11 plan.



Under Obama we have more attacks to include the Fort Hood terrorist attack and Iran closer to a nuclear weapon than ever before and not even trying to hide it anymore. North Korea is openly attacking ships, firing lots of missles and more agressive than ever during the 8 years under Bush. Radical Muslims are more worked up and attacking us more under Obama than under Bush so how can any idiot claim that being soft and weak will get the Muslims to like us?


We are Infidels, we can never be more than an infidel to the strict followers of Islam.

 

So I guess JFK saying no to operation Northwoods and sacking the plotters of an attack on Americans, along with staged terrorist attacks on American soil, hijacking planes and substituting drones painted up to look like commercial jets, was more "progressive" bullshit, TJ?
------------------------------------------

Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.[18]

# Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba. Concurrently, genuine defections of Cuban civil and military air and surface craft should be encouraged.


# It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner en route from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan route to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons with a common interest to support chartering a non-scheduled flight.

a. An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.


b. Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will begin transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio[16] stations in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

# It is possible to create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs have destroyed a USAF aircraft over international waters in an unprovoked attack.

a. Approximately 4 or 5 F-101 aircraft will be dispatched in trail from Homestead AFB, Florida, to the vicinity of Cuba. Their mission will be to reverse course and simulate fakir aircraft for an air defense exercise in southern Florida. These aircraft would conduct variations of these flights at frequent Intervals. Crews would be briefed to remain at least 12 miles off the Cuban coast; however, they would be required to carry live ammunition in the event that hostile actions were taken by the Cuban MIGs.


b. On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft. While near the Cuban Island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. No other calls would be made. The pilot would then fly directly west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would resume his proper identity and return to his normal place of business. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.


c. At precisely the same time that the aircraft was presumably shot down, a submarine or small surface craft would disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc., at approximately 15 to 20 miles off the Cuban coast and depart. The pilots returning to Homestead would have a true story as far as they knew. Search ships and aircraft could be dispatched and parts of aircraft found.

-------------------------------------------------

Sound familiar?

 

You really are brainwashed, I was wondering for awile but you have completely lost all connection to reality. I had not really understood your brand of lunacy until recently when a friend of mine gave me a book explaining anti-colonialism, and this is another root motivation for Obama as well.


To you, any lie is justified as long as it fills your need to attack the systems you hate.

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

For the few on the forum interested in knowing what Builder is talking about, the joint chiefs were instrusted to provide a list of available options for dealing with Cuba. This concept was indeed included among a huge number of other ideas all brainstorming from different angles. It was never fully developed and never completely accepted as an alternative by anyone in power.




BUT.



Even if it was, we are still stuck on the same problem, a problem Builder refuses to address because he knows it proves an inside job to be impossible for 9/11.



The "regular Joe" who must be in on the conspiracy for it to work. It is one thing for a President, or even a General to offer theories or ideas to try and conduct some kind of "false-flag" operation, but these Generals and leaders are not going to be the one doing the deeds, these operations must be performed by "little guys" and other civilian groups like first responders (fire fighters, cops, etc.) must also be pulled into the conspiracy.

None of these "regular Joes" would have any reason to keep that blood on their hands. They would have nothing to gain, no reason to lie, so no reasonable excuse not to tell.

How can someone pull that off when Clinton could not even get a hummer in the Whitehouse without the entire world finding out?

 

Back on the subject of the intent of those who are building this ground zero Mosque:



Interesting to be sure.....

 

Well thats the whole thing. There are so many people involved a conspiracy would be ludicrus.

 

Amusing indeed. Loved the way the video was made. Didn't know that about the abrogation thing. But hey, don't follow a religion with a single whacko (or even multiple whackos) declaring what God said

 

Did you even take the time to read about operation Northwoods, snaff? Doesn't sound like it. Did you have any idea about the US torture operations?

Were you aware that the propaganda machine started by Edgar J Hoover criminalised a formerly productive and profitable crop?

Lots of information is hidden from the mainstream reader, and anyone who chooses to blab about it loses their pension entitlements because they signed a waiver when gaining employment.

That, and the fact that they would probably meet with an unfortunate "accident" anyways, should they decide to "out" the people they work for. Valerie Plame ring any bells? Hmmm?

 

Just because this was one idea among hundreds of other ideas that does not mean it was ever used then or now.



You keep dodging the biggest point of why any conspiracy like this must fail, there must be thousands of 'regular people' must be in on the conspiracy, none of these 'regular people' have any reason to hide this cospiracy or hold the blood on their hands for these higher ups who would come up with something like this.

 

That was a very informative video...

I don't see how anyone could argue against the points that the guy talking made. I would surely like to hear some.

 

And that is the one thing you will never see anyone ever try to do because they can't argue against it, at least not honestly.

 

Well, one could say that some Muslims realize that some of the later passages are pretty intolerant and choose to ignore them, but they wouldn't be "true Muslims", and strict Islam would dictate they were evil or something. *shrug*

 

One of the few things I have seen you say that shows your paying attention Joker.

Bravo.

 

[quote name='snafu]
It has nothing to do with bigotry but the fact that this is hollowed ground.
[/quote]
Are you kidding me...hollowed ground? Are you from NYC? You have people right outside the WTC selling T-Shirts, cutlery sets, snow globes, swimwear, and various other items to all the sightseers from out of town, with the images of the WTC being demolished (and they buy them by the truckload). And you claim a Mosque will tarnish the "hallowed grounds" of the WTC. LMFAO!