House Of Evil / Seed Of Peace - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-17-2010, 01:41 PM   #91
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
And as Irvine pointed out, all of this carries a political weight that may overwhelm everything else.

which is the only reason why it's an issue.

as you pointed out -- FYM knew about this months ago.

but, suddenly, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are all over it. what they want is an issue driven by pure emotion in order to help their electoral chances in the fall. the GOP has been exploiting this tragedy since September 12, 2001, what with their phony "terror alerts/Code Orange" and holding the RNC convention in New York in 2004.

as has been pointed out, perhaps Newt Gingrich thinks we should be taking our cues on tolerance from Saudi Arabia, but this is exactly the kind of thing that, yes, does make our system of governance better than theirs. and that's what they were attacking, among other things. tolerance, pluralism, diversity -- these are the things that drive fundamentalists of all stripes into murderous rage.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:41 PM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
These standards were set up before hand, not after the fact. We have zoning restrictions, i.e. heights, styles, uses, etc...
Plenty of zoning standards apply retroactively -- why those Nativity scenes on city grounds have been coming down, why the state of California took down crosses, why the ACLU is trying to remove a cross that is on private land in the CA desert because it is "offensive" to people driving by on the freeway. There has also been an attempt to have the Forest Lawn cross -- visible from the 101 South -- removed even though it too is on private lands.

Shrug.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:43 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
which is the only reason why it's an issue.

as you pointed out -- FYM knew about this months ago.

but, suddenly, Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich are all over it.
I would humbly add that the President's comments were probably less than helpful in this regard in terms of fanning the flames and elevating the conversation to a federal/national level.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:45 PM   #94
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I would humbly add that the President's comments were probably less than helpful in this regard in terms of fanning the flames and elevating the conversation to a federal/national level.


true, but he did explain it perfectly. it might not be the wisest place to put a cultural center, but it is absolutely legal to do so and there is no law that restricts anyone's right to do so. (even as you're straining to find something)
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:47 PM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Really? You don't think the fact that Muslim is attached to it in anyway would be enough?
Has the mosque four blocks from Ground Zero seen outbreaks of violence and racial hatred?

Ground Zero is Ground Zero. It's a place of national significance. I can understand why people care.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:47 PM   #96
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Plenty of zoning standards apply retroactively -- why those Nativity scenes on city grounds have been coming down, why the state of California took down crosses, why the ACLU is trying to remove a cross that is on private land in the CA desert because it is "offensive" to people driving by on the freeway. There has also been an attempt to have the Forest Lawn cross -- visible from the 101 South -- removed even though it too is on private lands.

Shrug.
Nativity scenes are not up all year round, so they're not retroactive.

I do not support removing of crosses from private property and I doubt they are using zoning as the reason.

The rest you admit are "attempts" so how can they be examples of zoning standards being applied retroactively.

This argument is getting ridiculous. Do you really think someone is going to add "can't build anything with the Muslim religion attached to it within a 5 mile radius of Ground Zero" to any of their zoning laws?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:49 PM   #97
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Has the mosque four blocks from Ground Zero seen outbreaks of violence and racial hatred?

Ground Zero is Ground Zero. It's a place of national significance. I can understand why people care.
You missed my point in the first sentence, but then reinforced it with the next three.

Thank you.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:49 PM   #98
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Ground Zero is Ground Zero. It's a place of national significance. I can understand why people care.


are people going to care when it's finally all finished and is back to being an orgy of capitalism and commerce?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:52 PM   #99
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
This argument is getting ridiculous. Do you really think someone is going to add "can't build anything with the Muslim religion attached to it within a 5 mile radius of Ground Zero" to any of their zoning laws?
No, and it would be unconstitutional to do so, and I would disagree with that.

I'm just suggesting a little sensitivity goes a long way. Is that crazy?
__________________
nathan1977 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:52 PM   #100
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
I would humbly add that the President's comments were probably less than helpful in this regard in terms of fanning the flames and elevating the conversation to a federal/national level.
I think because he was speaking at a function for Muslim people( I think it might have been for Ramadan) that somehow he felt the need to comment on it. Best move politically would have been to say nothing-on the other hand no matter what he said I think some people would have found fault and used it for political purposes. Even if he said no mosque there, absolutely not..somehow some way someone could have done that.

I think his comment about the wisdom was the biggest problem, for me it was. Because it was like backtracking after hearing the political fallout. If you weren't commenting on the wisdom of it then why not say that initially. I think the truth must be that he didn't feel comfortable saying that at the Muslim function. Either that or the whole wisdom thing was concocted for political purposes. I don't know, I'm not inside his head or privy to his private communications. All I can go on is the perception created. And I think perception is the problem, because it's subjective.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:59 PM   #101
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
No, and it would be unconstitutional to do so, and I would disagree with that.

I'm just suggesting a little sensitivity goes a long way. Is that crazy?
Then why did you even go into all the zoning talk?

What sensitivity?

If you were Mormon and people were making a stink in Elderado, TX (where a fringe cult were taking on young girls to be their wives) and they didn't want you to build your church there, would you quietly just leave out of "sensitivity"? I mean you knew it had nothing to do with your religion but because they were ignorant you had to be sensitive to their ignorance?

I'm sick and tired of a certain portion of this country celebrating ignorance!!! It needs to stop. Ignorance is something to be ashamed of, not celebrated.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 01:59 PM   #102
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Like this...

Washington (CNN) -- President Obama's comments on a plan to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero are not only giving opponents an opportunity to attack him but also reveal a messaging problem from the White House, a communications expert said.

"The danger here is an incoherent presidency," said David Morey, vice chairman of the Core Strategy Group, who provided communications advice to Obama's 2008 campaign. "Simpler is better, and rising above these issues and leading by controlling the dialogue is what the presidency is all about. So I think that's the job they have to do more effectively as they have in the past [in the campaign]."

Obama has faced a torrent of criticism for what was called mixed messages on the controversial plan. On Friday, Obama said Muslims "have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country ... That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances."

The following day, Obama told Ed Henry, CNN's senior White House correspondent, that he was "not commenting on the wisdom" of the project, just the broader principle that the government should treat "everyone equal, regardless" of religion. Then a White House spokesman clarified those comments.

"There is no question they are having messaging problems at the White House," Morey said. "They've lost control of the dialogue, and they've gotten pulled down by the extremes on the left and right. They've just not had a coherent set of themes."

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote in a recent column that Obama's clarity and successful messaging during the campaign are gone. In place is a "incoherent president," who's "with the banks, he's against the banks. He's leaving Afghanistan, he's staying in Afghanistan. He strains at being a populist, but his head is in the clouds."

But Obama has the ability to sharpen his messaging skills by being less of a law professor and more of a communicator in chief, Morey said.

"Communicating as a law professor does not work as president. It's not worked," he said. "You're drawing fine distinctions and speaking in long enough paragraphs that they can be misconstrued and taken out of context and frankly, handed to your opposition to exploit. And that's clearly what's going on here [with the Islamic center/mosque comments]."

While many poked fun at former President George W. Bush for mispronouncing words and stumbling through sentences, observers note that he rarely had to backtrack on his answers because he employed a simple and direct messaging approach.

But it's not just Obama who is seemingly off-message. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs' recent criticism of the "professional left" in a newspaper article highlighted, some noted, a growing rift between the administration and the Democratic Party base.

The candid remarks show a frustration coming from not only the White House's top spokesman, but the president himself, said Julie Mason, White House correspondent for The Washington Examiner newspaper.

"It was rare for Robert [Gibbs] to go on the record about this, but part of the reason why this electrified the White House press corps so much is because Robert and Obama are so close, that when Robert does speak out of school, it's like you're getting the unvarnished opinion of the president," she said Sunday on CNN's "Reliable Sources." "So that's why we were all geeked up about it last week."

Gibbs' criticism of the left wing and Obama's recent comments on the mosque may have the potential for harming Democrats as the midterm election approaches.

"Whenever you have an explosive issue like this come to the forefront, it really spreads out wide and far," said Mark Preston, CNN senior political editor. "House Democrats are very frustrated by this. ... They are saying to themselves, 'Why did the president bring this up? All that he is doing to us right now is forcing us to have to weigh in on this very thorny issue.' "

Nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose the mosque plan, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll released last week. In terms of party affiliation, 54 percent of Democrats, 82 percent of Republicans and 70 percent of independents oppose the plan.

Preston said that at a time when Democrats are trying to localize the midterm election by talking about the things they've done back home, Republicans are trying to nationalize the recent religious debate.

"They are trying to bring the president into the debate. ... It only helps Republicans to continue to talk about this issue," he said.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 02:06 PM   #103
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,994
Local Time: 09:52 AM
No issue with this because it's non-denominational?

abcnews.com

Mosque Controversy Skips Pentagon: Muslims Gather in Daily Prayer at 9/11 Crash Site

By LUIS MARTINEZ

Aug. 17, 2010

Amid flaring political debate about a proposed New York City mosque near Ground Zero, there has been little commotion about the Pentagon's chapel where Muslims can gather in daily prayer near where a hijacked jetliner struck the building Sept. 11, 2001.

Sometimes misidentified as the "Pentagon Mosque," the non-denominational Pentagon Memorial Chapel maintained by the Pentagon Chaplain's Office is where department employees who practice Islam can meet to pray.

Located at the site where the hijacked American Airlines flight 74 struck the Defense Department headquarters, the chapel honors the memory of the 184 victims of the 9/11 attack.

The 100-seat chapel is available to Pentagon employees of all faiths to come in prayer as they wish throughout the day. The Pentagon Chaplain's Office schedules weekly religious services in the chapel for Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Protestants and Episcopalians, as well as a daily Catholic Mass. Muslim worshipers can gather daily to offer prayers and can attend a Friday Prayer Service led by an Imam.

Army spokesman George Wright said he is unaware of any complaints about the Muslim services from either 9/11 families or anyone in the building. The Army serves as the executive agent for the Pentagon Chaplain's Office.

The Pentagon Chaplain's Office schedules the religious services because "the armed forces are dedicated to looking after all the needs of our servicemen and women, including their spiritual needs," Wright said.

The office is "very open and very accommodating to the religious needs of the employees here in the building," he added.

The Muslim services at the Pentagon chapel have led some politicians to label it, incorrectly, as a mosque.

Appearing on CNN's "State of the Union" Sunday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., defended the right of the Islamic group seeking to build near Ground Zero by saying, "there is a mosque in the Pentagon, which is also hallowed ground. No one objects to that."

Nadler represents the congressional district where Ground Zero is located.


Dedicated in November 2002, after the reconstruction of the section of the building struck in the Sept. 11 attack, the Pentagon chapel honors the memory of the 184 victims who were killed there or were passengers aboard the hijacked jetliner.

Behind the chapel's altar is a lit stained-glass window, in the shape of the Pentagon, that bears the inscription, "United in Memory, September 11, 2001."

No religious icons or pictures are on display at the chapel. Religious symbols are brought in for religious services. A Torah, for example, housed in an ornate ark, is brought from behind curtains for use in the weekly Jewish service.

Because of the chapel's location at the impact point where the Pentagon was struck, there are various reminders nearby honoring the victims of 9/11.

Outside the chapel's double door is a small display honoring victims of the 9/11 attack.

Along the building's exterior below one of the chapel's stained glass windows is a dark charred block of limestone set against the lighter colored limestone used in the reconstruction of the façade. Inscribed "September 11, 2001," it is a reminder of the extensive fiery damage the building sustained in the attack.

Just beyond the chapel's stained glass windows lies the two-acre Pentagon 9/11 Memorial that individually honors each of the 184 victims of the attack on the Pentagon.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 02:46 PM   #104
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The more appropriate question is-why can't Muslims be satisfied to walk 2 extra blocks to a functioning Mosque as they've been doing already?

Adding another would appear to only be over kill, no pun.

<>
This comment reveals an underlying issue in this debate. I think for many people there is a negative assumption about the attitude and motivations of the Muslims behind the proposed center. "They're doing this to rub it in our faces", "they're being spiteful" and a lot of that comes from a perception that Islam is inherently an angry, intolerant faith.
When you view the Muslims planning this center and Islam in general this way, the objections make a lot more sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
I thought about it, and no -you're incorrect Sean.
I will pardon your attempted swipe at my Faith, w/o you even asking.

I know for a fact that if anything the LDS Church wouldn't even suggest building a structure there, Temple or meeting house- they would be apt to build a memorial or monument in memory of the victims, and have done so when fringe elements affiliated w the Faith have killed innocents.


Mountain Meadow Massacre Memorial



<>
There was no intended swipe. I was simply pointing out the commonality of another faith that is often misunderstood by non-members. Islam, LDS, Jehovah's Witness are all often unfairly maligned. But maybe you find it offensive for your faith to be lumped in with them? If so, I apologize--for me there is nothing offensive about such an association.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
This really doesn't have to be an issue about freedom of religion, or a referendum on the Constitution.

I'm of two minds on the subject. On the one hand, I don't like the idea of the government telling religions where they can build or not build. It's a slippery slope that will only raise more problems than it solves. On the other hand, there is some legal precedent for depriving private property owners of building where they want because of the common good. You can't build a bar next to a school, for example, or a strip club near a church.

I'm also kind of amazed that Interference was talking about this at the end of May, but it's only become a political topic now. Nice one.
I think Nathan and Obama feel pretty much the same about this issue. (Or more likely the "wisdom" comment was a political ploy, a failed attempt at a sop to the right, but at any rate they both ended up saying essentially the same thing). Unfortunately this country gets all bent out of shape when the president has two minds on a subject.
__________________
maycocksean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2010, 03:04 PM   #105
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
Unfortunately this country gets all bent out of shape when the president has two minds on a subject.


i know, right? compound sentences = "incoherent" presidency.

and, Republicans, ask yourselves the following: why have none of your major policy goals (smaller government, making abortion illegal, simpler tax code, etc.) been achieved since 1980? since 1980 you've had either the presidency or majorities in the Congress (excluding 1992-1994, and 2006-2010). and yet it's the right wing that feels as if the country is coming apart at the seams.

could it be that you're so easily distracted whenever anyone raises these hot-button cultural issues, whether it's Willie Horton, Swift Boats, same-sex marriage, the evergreen abortion, "welfare queens," and now the "mosque" at Ground Zero? why are you so easily led by your entertainers? (Rush, Beck, Hannity)? why is coverage of insignificant emotional controversies so compelling for you?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com