In the case of the Greek Orthodox church, it would replace one that was destroyed by 9/11 and that had been on that site for generations. They should be entitled to rebuild there but the District Board won't give approval for some reason. Can you say the same for this mosque? / dick thompson
I did not know about the pre-existing Greek Orthdox Church. It sounds, without knowing the particulars, that you have not only a very good point but an honorable one. Usually, I would think that "church" or other such religious site properties are owned by the religious organization and they are tax exempt. It sounds as though the pre- existing Greek Orthodox Church should have had unfettered ownership of the actual property, without much of a financial burden to meet to keep it.... what happened? really? I would like to hear if they were somehow cheated out of it. Often enough, religious organizations sell their properties, for their own reasons.... I ask (don't know) if the Greek Orthodox Church (as an organization) sold their property right to the site? Also, I'm wondering if the site could have been leased or rented somehow? I suppose some places that house "churches or synagogues or mosques" ... places of worship...can be rented within other owned properties.... YMMV but then you are trying to hide your support for the mosque. Kinda like all the "independents" who comment on political websites who claim they have not made up their minds but then you find that in over 40 years of voting they have never voted for a Republican even when they admitted the Republican was the better candidate. / dick thompson I'm not all that "hip" on the truncated acronyms... what does YMMV (or IMNSHO) stand for? As for Independents, in general, I'd say that "most" of them tend to definitely lean "conservative"... me, in particular, well. there have been some "Democrats" that I refused to vote for....Bill "the Judas Goat" Clinton, (his second pres-election), "Lyin'"Joe Lieberman (maybe just his first Senate run, but never since), Dick "the blooming a**- hole" Blumenthal never, I don't think), and some others... but I have to admit that when I vote against the Democrat, I usually go for the left-leaning third party or independent candidate, if there is one, or I don't vote that seat at all. No, I can honestly say that I never thought, in my own lifetime, that "the Reoublican was the better candidate"... never... although I did like Bush the first.... As for Obama... I don't think he's "left" enough.... have said so from the primaries.... I started calling him "OreO" Obama form the start... as from the Oprah and Obama Leadership Coalition... O repeat O... OreO for short, of course the OreO cookie fits in, too for both Oprah and Obama, I think.(har) You are partly right, dick thompson... I am fairly far left on most issues... but I'm not a partisan to personalities... I try to stay true to the issues..... So, great point on the Greek Orthidox Church... If you know or hear more about it, tell me the details. nominal9 On Sep 8, 12:25 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > In the case of the Greek Orthodox church, it would replace one that > was destroyed by 9/11 and that had been on that site for generations. > They should be entitled to rebuild there but the District Board won't > give approval for some reason. Can you say the same for this mosque? > > As to the financial hurdles, the mosque was supposed to actually be in > position to own the building site in order to get approval. They > implied that the did at the hearing but in fact they do not and are way > behind in getting contributions that would enable them to purchase the > site. They do not have the money. The imam is being sent all over the > Islamic world by our State Dept. While he is there on our dime he is > not to do fund raising and yet he has done precisely that which is illegal. > > Good reasons all to stop the mosque IMNSHO. YMMV but then you are > trying to hide your support for the mosque. Kinda like all the > "independents" who comment on political websites who claim they have not > made up their minds but then you find that in over 40 years of voting > they have never voted for a Republican even when they admitted the > Republican was the better candidate. > > On 09/07/2010 10:30 AM, nominal9 wrote: > > > > > I don't have any personal truck or baggage with the Mosque issue, > > either for or against it. Can you say the same? > > It seems to me that, so far, those trying to build it have met all > > legal hurdles, whether they meet all of the financial or whatever > > other "ordinary" hurdles that remain is for them to accomplish, if > > they can. > > I went back and read the Nat Hentoff article from Jewish World > > Review. I hope we can at least agree that "they" are "extraordinarily" > > against giving the Mosque and its builders a fair and equal > > opportunity at accomplishing their goal... You tell me, Dick > > Thompson... why (for what reasons) do you say that Nat Hentoff and > > Jewish World Review write or state that they are aginst the Mosque.... > > or, to put a finer point on it.....Why would you apparently prefer a > > Greek Orthodox Church to a Mosque, there? > > > nominal9 > > > On Sep 4, 5:31 pm, dick thompson<[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I fail to see why you are so involved in the Mosque question. > >> Given what you claim then you should first of all be striving to get > >> permission for the Greek Orthodox church in that area to be rebuilt > >> first since it was in existence for several generations in that location > >> until destroyed by the Muslims and 9/11. Apparently that means nothing > >> to you. Neither does the fact that the people trying to build the > >> mosque do not have funding nor do they, as they are legally required to > >> do, have ownership and likelihood of ownership of the site they are > >> trying to develop. You do not seem to pay any attention to what the > >> Imam has said in the past about Al Qaeda and the US and who to > >> support. You hear nothing from them about stopping the terrorist > >> behavior of the extreme muslims. For that matter you don't hear much > >> from ANY muslims about stopping the terrorists. You, nominal9, don't > >> seem to think this is something that shold be pursued. Instead you try > >> to come up with some kitschy takeoff on your betters by far and then pat > >> yourself on the back for being original. > > >> On 09/03/2010 01:21 PM, nominal9 wrote: > > >>> I think you are wrong, dick thompson, but it will take time to try to > >>> explain it to you... if you are willing to hear it or credit it at all > >>> from your end, that is.... which must be taken into consideration, as > >>> well... > >>> Anti-semitic? some have called me that..... I happen to think that > >>> every race or ethnicity (or whatever) is prone to its own number of > >>> racist individuals..... I DO NOT EXCLUDE some Jews from the ranks of > >>> the racists....I call the particular Racist Jews among the overall > >>> group or number of Jews in general..... ZIONIST RACIST JEWS.... > >>> Many years ago, now I died a parody of the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance > >>> to the Flag... I called it the Rush Lmbaugh Pledge of Allegiance... > >>> here's how it goes: > >>> " pledge allegiange to the Star of David of the Zionist State of > >>> Israel > >>> and to the Racist Oligarchy for which it stands > >>> One Kingdom under the ineffable Yahweh > >>> Exlusive, with criminal license and prejudgment in favor just of > >>> Jews." > > >>> When some hear this.... they wail... anti-Semite.... but hey, I say > >>> (and am) just the opposite... I am anti-Racist.... > >>> Nice to meet you Dick Thompson > >>> nominal9 > > >>> PS... this is really old ground for me, that I get weary of having to > >>> re-tread sometimes......but I just want to lay my cards on the table > >>> for you, in the hopes of getting beyond all the usual buggaboos and > >>> the rhetorical as well as the propaganda feints and tricks.... > > >>> On Sep 2, 1:25 pm, dick thompson<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> As usual you are reading the point wrong. Nobody is saying that MSNBC > >>>> doing it is justified by your claim that Hentoff is doing it. The > >>>> point is that something is either wrong in its entirety or not wrong in > >>>> its entirety when it comes to these points. You want to selectively > >>>> call dibs on Hentoff and then call anyone who does not believe as you do > >>>> funny names and think you are beng witty. fAIL!! If something is > >>>> wrong, point out where it is wrong and then point out also that it is > >>>> wrong for others to do the same thing. That is what you are missing. > >>>> YOu are against Hentoff and Jewish World Review and the reason is they > >>>> don't believe as you do and therefore you have a name for them - and > >>>> chances are it would be an antisemitic name. And no, I am not Jewish. > > >>>> On 09/02/2010 12:57 PM, nominal9 wrote:> Ohh.... It made perfect > >>>> sense......Annointed one...... > > >>>>> The trouble with"comparisons"... or similes... or metaphors is that > >>>>> "one" should always be careful to "weigh " the terms of the proposed > >>>>> comparison.... make sure that they actually do equal up...... > >>>>> Now, between Nat Heltoff and the Jewihh World review on the one side > >>>>> of the scale as counterbalanced by MSNBC on the other.... frankly. I > >>>>> would say that Nat and the Jewish World Review have a heavier > >>>>> comparative load of bias or prejudice, especially on Middle East > >>>>> issues.... Perhaps a more equal comparison would be Fox News as > >>>>> weighed against MSNBC, there the load or bias or prejudice would > >>>>> probably be a little more balancing "left vs right" on both sides... > >>>>> but the Middle East issue is a little funny..... it doesn't track > >>>>> along strict political lines..... > > >>>>> Anyway.... let's get back to my own metaphorical .... "Jimmy can do it > >>>>> but why can't I" ...rhetorical defense that I charge was adopted by > >>>>> Dick Thompson. First, it is more a charge of "rhetorical device" used > >>>>> than of a strict metaphor, in this instance, I think. The Mommy > >>>>> implied reply is, "I don't care what Jimmy does.... it is wrong for > >>>>> Jimmy to do it as well and Jimmy just doesn't have very good parents > >>>>> that care enough for him or correct him"...... > > >>>>> The trouble with "metaphorical or even this sort of "whiny ... they do > >>>>> it, too... defense is that the underlying problem is that something > >>>>> that is "wrong" is justified by at best another "wrong".... > >>>>> but what do I know..... > > >>>>> :"Annointed One" Eh.... sounds like a Sean Hannity follower..... > >>>>> Man... you should hear some of my old gags against Sean... especially > >>>>> my "nick-name" for him..... > > >>>>> nominal9 > >>>>> On Aug 31, 12:49 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>> Nominal9, > > >>>>>> Even in context your post made little sense. could you try to be a > >>>>>> little more literate ?? Mr. Thompson made a comparison NOT a defense. > > >>>>>> On Aug 31, 10:29 am, nominal9<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>> What's that... your ......"Mommy.... Jimmy can do it so why can't > >>>>>>> I?".... defense? > >>>>>>> nominal9 > > >>>>>>> On Aug 30, 3:41 pm, dick thompson<[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> As opposed to The Nation or MSNBC or the NYT or WaPo? Definitely > >>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>> more biased than these other medias are. They wrote the book on > >>>>>>>> bias > >>>>>>>> along with CBS. > > >>>>>>>> On 08/30/2010 03:20 PM, nominal9 wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media > >>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR > >>>>>>>>> update. > >>>>>>>>> It's free. Just click here. > > >>>>>>>>> Nat Hentoff is a nationally renowned authority on the First > >>>>>>>>> Amendment > >>>>>>>>> and the Bill of Rights and author of several books, including his > >>>>>>>>> current work, "The War on the Bill of Rights and the Gathering > >>>>>>>>> Resistance". Comment by clicking here. / article > > >>>>>>>>> Sad to say... as a "nationally renowned authority on the First > >>>>>>>>> Amendment"... Nat Hentoff has become more than a dissappointment in > >>>>>>>>> his support of "freedom of speech" in his older age... he has become > >>>>>>>>> nearly the contrary to an advocate for it... Nat has become a > >>>>>>>>> turncoat > >>>>>>>>> and a proponent of "censorship" as a needed "exception" to "freedom > >>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> speech" in many cases... especially in cases that criticize aspects > >>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> Zionist Racism in Israel.... > >>>>>>>>> As for the publication, Jewish > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
