Exactly what they want

[detlef]

Understood.

 

Now, given your recent boycott of the NFL due to the public financing, tax incentives, etc... How do you feel about this:

(Reuters) - The Muslim center planned near the site of the World Trade Center attack could qualify for tax-free financing, a spokesman for City Comptroller John Liu said on Friday, and Liu is willing to consider approving the public subsidy.

 

ETA:

 

and yes I know other nonprofit organizations receive this benefit.

Assuming it is, in fact, a YMCA-like community center, then I can certainly see a difference between hooking that dude up and being pissed that another dude is handed over mad jack to build a vehicle to start charging the same community $12 for a beer that they drink in a $100 seats.

[moneymakers]

Hope and change people

 

cant we just all get along?

 

give peace a chance.

 

lets not forget that Iran has the right to a nuclear bomb and now they have it.

 

Just like the monkey said when he got his tail caught in the door.

 

It wont be long now.

 

stupid people.

 

commonsense and history.

 

all sheep ignore.

[SEC=UGA]

Assuming it is, in fact, a YMCA-like community center, then I can certainly see a difference between hooking that dude up and being pissed that another dude is handed over mad jack to build a vehicle to start charging the same community $12 for a beer that they drink in a $100 seats.

 

How much do you think they're gonna charge for beer there? diaper dirt, you can't get a beer anywhere in Manhattan for under 12 bucks.

 

So, public financing for a Muslim, Christian, Jewish community center is ok, but if it is for a football stadium... You're a closet religious zealot, aren't you... AREN'T YOU?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

[detlef]

How much do you think they're gonna charge for beer there? diaper dirt, you can't get a beer anywhere in Manhattan for under 12 bucks.

 

So, public financing for a Muslim, Christian, Jewish community center is ok, but if it is for a football stadium... You're a closet religious zealot, aren't you... AREN'T YOU?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Wow, touche. Now you've got me thinking. A life long football fan and outspoken opponent of religion should not be taking this stance. You know what, I take that back. I think it's pretty lame that they're getting tax breaks to build this.

[Ursa Majoris]

lets not forget that Iran has the right to a nuclear bomb and now they have it.

 

Just like the monkey said when he got his tail caught in the door.

Say what now?

[SEC=UGA]

Say what now?

 

So, I stopped surfing pron and went to the online bible verse search for "Monkey tail in door" and got no results... I have no idea what to conclude from that post. That's 45 seconds of pron surfing I'll never get back.

[detlef]

So, I stopped surfing pron and went to the online bible verse search for "Monkey tail in door" and got no results... I have no idea what to conclude from that post. That's 45 seconds of pron surfing I'll never get back.

I found the link between Iranian nukes and monkeys

[Kid Cid]

Never, ever, ever, try and make sense of a moneymakers post.

 

Also, no religion, religious institution, property, business, or other endeavor owned by a religious based organization should be tax exempt on any level. These social constructs are every bit a profit generating system that any other business is, the only thing is that they are selling absolution and salvation, things that which if sold by any other business would immediately trigger an investigation by anti-fraud law enforcement.

[Yukon Cornelius]

Never, ever, ever, try and make sense of a moneymakers post.

 

Also, no religion, religious institution, property, business, or other endeavor owned by a religious based organization should be tax exempt on any level.

wurd

[Ursa Majoris]

Never, ever, ever, try and make sense of a moneymakers post.

 

Also, no religion, religious institution, property, business, or other endeavor owned by a religious based organization should be tax exempt on any level. These social constructs are every bit a profit generating system that any other business is, the only thing is that they are selling absolution and salvation, things that which if sold by any other business would immediately trigger an investigation by anti-fraud law enforcement.

+1

[untateve]

Never, ever, ever, try and make sense of a moneymakers post.

 

Also, no religion, religious institution, property, business, or other endeavor owned by a religious based organization should be tax exempt on any level. These social constructs are every bit a profit generating system that any other business is, the only thing is that they are selling absolution and salvation, things that which if sold by any other business would immediately trigger an investigation by anti-fraud law enforcement.

 

 

wurd

 

 

+1

 

I'm just trying to keep track of everyone who is going to Hell.

[Clubfoothead]

I'm just trying to keep track of everyone who is going to Hell.

 

In

[The Mucca]

I'm just trying to keep track of everyone who is going to Hell.

 

My guess would be, most of the Catholic Priests

[Bier Meister]

i've got the s'mores

[bpwallace49]

My guess would be, most of the Catholic Priests

 

Good! They can bring the wine . . .

[evil_gop_liars]

Just like the monkey said when he got his tail caught in the door.

 

:thinkingmonkey: Someday monkeys will not have a tails. :thinkingmonkey:

[SEC=UGA]

I'm just trying to keep track of everyone who is going to Hell.

 

You trying to make plans on who you're gonna room with?

 

I'll be in that part where they shove pineapples in to your anus.

[untateve]

I'll be in that part where they shove pineapples in to your anus.

 

I thought we were talking about Hell.

[driveby]

I know everyone loves Mark Steyn;

 

MOLLIFYING MUSLIMS, AND MUSLIFYING MOLLIES

 

Monday, 20 September 2010

While I've been talking about free speech in Copenhagen, several free speech issues arose in North America. I was asked about them both at the Sappho Award event and in various interviews, so here's a few thoughts for what they're worth:

 

Too many people in the free world have internalized Islam’s view of them. A couple of years ago, I visited Guantanamo and subsequently wrote that, if I had to summon up Gitmo in a single image, it would be the brand-new copy of the Koran in each cell: To reassure incoming prisoners that the filthy infidels haven't touched the sacred book with their unclean hands, the Korans are hung from the walls in pristine, sterilized surgical masks. It's one thing for Muslims to regard infidels as unclean, but it's hard to see why it's in the interests of us infidels to string along with it and thereby validate their bigotry. What does that degree of prostration before their prejudices tell them about us? It’s a problem that Muslims think we’re unclean. It’s a far worse problem that we go along with it.

 

Take this no-name pastor from an obscure church who was threatening to burn the Koran. He didn’t burn any buildings or women and children. He didn’t even burn a book. He hadn’t actually laid a finger on a Koran, and yet the mere suggestion that he might do so prompted the President of the United States to denounce him, and the Secretary of State, and the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, various G7 leaders, and golly, even Angelina Jolie. President Obama has never said a word about honor killings of Muslim women. Secretary Clinton has never said a word about female genital mutilation. General Petraeus has never said a word about the rampant buggery of pre-pubescent boys by Pushtun men in Kandahar. But let an obscure man in Florida so much as raise the possibility that he might disrespect a book – an inanimate object – and the most powerful figures in the western world feel they have to weigh in.

 

Aside from all that, this obscure church’s website has been shut down, its insurance policy has been canceled, its mortgage has been called in by its bankers. Why? As Diana West wrote, why was it necessary or even seemly to make this pastor a non-person? Another one of Obama's famous "teaching moments"? In this case teaching us that Islamic law now applies to all? Only a couple of weeks ago, the President, at his most condescendingly ineffectual, presumed to lecture his moronic subjects about the First Amendment rights of Imam Rauf. Where's the condescending lecture on Pastor Jones' First Amendment rights?

 

When someone destroys a bible, US government officials don’t line up to attack him. President Obama bowed lower than a fawning maitre d’ before the King of Saudi Arabia, a man whose regime destroys bibles as a matter of state policy, and a man whose depraved religious police forces schoolgirls fleeing from a burning building back into the flames to die because they’d committed the sin of trying to escape without wearing their head scarves. If you show a representation of Mohammed, European commissioners and foreign ministers line up to denounce you. If you show a representation of Jesus Christ immersed in your own urine, you get a government grant for producing a widely admired work of art. Likewise, if you write a play about Jesus having gay sex with Judas Iscariot.

 

So just to clarify the ground rules, if you insult Christ, the media report the issue as freedom of expression: A healthy society has to have bold, brave, transgressive artists willing to question and challenge our assumptions, etc. But, if it’s Mohammed, the issue is no longer freedom of expression but the need for "respect" and "sensitivity" toward Islam, and all those bold brave transgressive artists don’t have a thing to say about it.

 

Maybe Pastor Jones doesn't have any First Amendment rights. Musing on Koran burning, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer argued:

 

[Oliver Wendell] Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout 'fire' in a crowded theater... Why? Because people will be trampled to death. And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?

 

This is a particularly obtuse remark even by the standards of contemporary American jurists. As I've said before, the fire-in-a-crowded-theatre shtick is the first refuge of the brain-dead. But it's worth noting the repellent modification Justice Breyer makes to Holmes' argument: If someone shouts fire in a gaslit Broadway theatre of 1893, people will panic. By definition, panic is an involuntary reaction. If someone threatens to burn a Koran, belligerent Muslims do not panic - they bully, they intimidate, they threaten, they burn and they kill. Those are conscious acts, at least if you take the view that Muslims are as fully human as the rest of us and therefore responsible for their choices. As my colleague Jonah Goldberg points out, Justice Breyer's remarks seem to assume that Muslims are not fully human.

 

More importantly, the logic of Breyer's halfwit intervention is to incentivize violence, and undermine law itself. What he seems to be telling the world is that Americans' constitutional rights will bend to intimidation. If Koran-burning rates a First Amendment exemption because Muslims are willing to kill over it, maybe Catholics should threaten to kill over the next gay-Jesus play, and Broadway could have its First Amendment rights reined in. Maybe the next time Janeane Garafolo goes on MSNBC and calls Obama's opponents racists, the Tea Partiers should rampage around town and NBC's free-speech rights would be withdrawn.

 

Meanwhile, in smaller ways, Islamic intimidation continues. One reason why I am skeptical that the Internet will prove the great beacon of liberty on our darkening planet is because most of the anonymous entities that make it happen are run by people marinated in jelly-spined political correctness. In Canada, an ISP called Bluehost knocked Marginalized Action Dinosaur off the air in response to a complaint by Asad Raza, a laughably litigious doctor in Brampton, Ontario. Had his name been Gordy McHoser, I doubt even the nancy boys at Bluehost would have given him the time of day. A similar fate briefly befell our old pal the Binksmeister at FreeMarkSteyn.com: In other words, a website set up to protest Islamic legal jihad was shut down by the same phenomenon. In America, The New York Times has already proposed giving "some government commission" control over Google’s search algorithm; the City of Philadelphia, where the Declaration of Independence was adopted and the Constitution signed, is now so removed from the spirit of the First Amendment that it's demanding bloggers pay a $300 "privilege" license for expressing their opinions online. The statists grow ever more comfortable in discussing openly the government management of your computer. But, even if they don't formally take it over, look at the people who run publishing houses, movie studios, schools and universities, and ask yourself whether you really want to bet the future on the commitment to free speech of those who run ISPs. SteynOnline, for example, is already banned by the Internet gatekeepers from the computers at both Marriott Hotels and Toronto Airport.

 

But forget about notorious rightwing hatemongers like me. Look at how liberal progressives protect their own. Do you remember a lady called Molly Norris? She's the dopey Seattle cartoonist who cooked up "Everybody Draws Mohammed" Day, and then, when she realized what she'd stumbled into, tried to back out of it. I regard Miss Norris as (to rewrite Stalin) a useless idiot, and she wrote to Mark's Mailbox to object. I stand by what I wrote then, especially the bit about her crappy peace-sign T-shirt. Now The Seattle Weekly informs us:

 

You may have noticed that Molly Norris' comic is not in the paper this week. That's because there is no more Molly.

 

On the advice of the FBI, she's been forced to go into hiding. If you want to measure the decline in western civilization's sense of self-preservation, go back to Valentine's Day 1989, get out the Fleet Street reports on the Salman Rushdie fatwa, and read the outrage of his fellow London literati at what was being done to one of the mainstays of the Hampstead dinner-party circuit. Then compare it with the feeble passivity of Molly Norris' own colleagues at an American cartoonist being forced to abandon her life: "There is no more Molly"? That's all the gutless pussies of The Seattle Weekly can say? As James Taranto notes in The Wall Street Journal, even much sought-after Ramadan-banquet constitutional scholar Barack Obama is remarkably silent:

 

Now Molly Norris, an American citizen, is forced into hiding because she exercised her right to free speech. Will President Obama say a word on her behalf? Does he believe in the First Amendment for anyone other than Muslims?

 

Who knows? Given his highly selective enthusiasms, you can hardly blame a third of Americans for figuring their president must be Muslim. In a way, that's the least pathetic explanation: The alternative is that he's just a craven squish. Which is odd considering he is, supposedly, the most powerful man in the world.

 

Listen to what President Obama, Justice Breyer, General Petraeus, The Seattle Weekly and Bluehost internet services are telling us about where we're headed. As I said in America Alone, multiculturalism seems to operate to the same even-handedness as the old Cold War joke in which the American tells the Soviet guy that "in my country everyone is free to criticize the President", and the Soviet guy replies, "Same here. In my country everyone is free to criticize your President." Under one-way multiculturalism, the Muslim world is free to revere Islam and belittle the west's inheritance, and, likewise, the western world is free to revere Islam and belittle the west’s inheritance. If one has to choose, on balance Islam’s loathing of other cultures seems psychologically less damaging than western liberals' loathing of their own.

 

It is a basic rule of life that if you reward bad behavior, you get more of it. Every time Muslims either commit violence or threaten it, we reward them by capitulating. Indeed, President Obama, Justice Breyer, General Petraeus, and all the rest are now telling Islam, you don’t have to kill anyone, you don’t even have to threaten to kill anyone. We’ll be your enforcers. We’ll demand that the most footling and insignificant of our own citizens submit to the universal jurisdiction of Islam. So Obama and Breyer are now the “good cop” to the crazies’ "bad cop". Ooh, no, you can’t say anything about Islam, because my friend here gets a little excitable, and you really don’t want to get him worked up. The same people who tell us "Islam is a religion of peace" then turn around and tell us you have to be quiet, you have to shut up because otherwise these guys will go bananas and kill a bunch of people.

 

While I was in Denmark, one of the usual Islamobozos lit up prematurely in a Copenhagen hotel. Not mine, I'm happy to say. He wound up burning only himself, but his targets were my comrades at the newspaper Jyllands-Posten. I wouldn't want to upset Justice Breyer by yelling "Fire!" over a smoldering jihadist, but one day even these idiots will get lucky. I didn't like the Danish Security Police presence at the Copenhagen conference, and I preferred being footloose and fancy-free when I was prowling the more menacing parts of Rosengard across the water in Malmö the following evening. No one should lose his name, his home, his life, his liberty because ideological thugs are too insecure to take a joke. But Molly Norris is merely the latest squishy liberal to learn that, when the chips are down, your fellow lefties won't be there for you.

[redrumjuice]

Also, no religion, religious institution, property, business, or other endeavor owned by a religious based organization should be tax exempt on any level.

 

How about just being outright funded and built with tax payer dollars?

 

The Ground Zero mosque developers, who still owe more than $200,000 in back taxes, have jumped the funding shark. Evidently, those Saudi millions have failed to come through as planned and the mosque developers have applied for a federal grant to get their “cultural bridge” out of the water.

 

The mosque developers, having at last report only about $20,000 in their bank account, have applied for — stop the presses — five million taxpayer dollars. The grant money, if approved, will come from a special fund set aside for rebuilding the area around the Islamist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

 

The application was submitted under a “community and cultural enhancement” grant program administered by the Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Corporation (LMDC), which oversaw the $20 billion in federal aid allocated in the wake of 9/11 and is currently doling out millions in remaining taxpayer funds for community development.

 

It's the politically correct thing to do.

[polksalet]

How about just being outright funded and built with tax payer dollars?

 

 

 

It's the politically correct thing to do.

 

There is a special place in Hell for racists like you.

[Yukon Cornelius]

There is a special place in Hell for racists like you.

yah we will lock him in the closet with moneymakers

[detlef]

There is a special place in Hell for racists like you.

Well, at very least, a "special" short bus to take him there.

[Ursa Majoris]

So, apparently Jones finally satisfied his need to burn a Qu'ran.

 

And eight people paid with their lives.

[Savage Beatings]

So, apparently Jones finally satisfied his need to burn a Qu'ran.

 

And eight people paid with their lives.

 

He's a tool, of that there is no doubt. But these Muslims are much worse IMO. They see absolutely no value in human life. These U.N. representatives had nothing whatsoever to do with Pastor Jackhole's act of blasphemy. They don't give a rip. They want blood, and they really don't care who's it is.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Savage Beatings