Saturday, August 14, 2010

He Is Right but It Is Wrong

President Obama's comments on the Mohammedan complex near Ground Zero is unfortunately right on the money. . We do allow freedom of religion and expression in this country and thankfully so. But Damn! I would imagine that Obama wishes he never would have gotten caught up in this controversy. Now having the legal right to build does not mean that this monstrosity should be constructed in the vicinity. It is certainly a slap in the face to those who died on this day, not to mention  the brave men and women who have paid a price in the conflict since. It is being done as an "in your face" type of thing. It is despicable  and disgusting! It is amoral if not downright immoral and it sickens me! I have been to the memorial service of a young man that was killed in Iraq and this dishonors him and all others who have died in service to our nation. If I lived in another nation I am sure I would be scratching my head wondering "What is up with those Americans allowing something like this?" I don't live in another country, and thank goodness for that, but I am sure this is hard to understand for foreign nationals. How could it not be? Would Syria allow a shrine to the Crusader States being built in their backyard? I doubt it.
Here is a thought. In most cities there are ordinances that prohibit certain types of business to be built in the vicinity of schools and churches. Nuisance business such as porno shops, head shops, topless clubs, rub down joints, etc. etc. are prohibited within a certain distance of aforementioned sites. Is this Mohammedan center not a nuisance? It could certainly be argued so. I am sure that would not fly but what the hell - I'm just typing here.
There are also some very legitimate questions that need to be answered concerning this facility. Where is the funding coming from? The American people have a right to know. More importantly - Who is going to provide security and who will pay for it? Will the NYPD be required to have a platoon of officers on scene 24/7? If so, will the city be reimbursed or will the taxpayers foot the bill? Will the Mohammedans provide private security? If so, will they be qualified to protect a high risk facility? These are legitimate questions that need to be answered for the safety of the community. Unfortunately the reasons are obvious.


Ema Nymton said...


Can tell by this posting, you have been listening to the 'ficts' from 'Fox "News" Network again. It is simple, you are either for the Constitution or your not.

By your blog profile, you live in Texas. You object to people living in New York City who exercise their rights in a legal manner. (FYI - The proposed building in NYC meets _all_ local zoning requirements.)

It is simple, you are either for the Constitution or your not. So should people living in San Francisco be allowed to object to 'christian' churches being built in Oklahoma City? (Wasn't Timothy McVeigh a 'christian' when he used his terrorist tactic to blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995?) Should Catholic Churches be allowed to be built near schools (wink wink pedophile priests ya know.)?

Let us hope you do a better job of driving your taxi than you do of "just typing here." ;)

Ema Nymton
Remember the "Burn The Confederate Flag Day" 12 Sep 10.

Bartender Cabbie said...

I am for the Constitution and if you read closely I believe I noted that there is a legal right to build. What I am questioning is the wisdom and sensitivity of doing so. Comparing the Muslim facility to nuisance business was written for the most part "tongue in cheek," although I do believe it to be quite disrepectful to those that died on that day. Downright disrepctful.

Anonymous said...

Ema you are a good little dhimmi