**Update 8 am Friday** Hurricane Earl

Well, luckily the hurricane dropped its intensity very quickly and has been downgraded to a Cat 2, which is much better for everyone.  That isn't to say that a Cat 2 storm is mild, not by any means is that the case, but the fact remains that it is far, far better than a Cat 4, or even a 3.


As it stands now, Earl is moving up the coastline at a speed of aprox. 18 mph, which is relatively quick.

HURRICANE EARL CONTINUES TOWARD THE NORTH-NORTHEAST...WEATHER
CONDITIONS SHOULD IMPROVE IN THE OUTER BANKS LATER THIS MORNING...

LOCATION...36.2N 73.6W
ABOUT 130 MI...205 KM ENE OF CAPE HATTERAS NORTH CAROLINA
ABOUT 395 MI...640 KM SSW OF NANTUCKET MASSACHUSETTS
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...105 MPH...165 KM/HR
PRESENT MOVEMENT...NNE OR 20 DEGREES AT 18 MPH...30 KM/HR
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...955 MB...28.20 INCHES


WATCHES AND WARNINGS
--------------------
CHANGES WITH THIS ADVISORY...

NONE.

SUMMARY OF WATCHES AND WARNINGS IN EFFECT...

A HURRICANE WARNING IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* CAPE LOOKOUT NORTH CAROLINA NORTHEASTWARD TO THE NORTH
CAROLINA/VIRGINIA BORDER INCLUDING THE PAMLICO AND THE EASTERN
ALBEMARLE SOUNDS
* WESTPORT MASSACHUSETTS EASTWARD AROUND CAPE COD TO HULL
MASSACHUSETTS INCLUDING MARTHAS VINEYARD AND NANTUCKET ISLAND

A HURRICANE WATCH IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* NOVA SCOTIA FROM MEDWAY HARBOUR TO DIGBY

A TROPICAL STORM WARNING IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* NORTH OF THE NORTH CAROLINA/VIRGINIA BORDER TO SANDY HOOK NEW
JERSEY...INCLUDING DELAWARE BAY SOUTH OF SLAUGHTER BEACH AND THE
CHESAPEAKE BAY SOUTH OF NEW POINT COMFORT
* THE COAST OF LONG ISLAND NEW YORK FROM FIRE ISLAND INLET EASTWARD
ON THE SOUTH SHORE AND PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR EASTWARD ON THE NORTH
SHORE
* NEW HAVEN CONNECTICUT TO WEST OF WESTPORT MASSACHUSETTS...
INCLUDING BLOCK ISLAND
* NORTH OF HULL MASSACHUSETTS TO THE MERRIMACK RIVER
* STONINGTON MAINE EASTWARD TO EASTPORT MAINE
* THE COAST OF NOVA SCOTIA FROM LISMORE SOUTHWARD AND EASTWARD TO
ECUM SECUM
* PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND

A TROPICAL STORM WATCH IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* NORTH OF THE MERRIMACK RIVER TO WEST OF STONINGTON MAINE
* THE COAST OF LONG ISLAND WEST OF FIRE ISLAND INLET ON THE SOUTH
SHORE AND WEST OF PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR ON THE NORTH SHORE
* NEW BRUNSWICK FROM THE U.S./CANADA BORDER EASTWARD TO FORT
LAWRENCE AND FROM TIDNISH WESTWARD TO SHEDIAC
* NOVA SCOTIA FROM ECUM SECUM NORTHEASTWARD TO POINT TUPPER...AND
EAST OF LISMORE TO POINT TUPPER
* CAPE BRETON ISLAND AND THE MAGDALEN ISLANDS

This next photo is the wind advisory for the current track:

Hurricane Earl Updated Warning & Watches

Hurricane Earl is really getting much worse. Everyone along the eastern seaboard north of N.Carolina needs to be ready for this storm.

LOCATION...29.3N 74.7W
ABOUT 410 MI...660 KM S OF CAPE HATTERAS NORTH CAROLINA
ABOUT 870 MI...1400 KM SSW OF NANTUCKET MASSACHUSETTS
MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WINDS...145 MPH...230 KM/HR
PRESENT MOVEMENT...NNW OR 330 DEGREES AT 18 MPH...30 KM/HR
MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...928 MB...27.40 INCHES


A HURRICANE WATCH HAS BEEN ISSUED NORTH OF SAGAMORE BEACH
MASSACHUSETTS TO PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS...AND WEST OF WOODS HOLE
MASSACHUSETTS TO WESTPORT MASSACHUSETTS.

A TROPICAL STORM WARNING HAS BEEN ISSUED FOR THE COAST OF LONG
ISLAND NEW YORK FROM FIRE ISLAND INLET NORTHWARD AND EASTWARD TO
PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR.

A TROPICAL STORM WATCH HAS BEEN ISSUED NORTH OF PLYMOUTH
MASSACHUSETTS TO EASTPORT MAINE.

ENVIRONMENT CANADA HAS ISSUED A TROPICAL STORM WATCH FOR THE COAST
OF NOVA SCOTIA FROM PORT MAITLAND TO MEDWAY HARBOUR.

SUMMARY OF WATCHES AND WARNINGS IN EFFECT...

A HURRICANE WARNING IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* BOGUE INLET NORTH CAROLINA NORTHEASTWARD TO THE NORTH
CAROLINA/VIRGINIA BORDER INCLUDING THE PAMLICO AND ALBEMARLE
SOUNDS.

A HURRICANE WATCH IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* NORTH OF THE NORTH CAROLINA/VIRGINIA BORDER TO CAPE HENLOPEN
DELAWARE.
* WESTPORT TO PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS...INCLUDING MARTHAS
VINEYARD AND NANTUCKET.

A TROPICAL STORM WARNING IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* CAPE FEAR TO WEST OF BOGUE INLET NORTH CAROLINA.
* NORTH OF THE NORTH CAROLINA/VIRGINIA BORDER TO SANDY HOOK NEW
JERSEY...INCLUDING DELAWARE BAY SOUTH OF SLAUGHTER BEACH AND THE
CHESAPEAKE BAY SOUTH OF NEW POINT COMFORT.
* THE COAST OF LONG ISLAND NEW YORK FROM FIRE ISLAND INLET NORTHWARD
AND EASTWARD TO PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR.

A TROPICAL STORM WATCH IS IN EFFECT FOR...
* SANDY HOOK NEW JERSEY TO WOODS HOLE MASSACHUSETTS...INCLUDING
BLOCK ISLAND AND LONG ISLAND SOUND.
* THE COAST OF LONG ISLAND NEW YORK WEST OF FIRE ISLAND INLET AND
PORT JEFFERSON HARBOR.
* NORTH OF PLYMOUTH MASSACHUSETTS TO EASTPORT MAINE.
* THE COAST OF NOVA SCOTIA FROM PORT MAITLAND TO MEDWAY HARBOUR.

A HURRICANE WARNING MEANS THAT HURRICANE CONDITIONS ARE EXPECTED
SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE WARNING AREA.

A HURRICANE WATCH MEANS THAT HURRICANE CONDITIONS ARE POSSIBLE
WITHIN THE WATCH AREA.

A TROPICAL STORM WARNING MEANS THAT TROPICAL STORM CONDITIONS ARE
EXPECTED SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE WARNING AREA WITHIN 36 HOURS.

A TROPICAL STORM WATCH MEANS THAT TROPICAL STORM CONDITIONS ARE
POSSIBLE WITHIN THE WATCH AREA...GENERALLY WITHIN 48 HOURS.

_________________________________________________________________


This is a map of the anticipated wind speed mapping for the eastern seaboard:

Earl is still a large storm. Hurricane force winds extend 90 miles from the storm center and tropical storm force winds can be found 230 miles away.  The wind chart will change based on your location as Earl moves northward.

Based on what Dr. Rob Carver from the Weather Underground Website is saying:
When the trough in the jet stream comes out on Thursday, Earl will accelerate quickly to the northeast. The timing of the trough's arrival will determine Earl's impact on the East Coast. If the trough comes out quickly, Earl will stay at sea. If the trough is late in arriving, it could move Earl across the East Coast.

I will update this information as it become available.

This is the latest updated tracking chart for Hurricane Earl:

Most important things for you to have is a working flashlight, AM/FM radio, and extra batteries for both. A little battery-operated camp lantern (and extra batteries) is great to have too. Nothing sucks more than sitting in the dark, not knowing what's going on as the storm tears up stuff around you. Do NOT use real candles as they can start a fire. Those little battery-operated candles are nice though....they add a bit of light and make the darkness less lonely. Believe me, you'll want some kind of continuous light on all night long (and camp lanterns tend to go through a batch of batteries in 3-4 hours or so).


Remember that you're also going into a long holiday weekend, so plan accordingly. Be sure to gas up your car and have some cash money on hand. You also need to decide if you'll really need to have extra bottled water and food on hand. A lot depends on how badly the storm will screw up electrical power in your area and remember that affects things like gas stations and stores as well as restaurants being open and whether they can take credit/debit cards.




The food in your fridge should be okay for 24-48 hours if you don't keep opening up the fridge doors. You can freeze bottled water (in plastic containers) and leave it in the freezer/lower fridge compartments (instead of using messy bags of melting ice). Just be sure to open each bottle/jug first and empty out a few tablespoons of water so that the freezing ice won't crack the plastic. Then you can drink the cool water as the ice melts.


Be sure to have your cell phone charged and use sparingly. If the power goes out, then you can't charge your cell phone. If you have a landline phone, note that many of the newer telephones will not work without electricity -- test your landline phone to make sure.

** MUST SEE** Interviews with Restoring Honor Rally Participants

There are no words, as the video speaks for itself:

Hallowed Ground & Hate

That is what we keep hearing that the site of Ground Zero, or the place where the twin towers once stood in NYC is.

Hallowed Ground.

Hallowed.

hallowed [ˈhæləʊd (liturgical) ˈhæləʊɪd]
adj
1. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) set apart as sacred
2. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) consecrated or holy
hallowedness n

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hallowed


hal·lowed   [hal-ohd; in liturgical use often hal-oh-id] Show IPA
–adjective
regarded as holy; venerated; sacred: Hallowed be Thy name; the hallowed saints; our hallowed political institutions.

hal·low1    [hal-oh] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.
to make holy; sanctify; consecrate.
2.
to honor as holy; consider sacred; venerate: to hallow a battlefield.
Origin:
bef. 900; ME hal ( o ) wen, OE hālgian (c. G heiligen, ON helga ), deriv. of hālig holy

—Related forms
hal·low·er, noun



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hallowed




Holy Ground. Sacred.

Is this what we are going to call the sites where any attack took place? Not that I don't think we should show respect and offer a memorial for those who were killed. Innocent victims should receive the respect and honor they deserve, but is this really the direction we want to head as a country?


Why did we not make the entire Columbine School a memorial to those who were slaughtered? Those were innocents who were killed by terrorists as well, but the terrorists were kids from this country, so somehow that makes it a different kind of terrorist act?


When the world trade center was attacked in 1993, why was the site not labeled "Hallowed Ground" then? Was it because not enough people died and were injured? What was it that allowed things to resume as normal when today we are calling the entire area where the twin towers fell now to be labeled "Hallowed Ground"?


Amendment 1 of the Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Hate In Action:




That is just the beginning. The hate is continuing to grow.

NYPD Charges Man With Hate Crime After He Allegedly Stabbed Muslim Cab Driver

The New York Police Department has confirmed to TPM that a cab driver in Manhttan was allegedly stabbed by a passenger who asked if the cabbie was Muslim, and says the incident is being treated as a hate crime. The suspect has been charged with attempted murder and other crimes.

NYC Cabbie Stabbed for being Muslim


What we have learned about Michael Enright is that he is a film student at the School of Visual Arts in Manhattan and has been working with the Intersections International, an interfaith and multicultural effort which seeks to promote justice and peace. So at first glance this seems to be an out of place attack. Why would someone who is aligned with such an organization attack someone simply for being Muslim?

More information is now coming to light.

The Daily News also reports that cops found a diary on Enright that was filled with anti-Muslim rantings:

When he was arrested Tuesday in midtown, Enright had a personal diary filled with pages of "pretty strong anti-Muslim comments," a police source said.

The source said Enright's journal equated Muslims with "killers, ungrateful for the help they were being offered, filthy murderers without a conscience."

Diary Found on Man who Stabbed NYC Cabbie for being Muslim is filled with Anti-Muslim comments


So alcoholism and anti-Muslim sentiments were enough to put this guy into the frame of mind that it was acceptable to stab this cabbie? So maybe it was just an odd coincidence?



Well, we aren't finished with the updates.....

Man arrested after urinating on mosque prayer rugs

QUEENS (WABC) -- An apparently drunk man was arrested for shouting anti-Muslim slurs as he urinated on prayer rugs in a mosque in the Astoria section of Queens.

Omar Rivera was charged with criminal trespass after worishipers at the Al-Iman Mosque on Steinway Street subdued him Wednesday night.

Holding a beer bottle, Rivera burst in during evening prayers. He allegedly shouted anti-Muslim slurs, calling the worshipers "terrorists," then flashed his middle finger and urniated on the prayer rugs.

Man arrested for urinating on Mosque Prayer Rugs


Vandalism at Madera mosque called hate crime

Imam Abdullah Salem arrived at the Madera Islamic Center on Tuesday to find a pair of menacing signs, including one that read "Wake up America, the enemy is here."
It was the latest in a series of incidents that the Madera County Sheriff's Department is investigating as hate crimes. On Sunday, a brick nearly smashed a window at the center on Road 26 just outside Madera. Last week, another sign left on the property read "No temple for the god of terrorism."

Vandalism at Mosque



Gainesville Church Will Burn Qurans On 9/11

Gainesville officials denied a burn permit for a church that plans to burn copies of the Quran on the ninth anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

The Gainesville church, the Dove World Outreach Center, has a history of inflammatory comments and campaigns against Islam and remained defiant despite the burn permit denial.

In an e-mail sent out Wednesday, the church said, "City of Gainesville denies burn permit – BUT WE WILL STILL BURN KORANS."

The Dove World Outreach Center is promoting the event through its website and social networking sites like Facebook. The burning of the Islamic holy text is set to be carried out on the center's grounds.

Church Plans To Burn Koran's on September 11th


Okay, so this is just the start of what is sure to be more hate and anger directed toward Muslims in this country. The right wing is using fear to create a palpable hatred directed towards all Muslims in this country & abroad. This is the latest "attack ad" that is being use to gin up fear and hopefully help them in the election.:




Instead of using facts, they use fear. Instead of offering solutions, they instead simply try to make fear the tool to scare people into thinking that supporting a Community Center is a bad thing.

Ginning up hate to win a political election!

What has this country come to? Are we not beyond this type of irrational hatred and violence directed toward others who are deemed different? Religious intolerance has always been simmering below the surface, but it no longer below the surface and has now boiled over into full blow, in your face hate being shown to others.

What is going on with this country? When the right wing says they want to take our country back, are they talking about back to a time when it was acceptable to own slaves, when black people were segregated and woman were treated like accessories and nothing more?

Honestly I don't understand this backward thinking. What's worse is that I expect this hate to continue to grow thanks in large part to people like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush & Fox as they are going out of their way to promote this hate.

When did it become acceptable to level this kind of intolerance towards others? I thought we as a nation were moving past that kind of mindset?

We see the claims of needing "constitutional conservatives", but that is laughable when those calling for it don't even know what the constitution says or understands the meaning of the claims they are making.

Sarah Palin is a great example of this.

She has consistently claimed that she is having her 1st Amendment rights violated, but the fact is that she proves has no understanding of what she is saying by making that statement.

No law has been implemented to restrict her freedom of speech. None whatsoever. What she really means is that she doesn't want people to criticize her when she says something stupid, which happens with alarming regularity. She wants to be able to say what she wants without being questioned on it. That is why she refuses to do interviews unless she can pre-screen every question ahead of time (so that someone else can write the answers down for her).

She claims she want to speak "without the filter of the media", but the reality is that she wants to be able to say whatever pops into her head, without being questioned on it. She did the exact same thing during the 2008 campaign,

In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.

Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

Palin Fears Media

GLENN GREENWALD From Salon.com explains her complete lack of understanding:

The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn't have anything to do with whether you're free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don't like what you've said.

If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.

This isn't only about profound ignorance regarding our basic liberties, though it is obviously that. Palin here is also giving voice to the standard right-wing grievance instinct: that it's inherently unfair when they're criticized. And now, apparently, it's even unconstitutional.

According to Palin, what the Founders intended with the First Amendment was that political candidates for the most powerful offices in the country and Governors of states would be free to say whatever they want without being criticized in the newspapers. In the Palin worldview, the First Amendment was meant to ensure that powerful political officials such as herself would not be "attacked" in the papers. Is it even possible to imagine more breathtaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?



UPDATE: The Constitution also guarantees freedom of association. Thus, by Palin's "reasoning," when newspapers -- or Palin herself -- criticize Obama for his associations, they're threatening his constitutional rights.

Sarah doesn't have any understanding of the Constitution

The thing that is most concerning is that these quotes are from 2008 and yet here we are in 2010, and Sarah Palin is still showing the same misunderstanding of the 1st Amendment. This just goes to show that years have gone by and she has not been able to educate herself on even the most basic of rights given to us in the constitution, yet she is consistently demanding that she knows what our founding fathers meant when they wrote the constitution, and what a constitutional conservative is today.

If she has this kind of understanding of the constitution, why should we expect her to have a basic grasp of any issue?

Her promotion of hate during the 2008 presidential campaign was obvious and she relished the attack dog role she was given. Claiming that then Senator Obama was not like "you and me" as American's. That he "palled around with terrorists", and those kinds of remarks continue today from her.

She is not the only one. Glenn Beck & Rush as well as the entire cast of characters at Fox do the same thing, and they are joyously happy in their ability to use fear and even outright lies to misinform their viewers, using hate and fear to hopefully score political points.

This claim that the spot where the twin towers stood is Hallowed Ground and therefore should hold nothing Muslim on it, forgets that Muslims died that day as well. Muslims from the area rushed to help. They denounced the acts of those who wrought this damage upon us all, and the damage was not aimed solely at white christians, but at all of America and what we stand for, and yet here we watch as these who claim that Muslims from this country, who have worked for peace and understanding should forgo their rights for those who have decided to not only allow the terrorists to win, but to encourage them to engage in more activities by giving in to the fear that they try to create in attacking us.


This country, previously a proud one, who could be pointed to as an example of the good things democracy and basic fundamental rights could accomplish is falling backwards fast.


Things have got to change. People need to stand up and say "Enough is Enough". Before it is too late to turn the tide.

False Claims By Christain'ts

Yes, you read the title correctly. I wrote Christain'ts. Why? Because I don't consider them to be real Christians.

They are, in my opinion, CINO's or Christians in Name Only. They promote their own particular agenda of what a Christian is or should be, follow the rules they pick and choose to follow, and readily condemn those that don't agree with them.

Palin fans are famous for this. One such fan who regularly proclaims herself to be a Christian is Adrienne Ross who blogs at a site called "Motivation Truth". The problem is that "Truth" is not what she writes, but propaganda designed to to mislead and misinform.

A prime example:

Adrienne Ross Twitter


Her post is about how supposedly a church that was destroyed by debris from the attack on September 11 is not being allowed to be rebuilt, but that the Cordoba House/Park 51 otherwise falsely labeled as the  Ground Zero Mosque (it is neither a mosque nor is it at Ground Zero) is being greenlighted along, and the implication she makes is that there is religious freedom for the Mosque but not for the Church.

She writes:

Let's look at the facts. If there was such love and tolerance for all people's right to worship, as seems to have sprung up with the plans for building the mosque, why hasn't there been a great outcry about St. Nicholas Church? This church was destroyed when one of the Towers collapsed, but they have not been allowed to rebuild.

Ross Paints False Picture of the Facts in her claims of Religious Freedom for some


Lets look at the actual facts shall we?  They are easy enough to find, she even links to the article in question, but conveniently omits the truth, which was provided in the same link, from her rant.

The Port Authority and the church announced a deal in July 2008 under which the Port Authority would grant land and up to $20 million to help rebuild it in a new location -- in addition, the authority was willing to pay up to $40 million to construct a bomb-proof platform underneath.

Within a year, the deal fell through and talks ended. Port Authority officials told Fox News that the deal is dead.

The archdiocese and Port Authority offer sharply conflicting accounts of where things went wrong. The Port Authority has previously claimed the church was making additional demands -- like wanting the $20 million up front and wanting to review plans for the surrounding area. They say the church can still proceed on its own if it wishes.

"The church continues to have the right to rebuild at their original site, and we will pay fair market value for the underground space beneath that building," a spokesperson with the Port Authority told Fox News.

But Karloutsos called the Port Authority's claims "propaganda" and said the church has complied with all conditions. He said the government should honor agreements that date back to 2004, under former New York Gov. George Pataki.

Fox News ~ Conflicting Stories Between Port Authority & Archdiocese


The bottom line in this story:

"The church continues to have the right to rebuild at their original site, and we will pay fair market value for the underground space beneath that building," a spokesperson with the Port Authority told Fox News.


That's right, the church is not being stopped from rebuilding.  Not in any way, shape or form.  They have the right to rebuild.  No one is stopping them.


In fact if you do a bit of research you'll find that not only is the church not being stopped, but they got greedy.

Last July, the Port Authority and the Greek Orthodox Church announced a tentative plan to rebuild the church just east of its original site, at Liberty and Greenwich Streets. The authority agreed to provide the church with land for a 24,000-square-foot house of worship, far larger than the original, and $20 million. Since the church would be built in a park over the bomb-screening center, the authority also agreed to pay up to $40 million for a blast-proof platform and foundation.

In recent negotiations, the authority cut the size of the church slightly and told church officials that its dome could not rise higher than the trade center memorial. The church, in turn, wanted the right to review plans for both the garage with the bomb-screening center and the park, something the authority was unwilling to provide. More important, authority officials said, the church wanted the $20 million up front, rather than in stages. Officials said they feared that the church, which has raised about $2 million for its new building, would come back to the authority for more.

The termination of negotiations is a major setback for the little church, a parish of 70 families that is nearly 90 years old. St. Nicholas officials had hoped to build an impressive structure, with a traditional Greek Orthodox dome, and a nondenominational center for visitors to ground zero. That will not be possible on the church’s original 1,200-square-foot lot, although church officials say they hope for reconciliation.

NYTimes

So the church was offered larger space than they originally had, and were offered money to help rebuild but that wasn't good enough.



So where pray tell is the religious intolerance in this situation?   Does the Church have protesters trying to stop this from being rebuilt?  No!  Are there people shouting that they should not rebuild or that this group should move further away from the site?   No!

There is no comparison between the two, but that isn't going to stop these Christain'ts from trying to make an issue out of it.  Why?  Because they need to try and prove that their complaints are not religious intolerance, and as we've just seen they have failed miserably.  Hardly surprising but the facts speak for themselves.

This is hardly the behavior of a real Christian, but then again, those who are real Christians don't need to proclaim it loudly or proudly, they just are what they are and prove it in their daily lives in the numerous small ways that good Christians do.

Sarah Palin talks OTR with Greta Van Sustern & Continues to Lie

Last night Sarah Palin was a guest on Greta's show. They discussed drilling in ANWAR & Cordoba House, the Cultural Center that has suddenly become a controversy based on the hateful rhetoric of people like Sarah Palin & Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs.

This is the portion of the transcript from Greta's show regarding the Cordoba House discussion:

VAN SUSTEREN: We're back live in Wasilla, Alaska, with former governor Sarah Palin. And once again, President Obama has put himself in the middle of a controversy, this time over the planned mosque near Ground Zero in New York. Now, on Friday, President Obama came out strong in defense of Muslims building that mosque. Then Saturday, when things seemed to get a bit heated, the president clarified his statement, saying he would not comment on the wisdom on the decision to build a mosque there. Governor Palin?

PALIN: Well, you know, it sounds cliched to say that the president is disconnected from the American people on this issue, but how else do you describe it? He just doesn't get it, that this is an insensitive move on the part of those Muslims who want to build that mosque in this location. It feels like a stab in the heart to, collectively, Americans who still have that lingering pain from 9/11.

VAN SUSTEREN: So but where do you divide the line? Because you've got the 1st -- you know, they do have a -- there is a 1st Amendment to practice your religion. But the American people overwhelmingly say, well, you know, while they recognize the right, they just don't want the right exercised there.

PALIN: Well, exactly. And nobody argues that that freedom of religion that the Muslims have to build that mosque somewhere. However, there are 100 mosques already in New York. To choose and be so adamant about this exact location just a block or two away from 9/11, again, is that knife, it feels like. Now, if the purpose of this mosque, as we are lead to believe, is to create this tolerant environment, to avoid anything like a 9/11 ever repeating, you have to ask why didn't one of those 100 mosques already accomplish such a thing, allowing that tolerance and that acceptance of differing views? So I don't buy into that reason, that that's the purpose of this location being chosen.

VAN SUSTEREN: I'm curious what the sort of political effect will be because the statement the president made was not one that was sort of, you know, off-the-cuff, when he got sort of caught walking in some place and some reporter throws a question. He actually -- you know, he thought about it. He made a statement at a public dinner. So there must have been some discussion about it.

PALIN: There had to have been discussion about it. It had to have been a deliberative and well thought-out comment that he had made and then had to kind of clarify it the next morning. You know why he had to do such a thing, Greta? You twittered right after he had made that comment. You must have got your information from the press pool or something. You twittered that night, on a Friday night after he gave that comment to the Muslim community as he was celebrating the holy month of Ramadan in the Islamic community there in the White House -- you twittered what he had said.
And there across the Internet then, the ensuing explosion based on his comment -- I have not seen such a thing in the political debate and discourse in this country in quite some time. The next morning, he realized then, I think, Whoops, I better backtrack a little bit, and that's what he did the next morning.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, I can't wholly take credit for it because what happens is, is that we get the White House press pool reports that come across the BlackBerry, and it happened late Friday night. And as luck would have it, I'm one of the -- I'm the late anchor. And so the minute that I got it, I just duped it onto Twitter and to GretaWire and people picked it up.

PALIN: And once you did, once people picked it up, though, we were appalled! We -- we were -- it was shocking because this leader of the free world has such power in his words. He should utilize that power in the words to represent the will of the people and not underestimate the wisdom of the people in America. And the overwhelming majority of Americans right now are saying, Mr. President, no, this hurts. This is a slap to those innocent victims who were murdered that day on 9/11. Build the mosque. Build it somewhere. Join the other 100 mosques that are already there in New York, but somewhere else that's less offensive and less provoking of more pain and -- and anger.

VAN SUSTEREN: All right, it's going to have political ramifications because we -- already Senator Harry Reid is disagreeing with the president, heading for the hills on it may be -- might be sort of a flip way to say it. But there's the political ramifications, and then there's also the real substantive problems (INAUDIBLE) What should the president do to try to sort of heal the wound? Because there is a wound in this country between many Muslims -- not all of them -- and many Americans -- not all of them -- with Muslims. I mean, how can we at least make some effort to fix this, put this fire out, rather than fuel it?

PALIN: Well, what the president seems to be suggesting is that everybody needs to be so tolerant of others' beliefs. That is fine. Then let him take that lesson and try to apply it to the debate on the other side if you were right now and talk to that imam, those others who want to build and choose that precise location for their mosque that is so offensive to so many people, and ask them to be tolerant. Ask them to understand America's feelings on this. And see if then the president can use some of his influence in a more positive, less divisive way. That's one way that he can help bridge this divide.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, I think it certainly says the president doesn't pay attention to polls because I think (INAUDIBLE) American people overwhelmingly are opposed to it. I mean, I think the numbers -- I haven't seen the numbers today because I've been on the road with you -- actually, up in the air with you. But I haven't seen the numbers, but he certainly - - I mean, he's making decisions independent of the polls.

PALIN: No, I don't believe that.

VAN SUSTEREN: You don't believe it?

PALIN: I believe that's why he made his comment Friday night. He knew immediately because his advisers told him, You went too far on this. So the next morning, he tried to backtrack that. And now, curiously, he's not coming out and saying -- we want to know -- Mr. President, we have a right to know. What's your position on this? Again, we all know that there is that 1st Amendment right to build a church, a mosque where they want to, if it's legally appropriate. But what is your position on this? Should they? Do you support it? And we don't have the answer from him.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, if he wants to come to "On the Record," we'd be happy to ask him those questions.

PALIN: I hope he does!

VAN SUSTEREN: Anyway, Governor, as always, thank you. And (INAUDIBLE) look at this beautiful yard that she has here. And we're going to have much more with Governor Palin. You don't want to miss "On the Record" tomorrow and Wednesday. Governor Palin and her husband, Todd, are taking you to heart of Alaska so you can actually see for yourself this land, this ANWR area, this battle ground of the oil drilling war, make your own decision. We'll be back here tomorrow night and Wednesday night at 10:00 PM Eastern. We want you back here.

Transcript of OTR with Greta Van Sustern


First reaction to this whole piece is WTF!!??!!



Lets take this one at a time okay? That will make it so much easier to tear apart the lies of Sarah Palin & show how willingly Greta is to just toss her journalistic credentials out the window when it comes to Sarah Palin.

PALIN: Well, you know, it sounds cliched to say that the president is disconnected from the American people on this issue, but how else do you describe it? He just doesn't get it, that this is an insensitive move on the part of those Muslims who want to build that mosque in this location. It feels like a stab in the heart to, collectively, Americans who still have that lingering pain from 9/11.

President Obama did respond correctly because it is not his job to get into the middle of a situation like this. His job is to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans not just a select few. Unlike Sarah Palin who while pretending to be a governor felt that she could "take her governor's hat off" and then make a point of coming out for or against a project.

Our president knows his place and his job.

This cultural center is NOT a "stab in the collective hearts of Americans, it is only a political talking point being used by some shameless people who will pick up any subject they think is newsworthy to attack others in the hopes of scoring political points.

PALIN: Well, exactly. And nobody argues that that freedom of religion that the Muslims have to build that mosque somewhere. However, there are 100 mosques already in New York. To choose and be so adamant about this exact location just a block or two away from 9/11, again, is that knife, it feels like. Now, if the purpose of this mosque, as we are lead to believe, is to create this tolerant environment, to avoid anything like a 9/11 ever repeating, you have to ask why didn't one of those 100 mosques already accomplish such a thing, allowing that tolerance and that acceptance of differing views? So I don't buy into that reason, that that's the purpose of this location being chosen.

This shows the complete and utter lack of understanding of the issue not to mention it reaffirms the claim that this is based on religious intolerance & hate for anyone who is Muslim.

This spot is not near "9/11", as claimed. A stupid way to refer to Ground Zero. This "knife to the heart" thing is also being overplayed as well. This is also not a Mosque. It is a cultural center with planned space for:
recreation spaces and fitness facilities (swimming pool, gym, basketball court)
a 500-seat auditorium
a restaurant and culinary school
cultural amenities including exhibitions
education programs
a library, reading room and art studios
childcare services
a mosque, intended to be run separately from Park51 but open to and accessible to all members, visitors and our New York community
a September 11th memorial and quiet contemplation space, open to all


Now, to suggest that this center is not needed because there are other local mosques which have not been able to "improve" relations is a telling statement indeed. It suggests that this is all about religious intolerance, and equates all Muslims with terrorists.

Are we now to believe that all Christians are unable to preach against pedophilia due to the fact that priests have been molesting children for decades without being stopped? Or since preaching about abortion has not stopped it that they should stop preaching about how wrong it is? Or perhaps Christians should give up preaching about how sinful it is to be gay because that has not stopped people from being gay? Maybe we should stop all churches altogether since their purpose seems to have not worked for so many?


There is no instant response to teaching tolerance, it is a never-ending battle and as someone else just recently said (h/t to annes_123) the purpose of extending tolerance towards the mosque .. is NOT "here we will give you this now let's see what YOU do back... , indeed, it should be held up as a great idea, as we need more people teaching and practicing tolerance and encouraging diversity within our country.

PALIN: There had to have been discussion about it. It had to have been a deliberative and well thought-out comment that he had made and then had to kind of clarify it the next morning. You know why he had to do such a thing, Greta? You twittered right after he had made that comment. You must have got your information from the press pool or something. You twittered that night, on a Friday night after he gave that comment to the Muslim community as he was celebrating the holy month of Ramadan in the Islamic community there in the White House -- you twittered what he had said.
And there across the Internet then, the ensuing explosion based on his comment -- I have not seen such a thing in the political debate and discourse in this country in quite some time. The next morning, he realized then, I think, Whoops, I better backtrack a little bit, and that's what he did the next morning.


Yes Sarah, it was the fact that Greta twittered about this statement by the president on the Cordoba House that caused a huge uproar and demanded he clarify his statements. Heck, even Greta did not buy into that claim.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, I can't wholly take credit for it because what happens is, is that we get the White House press pool reports that come across the BlackBerry, and it happened late Friday night. And as luck would have it, I'm one of the -- I'm the late anchor. And so the minute that I got it, I just duped it onto Twitter and to GretaWire and people picked it up.


The fact of the matter is that the President did not do anything more than reiterate what he had previously stated, and refused to give a personal opinion on the matter, which is exactly what he should do.

PALIN: And once you did, once people picked it up, though, we were appalled! We -- we were -- it was shocking because this leader of the free world has such power in his words. He should utilize that power in the words to represent the will of the people and not underestimate the wisdom of the people in America. And the overwhelming majority of Americans right now are saying, Mr. President, no, this hurts. This is a slap to those innocent victims who were murdered that day on 9/11. Build the mosque. Build it somewhere. Join the other 100 mosques that are already there in New York, but somewhere else that's less offensive and less provoking of more pain and -- and anger.


What Sarah Palin fails to realize is that the job of President of the United States is to protect all citizens and to defend the constitution of the USA rather than get into personal pissing matches.

He did his job, when asked to clarify his statement, he said he was not going to comment on his personal feelings regarding the wisdom of creating this cultural center at the specified location, rather that they had the right to do so based on the law. That is the exact right response for the president.

There is no slap at anyone, anywhere at anytime. Sarah Palin for all her complaints about wanting smaller government, less government intrusion, and demanding more states rights, now seems to want the federal government to get involved in a local issue. The local community has approved of this center and that is the bottom line. It is none of Sarah Palin's business, nor is it the business of anyone else. It has met all legal requirements, it has the blessing of the local community where it will be located, therefore all the blowhards in the rest of the country have no say in this matter.

"Do you favor or oppose the building of an Islamic community center and prayer space two blocks from the site of the World Trade Center?"

Manhattan:
Favor: 53%
Oppose: 31%
Unsure: 16%

Polling on Cultural Center


Over 50% of locals favor the idea. That speaks volumes.

PALIN: Well, what the president seems to be suggesting is that everybody needs to be so tolerant of others' beliefs. That is fine. Then let him take that lesson and try to apply it to the debate on the other side if you were right now and talk to that imam, those others who want to build and choose that precise location for their mosque that is so offensive to so many people, and ask them to be tolerant. Ask them to understand America's feelings on this. And see if then the president can use some of his influence in a more positive, less divisive way. That's one way that he can help bridge this divide.



Again, Sarah Palin seems to want the President of the United States to get involved in a local matter, where the locals have approved of something that outsiders don't like. Who cares if Sarah Palin and her ilk are offended by this cultural center? "America's feelings on this" don't matter on issues such as this. This is not a center being built by the terrorists. It is not a full blown Mosque, or anything other than a center for locals to use that they have approved of. The president is doing the right thing, and there is no need to "bridge a divide" that is located solely in the minds of the intolerant and bigoted.


In stating the she doesn't believe that the President was paying attention to the polls, Greta got this remark from Sarah,

PALIN: I believe that's why he made his comment Friday night. He knew immediately because his advisers told him, You went too far on this. So the next morning, he tried to backtrack that. And now, curiously, he's not coming out and saying -- we want to know -- Mr. President, we have a right to know. What's your position on this? Again, we all know that there is that 1st Amendment right to build a church, a mosque where they want to, if it's legally appropriate. But what is your position on this? Should they? Do you support it? And we don't have the answer from him.


Sarah has no right to know the President's official personal position on this matter because his personal position doesn't matter one single bit. That is where a lot of Sarah Palin's problems arise. She doesn't understand that there is a line drawn between professional/political and personal. His job is to protect the rights and freedoms of all of us regardless of what his personal beliefs are. His personal feelings don't matter any more than anyone else's do with the exception of the local community in regards to this matter.


I've grown very tired of this being an issue simply because there needs to be another political talking point by Sarah Palin and her ilk. Unless she is demanding that the federal government get involved in every local issue, which she has claimed is a part of the problem, then she needs to shut up and sit down.

Updated Information on Cordoba House (aka NYC Mosque)

Just found some interesting information that I thought I should share regarding this controversy.


How it all got started:
Pamela Geller of "Atlas Shrugs", the woman who once proclaimed that Malcolm X was President Obama's father started the attacks against this Cultural center.

A Timeline:

Dec. 8, 2009: The Times publishes a lengthy front-page look at the Cordoba project. "We want to push back against the extremists," Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the lead organizer, is quoted as saying. Two Jewish leaders and two city officials, including the mayor's office, say they support the idea, as does the mother of a man killed on 9/11. An FBI spokesman says the imam has worked with the bureau. Besides a few third-tier right-wing blogs, including Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs site, no one much notices the Times story.

Dec. 21, 2009: Conservative media personality Laura Ingraham interviews Abdul Rauf's wife, Daisy Khan, while guest-hosting "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox. In hindsight, the segment is remarkable for its cordiality. "I can't find many people who really have a problem with it," Ingraham says of the Cordoba project, adding at the end of the interview, "I like what you're trying to do."
(This segment also includes onscreen the first use that we've seen of the misnomer "ground zero mosque.") After the segment — and despite the front-page Times story — there were no news articles on the mosque for five and a half months, according to a search of the Nexis newspaper archive.
**(The link below provides video of the segment as well)**

May 6, 2010: After a unanimous vote by a New York City community board committee to approve the project, the AP runs a story. It quotes relatives of 9/11 victims (called by the reporter), who offer differing opinions. The New York Post, meanwhile, runs a story under the inaccurate headline, "Panel Approves 'WTC' Mosque." Geller is less subtle, titling her post that day, "Monster Mosque Pushes Ahead in Shadow of World Trade Center Islamic Death and Destruction." She writes on her Atlas Shrugs blog, "This is Islamic domination and expansionism. The location is no accident. Just as Al-Aqsa was built on top of the Temple in Jerusalem." (To get an idea of where Geller is coming from, she once suggested that Malcolm X was Obama's real father. Seriously.)

May 7, 2010: Geller's group, Stop Islamization of America (SIOA), launches "Campaign Offensive: Stop the 911 Mosque!" (SIOA 's associate director is Robert Spencer, who makes his living writing and speaking about the evils of Islam.) Geller posts the names and contact information for the mayor and members of the community board, encouraging people to write. The board chair later reports getting "hundreds and hundreds" of calls and e-mails from around the world.

May 8, 2010: Geller announces SIOA's first protest against what she calls the "911 monster mosque" for May 29. She and Spencer and several other members of the professional anti-Islam industry will attend. (She also says that the protest will mark the dark day of "May 29, 1453, [when] the Ottoman forces led by the Sultan Mehmet II broke through the Byzantine defenses against the Muslim siege of Constantinople." The outrage-peddling New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser argues in a note at the end of her column a couple of days later that "there are better places to put a mosque."

May 13, 2010: Peyser follows up with an entire column devoted to "Mosque Madness at Ground Zero." This is a significant moment in the development of the "ground zero mosque" narrative: It's the first newspaper article that frames the project as inherently wrong and suspect, in the way that Geller has been framing it for months. Peyser in fact quotes Geller at length and promotes the anti-mosque protest of Stop Islamization of America, which Peyser describes as a "human-rights group." Peyser also reports — falsely — that Cordoba House's opening date will be Sept. 11, 2011.
Origins of the Ground Zero Mosque Controversy


There is also a false story of the 9/11 families being against this Cultural Center but that is not true. So far, one person, Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of the plane flown into the pentagon (funny she isn't complaining about the worship center located there isn't it?) is the one victim family member on record as being against this. She is also the co-creator of Liz Cheney's "Keeping America Safe" initiative.

Also very worth noting is that none of the 9/11 Families groups who actually seem to be membership organizations made up of families of the victims seem to have taken positions on the mosque issue at all. I looked at the websites of several such organizations. And they each contain 'about' pages with some information about the organization, its membership and in most cases boards of directors. The website of Burlingame's group, 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong America, contains no such information. But it's statement of purpose does give some sense of viewpoint: "The war against sharia is a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity."

Since almost three thousand people died as a result of the attacks, many thousands count as family members of the dead. And given that the public at large is at best divided over mosque question and likely on balance against it, it stands to figure that there's a similar spectrum of opinion among these families. Yet I have not seen any clear evidence that as a group these people are against the Cordoba House project.

Getting some facts on the table


Another really good article on the subject is in "The New Yorker" titled Zero Grounds by Hendrik Hertzberg which is worth a read.

NYC Mosque Controversy

I've written about it before, which you can read about here.

This controversy has gotten out of control, and it sickens me.  I have to ask why it is so disturbing to have a cultural center located a couple of blocks away from Ground Zero.  It has to be the "Mosque" part of it, otherwise I cannot imagine that this would be a topic of discussion for anyone.

So why is the "Mosque" consideration a problem?  Is it because the terrorists claimed to be Muslim and working on the behalf of Islamic ideals?  If that is the issue then I have to ask...so what?   We don't condemn an entire believe system simply based on the ideals of a few fanatics do we?  Do we demand that all Christians remove churches from parks, schools and anywhere else that children might congregate simply because priests have molested children?

Don't we constantly hear from Christians who claim that we are trying to remove their religious symbols and viewpoints from this country?  They claim they have every right to place their nativity scene's around the public square during the holiday season.  They claim that this country should be allowed to pray in schools, and teach creationism alongside of evolution..right?  They want their holiday's recognized by everyone even though this is a country with many different religious beliefs, encompassing many varied viewpoints, and yet to speak to them about tolerance and understanding would be unacceptable in their eyes.

But now they demand sensitivity from a different religious sect for their viewpoints, when they themselves are unwilling to offer that same sensitivity towards those who believe differently.  To use tolerance and understanding as an excuse is beyond the pale considering how these same people act when it comes to their own personal religious beliefs.  They have no tolerance and understanding, instead they demand acceptance of their beliefs.

If it is religious institutions that should not be close to Ground Zero, then should we remove or demand the removal of the churches that are located much closer than the Cordoba House would be?

  I'd be willing to bet that this would not go over well, so it all comes back to the fact that it is the Muslim religion that is the issue.

Are people really that intolerant?  To be sure the answer is yes.  People can claim that this is only about what they are calling the "Ground Zero Mosque", which is a total fabrication.

This is not a "Mosque" it is a Cultural Center.

It is not at Ground Zero, it is a couple of blocks away.

This is not being solely directed at the Cordoba House either.

There are problems cropping up all over the country involving this issue with Mosque's.

Tennessee, California, Georgia, Kentucky, Wisconsin and Illinois as well as Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, and Midland Beach, Staten Island, in New York City, are all area's that are suddenly having controversies dealing with Mosque's.

This is about Muslims in the U.S.A. Plain and simple. That is the bottom line.

Our President recently came out with the only proper response that a president of this country should.

“This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

This is and was the absolutely correct thing that our President should say.  There is nothing more to be added.  I know that many who oppose the idea of this cultural center are demanding that the president come out and take a personal stand on this issue, but it is not his job nor his place to do so.   His job is to follow the constitution and protect everyone, not a select few.

We've also heard from those who oppose this building that "they can build a mosque when we are allowed to build a church in Iraq" or other such nonsense.   Lets clear up that misconception now.


List of Christian Churches in Baghdad - Iraq
Chaldean Church (Catholic denomination):

1. "Pregnant without Sin" (in reference to Virgin Mary), built in 1921 - Camp Gelani.
2. Mar Aphram, built in 1940s - Shalcheya.
3. Mar Yousif, built in 1956 - Eastern Karada.
4. Mar Youhanan the Baptist, built in 1960 - alDura.
5. Holy Family, built in 1960 - Aurfaleya (Betaween)
6. The Virgin- Prayer's Lord (Sultana alWardeya), built in 1960 - Karada Khareg.
7. Holy Heart of Jesus, built in 1964 - Hay alWehda.
8. Mar Eliya of Heyra, built in 1964 - Hay alAmeen.
9. Mar Yousif- Protector of the Workers, built in 1965 - Hay alYarmook
10. Mar Yaqoub- Bishop of Nisibin, built in 1965 - alDura
11. The passing of the Virgin, built in 1966 - alMansour
12. Mar Toma the Disciple, built in 1966 - Nereya and Gayara
13. Mother of Continuous Help, built in 1966 - Hay anNedhal and alSadoon
14. The Virgin- Protector of Crops, built in 1968 - alBayya'
15. Mar Gewergis, built in 1969 - Hay Sumer/New Baghdad
16. Virgin Mary, built in 1971 - Palestine Street
17. Martyr Mar Baythoon, built in 1978 - Baladeyat/7-April
18. Holy Trinity, built in 1978 - Habebeya/7-April
19. Mar Marey, built in 1980 - Hay Beydha/alBanook
20. The Disciples Mar Putros and Mar Polos, built in 1986 - alDura
21. Congratulating the Virgin, built in 1989 - Hay alMuthana/Suq alThelatha
22. The Rising, built in 1994 - Hay alMualemeen/alMashtal
23. Mar Polos- The Disciple, built ??, al-Zafaraneya

Assyrian (include Assyrian, Assyrian Evangelical, and Old Assyrian):

1. Virgin Mary (Mar Kura), built in 1928 -Karada Maryem
2. Mar Qaradagh, built in 1946 - Camp Gelani
3. Evangelical Assyrian, built ??, Sahat alTayaran
4. Mar Gewergis, built in 1961 - alDura
5. Mar Odishu Nokhreta, built in 1972 - Elwiya
6. Virgin Mary, built in 1970 - Neyreya and alGayara
7. Mar Marey, built in 1985 - alAmeen
8. Mar Zaya, built in ?? - alDura
9. Virgin Mary (Old Assyrian Church), built in 1988 - Hay alReyadh

Syriac (include Orthodox and Catholic):

1. The Disciples Mar Putros and Mar Polos (Orthodox), built in 1964 - Industerial Street
2. Mar Yousif (Catholic), built in 1965 - alMansour
3. Lady of Salvation (Catholic), built in 1968 - Eastern Karada
4. Mar Maty (Orthodox), built in 1981 - Hay Sumer/Ghadeer
5. Mar Toma (Orthodox), built in 1978 - alMansour/Hay alMuhandeseen
6. Mar Behnam (Catholic), built in 1982 - Hay Sumer/alQanat
7. Mar Behnam (Orthodox), built in ?? - Hay alMechanic/alDura

Armenian (include Catholic and Orthodox) :

1. Holy Heart of Jesus (Catholic), built in 1938 - Eastern Karada
2. St. Gregor the Illluminant (Orthodox), built in 1956 - Sahat alTayran
3. St. Garabeet (Orthodox), built in 1973 - Hay alReyadh

Melkite, known commonly as "Room" (include Orthodox, Catholic and Latin):

1. Mar Anderaous (Orthodox), built in 1940's - Camp Gelani
2. Room Catholic, built in 1962 - Karada Dakhel
3. St. Jerjis (Orthodox), built in 1976 - Hay alReyadh
4. Cathedral of St. Joseph (Latin), built in 1965 - Hay alWehda/Elwiya

Protestant:

1. Adventest Church, built in 1958 - alNedhal Street

Evangelical:

1. National Evangelical, built in 1954 - Hay alNedhal

http://www.chaldeansonline.org/church/christian.html



So now what is the next excuse going to be?


That Muslims need to be understanding of how "we" feel?

Like somehow Muslims are not included in that "We".

Muslims died on that day as well.  They rushed to the scene of the unfolding disaster and helped in ways that anyone else might have done.   They are as much of the "we" as anyone else.
Here is a list of the Muslims that died on September 11th.  Remember their names as they deserve to be honored just like anyone else who died that day due to the terrorist attacks.

Samad Afridi
Ashraf Ahmad
Shabbir Ahmad (45 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and 3 children)
Umar Ahmad
Azam Ahsan
Ahmed Ali
Tariq Amanullah (40 years old; Fiduciary Trust Co.; ICNA website team member; leaves wife and 2 children)
Touri Bolourchi (69 years old; United Airlines #175; a retired nurse from Tehran)
Salauddin Ahmad Chaudhury
Abdul K. Chowdhury (30 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Mohammad S. Chowdhury (39 years old; Windows on the World; leaves wife and child born 2 days after the attack)
Jamal Legesse Desantis
Ramzi Attallah Douani (35 years old; Marsh & McLennan)
SaleemUllah Farooqi
Syed Fatha (54 years old; Pitney Bowes)
Osman Gani
Mohammad Hamdani (50 years old)
Salman Hamdani (NYPD Cadet)
Aisha Harris (21 years old; General Telecom)
Shakila Hoque (Marsh & McLennan)
Nabid Hossain
Shahzad Hussain
Talat Hussain
Mohammad Shah Jahan (Marsh & McLennan)
Yasmeen Jamal
Mohammed Jawarta (MAS security)
Arslan Khan Khakwani
Asim Khan
Ataullah Khan
Ayub Khan
Qasim Ali Khan
Sarah Khan (32 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Taimour Khan (29 years old; Karr Futures)
Yasmeen Khan
Zahida Khan
Badruddin Lakhani
Omar Malick
Nurul Hoque Miah (36 years old)
Mubarak Mohammad (23 years old)
Boyie Mohammed (Carr Futures)
Raza Mujtaba
Omar Namoos
Mujeb Qazi
Tarranum Rahim
Ehtesham U. Raja (28 years old)
Ameenia Rasool (33 years old)
Naveed Rehman
Yusuf Saad
Rahma Salie & unborn child (28 years old; American Airlines #11; wife of Michael Theodoridis; 7 months pregnant)
Shoman Samad
Asad Samir
Khalid Shahid (25 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald; engaged to be married in November)
Mohammed Shajahan (44 years old; Marsh & McLennan)
Naseema Simjee (Franklin Resources Inc.’s Fiduciary Trust)
Jamil Swaati
Sanober Syed
Robert Elias Talhami (40 years old; Cantor Fitzgerald)
Michael Theodoridis (32 years old; American Airlines #11; husband of Rahma Salie)
W. Wahid

This entire controversy is more than ridiculous, it is bigoted, hateful, and un-American.  What's worse it shows  us in a bad light to the world.  How intolerant are we?  How can we profess to live by the constitution if we allow this kind of action to take place?  What does it say about us all that we are allowing small minded people to control this narrative?


On the one hand we have people screaming for the government to do something, anything to keep this cultural center from going up and on the other hand we have these same people screaming about government overreach and interference.   The hypocrisy is astounding but expected as we see it continuously from the same people, over and over again.

Stop calling it the Ground Zero Mosque.  It isn't one.
Stop calling it the 9/11 Mosque.  It isn't one.

It is the Cordoba House, it is a cultural center and it needs to go up as planned, in the place it was planned, because our constitution not only allows it, but since we are a nation of laws, our laws say that as long as it meets the appropriate approval within the legal framework, that there is no reason to keep it from being established.

Palingates has a great post up with the tweets from the head twit herself regarding this controversy. Check it out!

Don't be afraid to stand up and speak out against this group of haters who are trying to stop this cultural center from being established at the currently planned location. The country and the world needs to know that not all of us feel the same as these loud mouthed knuckledraggers.
 Make your voice heard.