Welcome to the Unhypnotize Truth Community!
A great place to discuss conspiracies, UFOs, NWO, truth, reality and enlightenment.

• » Conspiracies Discussions
• » UFOs and Extraterrestrial
• » Spiritual and Paranormal
• » World and Alternative News

Its time to wake up to the global conspiracy...and move beyond...
Our community is here to spread truth, discuss the Global Conspiracy and the world wide Truth Movement!

YES! I want to register for free right now!
Page 1 of 2 12 Last
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: The Ground Zero Mosque

  1. #1

    The Ground Zero Mosque

    Final nail in the political coffin of a one-term President

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Tuesday, August 17, 2010

    With President Barack Obama’s political dynasty already on life support, his decision to publicly back the hugely unpopular building of a Muslim mosque near Ground Zero confirms that Obama, or rather the advisors that pull his strings, have decided to commit political suicide and cut him loose from the Washington power structure, with the hope of fooling Americans with another establishment Republican as a legitimate alternative in 2012.

    This issue isn’t about whether you believe the official story that 19 Muslims carried out 9/11, nor is it really about whether or not a mosque should be built near Ground Zero.

    Constitutionally speaking of course, the government has no business whatsoever interfering in religion or private property rights under the First Amendment, which states, “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.”

    However, the important facet of this issue is not really about the rights and wrongs of the mosque, it’s about Obama politically choosing to lend support to something that he knows full well is vitriolically opposed by the vast majority of Americans.

    Obama decided to throw has hat in the ring with a mere 20 per cent of Americans who support building the mosque, which is just a stone’s throw away from where the twin towers once stood. A CNN poll found 68 per cent of Americans oppose the idea. Whoever advised him to make this call, or whether Obama chose to do so himself, they had to be aware that coming down on the wrong side of such a hugely sensitive issue was an act of political hara-kiri.

    Even Harry Reid, one of the most liberal representatives in the Senate, broke ranks with Obama in stating it was, “very obvious that the mosque should be built someplace else”.

    The consequences of the decision, irrespective of any amount of backtracking, are clear, as Politico’s Roger Simon points out today, Obama will be a one-term President – if he even lasts that long.

    Obama’s public support for the building of the mosque will only serve to embolden the significant and furious hardcore of Americans who believe that Obama is a secret Muslim on a mission to purge America of its Christian foundation. In reality, Obama is a servant of the elite and a Wall Street yes man, who now that his manufactured “change” corporate marketing brand has been popped, serves no purpose whatsoever to his globalist masters, who have obviously made the decision to sacrifice him politically in the hope that their wider agenda can be rescued.

    Obama has to be extricated from the big government globalist agenda because he has become its poster child. Obama’s approval ratings have sunk to record lows in record time, and the jig is up. If the Democrats cannot separate themselves from the widely rejected Brand Obama, then they could be out of power for decades. Of course, in the wider scheme of things, the globalists will just offer up another establishment Republican as the solution to the devastation the Obama administration has wrought, which is exactly why Barry Soetoro is now being discredited and politically destroyed.

    The only remaining salvation for Obama’s political career and his hopes of still being in the White House come January 2013 hinge on whether Israel will launch an attack on Iran, which many are now saying is imminent and could even happen within the next eight days.

    Should Obama lend full American support to such an offensive, he will likely placate many of those on the right who are so upset about the building of the mosque. A war with Iran will wipe the mosque controversy off the front pages in an instant, and it may also give Obama the political capital to rebuild Americans’ faith in his leadership. Of course, the fact that it could also set off world war three is not seen as a major concern for the globalists.

    However, absent such a mitigating factor, it is obvious that in expressing support for the highly unpopular mosque, Obama is knowingly falling on his sword, and may even be preparing to resign before the 2012 election as Roger Simon alludes to in his article.

    The most obvious outcome however still remains that Obama will be so hated and discredited by 2012 that the Republicans could run almost anyone against him in the next election and be guaranteed victory, ensuring that Americans will once again be punished with another elitist water carrier for the new world order agenda, unless a political revolution occurs and they rally behind a genuine Constitutionalist like Congressman Ron Paul.

    Paul Joseph Watson is the author of Order Out of Chaos and is the writer and editor of Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com.


  2. #2

    Pelosi Wants Ground Zero Mosque Opponents Investigated

    Arrogant and deluded Speaker of the House still can’t accept the fact that there is genuine and overwhelming grass roots opposition to the Obama administration

    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Wednesday, August 18, 2010

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has called for opponents of the proposed Ground Zero mosque to be investigated in order to establish who is funding their activities, in a throwback to how Pelosi also claimed that the Tea Party was a phony “astroturf” movement being orchestrated by the Republican hierarchy.

    “There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded,” Pelosi told San Francisco’s KCBS radio.

    “How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City,” she added.

    No matter where you stand on the proposed mosque, which is set to be built within a community center a couple of blocks from where the twin towers once stood, Pelosi’s implication that opposition to its construction is being bankrolled by the Republican party is simply not true.

    A Rasmussen poll conducted nearly a month ago, before the mosque story had received widespread media coverage, found that a mere 20 per cent of Americans supported the construction of the mosque. People were not swayed to oppose the mosque because of an engineered PR campaign to ‘gin up’ the controversy as Pelosi claims, they were opposed to it from the very start.

    Pelosi’s comments bear resemblance to similar rhetoric that we heard earlier this year, when she claimed the Tea Party movement was not grass roots because it was being orchestrated by the Republican establishment.

    “The Republican Party directs a lot of what the Tea Party does, but not everybody in the Tea Party takes direction from the Republican Party. And so there was a lot of, shall we say, Astroturf, as opposed to grassroots,” she stated at the time.

    Pelosi is so arrogant and out of touch with the American people that she truly believes that any significant opposition to Barack Obama, who on Friday committed political suicide by publicly backing the mosque, and his policies is not the genuine backlash of millions of Americans sick to the back teeth with big government and must be artificially engineered.

    When she is heckled and booed, as routinely happens when she makes any kind of public appearance, Pelosi resorts to blaming “insurance companies” and other mythical creatures of her imagination.

    In reality, Obama’s poll numbers continue to plunge to record lows as more Americans reject his policies and Pelosi’s own approval rating according to a CBS poll stands at a pathetic 11 per cent, making her even more unpopular than George W. Bush ever was.

    This is a woman who, along with Harry Reid who has even worse approval ratings, has come to represent the Obama administration’s big government policies. She is despised by the vast majority of Americans and yet has the temerity to pretend that this resentment and opposition is an artificial construct of the Republican party.

    Pelosi, who is fond of public displays of smiling and cackling as she sinks a dagger into the heart of America with the passage of Obamacare, is living in a self-perpetuated fantasy world where the vast majority of Americans vehemently support her activities, when in reality she is reviled and detested by around 90 per cent of the entire country.

    Listen to the audio via the clip below.

    Paul Joseph Watson is the author of Order Out of Chaos and is the writer and editor of Alex Jones’ Prison Planet.com.


  3. #3

    9/11 Heroes Blast Obama: Forget The Mosque, We’re Dying

    Responders find Obama’s choice to address hyped controversy “disturbing” in face of abject silence over toxic dust health epidemic

    Steve Watson
    Wednesday, Aug 18th, 2010

    Hero 9/11 first responders, many of whom are sick and dying, have slammed Obama in an open letter for ignoring their plight while taking the time to outline views on a proposed mosque close to ground zero, the site of the 2001 attacks that felled the twin towers.

    The letter, written by Jon Feal, head of the Fealgood Foundation, one of the largest and most vocal 9/11 responders’ groups, asks “Why have you failed us?”

    “…your campaign said you supported the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which would provide us with the health care we earned through our service to this country. Since that time, though, you’ve said absolutely nothing about the heroes of 9/11. We thought you would be our champion, because the last administration failed us.” Feal’s letter continues.

    Feal has worked tirelessly with other 9/11 responders to lobby lawmakers to introduce meaningful legislation to compensate and help care for rescue workers who are still suffering from respiratory problems and serious illnesses caused by toxic dust they were told by the EPA was safe to breathe during the cleanup effort.

    He outlines how Obama has had to “be dragged kicking and screaming into providing help for 9/11 responders”, yet has still not fulfilled the campaign promises he made to help the heroes.

    “…it is disturbing that you have the time and energy to speak in favor of the mosque, but not on the health crisis caused by the attacks.” the letter to Obama further states, also making clear that media driven controversy over the mosque is simply not an issue for the Fealgood Foundation.

    “It is our understanding that you have never personally addressed the issue of 9/11 responders and survivors on your own, and that the only time you have even mentioned the issue was when you were confronted about it.” Feal adds.

    “After nine years of speeches and tributes but no action, we’ve heard enough. And sir if you choose not to come to New York on the 9th anniversary, then I implore you to make a public statement saying you support 9/11 responders.” The letter concludes.

    As The New York Daily News reports, the responders’ grievances with the president have been supported by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan, Queens), who has worked closely with them on promoting the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which fell short of a two-thirds vote in the House last month owing to Republican opposition.

    “While I welcome President Obama’s comments on religious freedom, I can understand why John Feal and his fellow 9/11 responders would want to hear that the President supports their cause, too,” Maloney said.

    As we noted yesterday in our feature article, Obama’s choice to address the issue of the proposed mosque, and voice support for the plan, equates to political suicide.

    The important facet of this issue is not really about the rights and wrongs of the mosque, it’s about Obama politically choosing to lend support to something that he knows full well is vitriolically opposed by the vast majority of Americans.

    Open Letter to President Obama from John Feal

    Dear Mr. President:

    Why have you failed us?

    Two years ago, when you were asking for our votes for president, your campaign said you supported the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which would provide us with the health care we earned through our service to this country. Since that time, though, you’ve said absolutely nothing about the heroes of 9/11. We thought you would be our champion, because the last administration failed us. Thousands of brave men & woman need your voice & support.

    While supporting or opposing the mosque near ground zero is not an issue for us, it is disturbing that you have the time and energy to speak in favor of the mosque, but not on the health crisis caused by the attacks. It is our understanding that you have never personally addressed the issue of 9/11 responders and survivors on your own, and that the only time you have even mentioned the issue was when you were confronted about it.

    We’re sure your advisers will say that you put $150 million in the budget this year for 9/11 health programs, and that shows your support for our cause – but we both know that 1) this is not even close to what you committed to support during the campaign, and 2) your administration has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into providing help for 9/11 responders – in fact, you only pledged the $150 million when you were pressed on the issue.

    9/11 responders and survivors with lifelong illnesses need guaranteed health care, not a single year’s funding. Your budget also will do nothing for the men and women who can’t work because of their illnesses, and struggle to pay their mortgages and feed their families.

    We are sure you are planning to come to New York on September 11th to honor those who died, as well you should, but it would be an insult to us if you were to come to New York and not say anything about the bill to help sick and dying 9/11 responders. After nine years of speeches and tributes but no action, we’ve heard enough. And sir if you choose not to come to New York on the 9th anniversary, then I implore you to make a public statement saying you support 9/11 responders, those effected by 9/11 and it’s aftermath and our bill HR.847 & S.1334. God bless you Mr. President, God bless America & God bless the tens of thousands of men & woman who need your support.

    “Any nation that does not honor its heroes will not long endure”
    – Abraham Lincoln

    Steve Watson is the London based writer and webmaster at Alex Jones’ Infowars.net, and regular contributor to Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.


  4. #4

    Ground Zero Mosque Group Says It Has No Plan to Move Site or Meet With N.Y. Governor

    Patrick Goodenough
    CNS News
    Wednesday, August 18, 2010

    (CNSNews.com) – The organization planning to build a mosque and Islamic center near Ground Zero denied reports Tuesday about a scheduled meeting to discuss the matter with New York Gov. David Paterson. The group reaffirmed that it has no intention of moving the controversial project.

    Earlier Rep. Peter King (R.-N.Y.), a vocal critic of the plan, said Paterson told him during a phone conversation that he planned to meet with the developers later this week to discuss the possibility of an alternative site.

    The project is the brainchild of Feisel Abdul Rauf, an Islamic cleric who heads the Cordoba Initiative, an organization whose stated goal is to improve Muslim-West relations.

    Formally called Park51 – the address is 45-51 Park Place in lower Manhattan, about 200 yards from the World Trade Center site – the project widely dubbed the “Ground Zero Mosque” has become a major national political issue.

    Full story here.


  5. #5

    The True Meaning of the Ground Zero Mosque Controversy

    George Washington’s Blog
    Wednesday, August 18, 2010

    The Founding Fathers believed in freedom of religion, and tolerance of all religions.

    As such, anyone who tries to ban Islam as evil is anti-American.

    As Greg Palast argues, if we ban mosques because some Muslims are murderers, we should also ban churches because Timothy McVeigh was a Christian.

    Indeed, we should also ban synagogues because some Jews commit terrorism (see second bulleted paragraph).

    Of course, anyone who sees their religion as the “good guys” and the other guy’s religion as “evil” is living in a cartoon.

    As Christian writer and psychiatrist M. Scott Peck explained, there are different stages of spiritual maturity. Fundamentalism – whether it be Muslim, Christian, Jewish or Hindu fundamentalism – is an immature stage of development. Indeed, a a Christian fundamentalist who kills others in the name of religion is much more similar to a Muslim fundamentalist who kills other in the name of his religion than to a Christian who peacefully fights for justice and truth, helps the poor, or serves to bring hope to the downtrodden.

    But there is another meaning to the Ground Zero controversy.

    Nice Gesture … Now Can We End the Crusades?

    The war on terror is largely a religious war.

    As I pointed out in January:

    ABC News is reporting that U.S. military weapons are inscribed with secret ‘Jesus’ Bible codes ….
    Conservative Christians were the biggest backers of the Iraq war …

    One of the top Pentagon officials involved in the Iraq war – General William Boykin – literally:

    Sees the “war on terror” as a religious war between Judeo-Christian civilization and Satan, with Islam of course cast in the latter role.
    Jeremy Scahill describes Boykin as:

    A Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence under Bush. Boykin was part of Donald Rumsfeld’s inner circle at the Pentagon where he was placed in charge of hunting “high-value targets.” Boykin was one of the key U.S. officials in establishing what critics alleged was death-squad-type activity in Iraq.
    Boykin’s crusade is also important because one of his assigned jobs was:

    Speeding up the flow of intelligence on terrorist leaders to combat teams in the field so that they can attack top-ranking terrorist leaders. It can easily be speculated that it is this urgency to obtain intelligence, and an uncompromising religious outlook backed by a [crusader] mentality, that has led to the lower echelons in the US military to adopt Saddam Hussein-like brutalities.
    Moreover, the U.S. military has just been busted trying to convert Afghanis to Christianity (the same thing happened in Iraq).

    As Scahill notes:

    What’s more, the center of this evangelical operation is at the huge US base at Bagram, one of the main sites used by the US military to torture and indefinitely detain prisoners.
    The bottom line is that – while torture was ordered by the highest level Bush administration officials in order to create a false link between 9/11 and Iraq – it seems like many of those who enthusiastically rallied around torture looked at it, literally, as a religious crusade.
    As I wrote on May 25th:

    According to French President Chirac, Bush told him that the Iraq war was needed to bring on the apocalypse:

    In Genesis and Ezekiel Gog and Magog are forces of the Apocalypse who are prophesied to come out of the north and destroy Israel unless stopped. The Book of Revelation took up the Old Testament prophesy:

    “And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”
    Bush believed the time had now come for that battle, telling Chirac:

    “This confrontation is willed by God, who wants to use this conflict to erase his people’s enemies before a New Age begins”…
    There can be little doubt now that President Bush’s reason for launching the war in Iraq was, for him, fundamentally religious. He was driven by his belief that the attack on Saddam’s Iraq was the fulfilment of a Biblical prophesy in which he had been chosen to serve as the instrument of the Lord.
    And British Prime Minister Tony Blair long-time mentor, advisor and confidante said:

    “Tony’s Christian faith is part of him, down to his cotton socks. He believed strongly at the time, that intervention in Kosovo, Sierra Leone – Iraq too – was all part of the Christian battle; good should triumph over evil, making lives better.”

    Mr Burton, who was often described as Mr Blair’s mentor, says that his religion gave him a “total belief in what’s right and what’s wrong”, leading him to see the so-called War on Terror as “a moral cause”…

    Anti-war campaigners criticised remarks Mr Blair made in 2006, suggesting that the decision to go to war in Iraq would ultimately be judged by God.
    Given that the Iraq war really was a crusade, the fact that the Pentagon is now saying that it may have to leave troops in Iraq for another decade shows that the crusade is still ongoing under Obama.
    Indeed, churchgoers are more likely to back torture of suspected terrorists than atheists (and see this), and torture is apparently still continuing under the Obama administration.

    So if Obama wants to create better relations with the Islamic world, he might want to start by ending the Crusades.

    And if Americans want to practice a little Christian charity, how about providing medical care to the heroes who pulled survivors out of the rubble on 9/11, and are now dying due to our neglect?


  6. #6

    Obama: ‘No regrets’ about NY mosque defense

    Wednesday, August 18, 2010

    COLUMBUS, Ohio — US President Barack Obama said Wednesday he had “no regrets” about defending the right of Muslims to build a mosque near the New York site of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

    “The answer is: No regrets,” the president told NBC television on the sidelines of a visit to a middle-class family aimed at highlighting his efforts to revive the sputtering US economy ahead of November congressional elections.

    Obama upset some of his Democratic allies late last week by joining a bitter national debate over the plans, affirming the right to build on religious freedom grounds but without endorsing what he called the “wisdom” of doing so.

    His remarks drew immediate fire from his Republican foes, including possible contenders for the White House in 2012, who have denounced the project as offending the memory of those killed in the attacks.

    Full story here.


  7. #7

    Obama mosque stance hurting, Gallup finds, as Americans disapprove of it and him

    LA Times
    Aug 19, 2010

    President Obama busily continued his five-state cross-country political money collection tour today.

    But he took time out to declare that he has “no regrets” about his firm statement of support for a new mosque and social center near the site in New York City of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

    Shortly after, Gallup released a new overnight poll showing, however, that many Americans have regrets that their president made that statement.

    The new survey found that among the 57% of Americans with an opinion, 37% of Americans disapprove of the Democrat’s mosque comments. Twenty percent support them. Another 41% said they don’t yet know enough to have an opinion.

    Two-thirds of Americans told Gallup they are paying a great deal or fair amount of attention to the mosque issue, which Gallup suggests is playing a role in Obama’s overall approval this week falling to 41%, the lowest level of his 19-month presidency.

    Full article here


  8. #8

    Barack Obama is Muslim, according to nearly one in five Americans surveyed

    Mark Tran
    London Telegraph
    Aug 19, 2010

    Almost one in five Americans believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim, according to a new poll, despite his public statements about his Christian faith.

    The survey by the Pew Research Centre found that 18% now say that the US president is a Muslim, up from 11% in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34%) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48% in 2009. Forty three percent say they do not know Obama’s religion.

    The survey was completed in early August, before Obama’s recent comments about the proposed construction of a mosque near the site of the former World Trade Centre, which have landed him in political hot water. The president has said he believes Muslims have the right to build an Islamic centre there, but refrained from taking a position on whether or not it should actually be built two blocks from Ground Zero. The issue has become politically charged ahead of congressional races in mid-November, with Republicans accusing Obama of being out touch with mainstream America.

    Full article here


  9. #9

    The Ground Zero Mosque and Property Rights

    Kurt Nimmo
    Prison Planet.com
    Friday, August 20, 2010

    If the “debate” staged by the corporate media over the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” demonstrates anything, it is once again how gullible and easily influenced the American people are, at least according to polls.

    On August 19, Time Magazine released a poll showing 61% of respondents oppose the construction of the mosque, compared with 26% who support it. “More than 70% concur with the premise that proceeding with the plan would be an insult to the victims of the attacks on the World Trade Center,” writes Time.

    Both “right” and “left” ignore the central issue of the so-called Ground Zero Mosque — property rights. Bill O’Reilly and Clinton era throwback Dick Morris demand Muslims be stripped of their right to own property in America.

    An insult to the victims, even though there is no definitive evidence Muslims are responsible for that catastrophic event.

    Time Magazine, of course, is a mantlepiece of the CIA’s Mockingbird corporate media, so any poll it generates should be highly suspect. In fact, we have absolutely no gauge as to what the American people think about the mosque. Considering the non-stop anti-Muslim propaganda propagated by the corporate media, it is entirely possible most Americans believe the mosque is an insult to the victims.

    As expected, establishment politicos have lined up in opposition to the mosque. Naturally, the neocon Newt Gingrich compared it to Nazis trying to put up a sign near Washington’s holocaust museum and Sarah Palin, the darling of the establishment refashioned Tea Party movement, said it is an unnecessary provocation that “stabs hearts.”

    Palin tells us she supports the Constitution, but obviously she has a dim understanding of the founding document. As Rick Lynch notes, in a political context, virtually nothing was as important to the Framers as property rights. For the founders, the rights of property were inviolable and they considered the Constitution itself as the embodiment of property rights. Concerns of freedom cannot be separated from concerns for property.

    Palin should know that property rights were so important to the Framers that all but 4 of the 55 men at the Constitutional Convention placed the protection of property behind only liberty itself. As Lynch notes, of the four who disagreed on this point, three differed not because they valued property rights less than their fellows but because they actually “put [their] protection ahead of liberty as the main object of society,” as Forrest McDonald explains.

    But nowadays, even the Supreme Court has a vague understanding of property rights and the Constitution. In 2005, during the “conservative” (actually neocon) Bush era, the Supreme Court ruled under the Kelo decision that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development. The founders would have been appalled by the very concept of “eminent domain,” the idea that government can deny the right of the individual to hold property.

    Sharif El-Gamal, a real estate developer, owns the buildings that will be transformed into a 15-story mosque on Manhattan. In order that the feelings of the 9/11 victims families will not be hurt — and also buttress the cornerstone premise of the manufactured global war on terror — El-Gamal’s property rights may be violated.

    It is not merely Newt and Sarah who are behind this selective application of property rights. New York governor David Paterson and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid oppose the mosque, as does Howard Dean, who has labeled it “a real affront to people who lost their lives.”

    The real affront is to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If government can tell Muslims they have no right to property, they can tell all of us.

    Is it possible nearly two-thirds of Americans are opposed to the very idea of property rights? If we are to believe the corporate media, they are.

    From the Patriot Act to naked body scanners in airports around the nation, we have already lost far too many of our precious freedoms. It stands to reason we will lose our property as well.


  10. #10

    ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ inflating Islamophobia

    Jerry Mazza
    Online Journal
    Friday, August 20, 2010

    I have the feeling that like the Broadway Bomber, the underwear bomber, the shoe bomber, the Khalid Sheik Mohammed trial and where it should be held, and other ‘false-flag’ events that building this new Mosque two blocks from Ground Zero is inflating the inherent Islamophobia of New Yorkers and America. And that ain’t good, for New York, Muslims, Americans and America, or the world.

    I see more and more articles on the proposed mosque, the rabid Republicans taking fiery stands and the wimpy Democrats trying to show they’re just as “tough on terror” as their cohorts in Congress. One of the articles I found particularly noxious was the Money behind the Mosque from the unfair and unbalanced reporting of the New York Post and worldwide media mogul and Zionist, Rupert Murdoch, who is of Jewish decent on his mother’s side. She had the money that put her husband in the catbird seat of an Australian newspaper and Rupert followed in dad’s footsteps right to America and New York City.

    The article started off in the typical pattern of understanding, yes, we Americans do have a constitutional right to pursue our religious beliefs as we wish. As the Post stated, “Yesterday’s unanimous vote by the city Landmarks Preservation Commission cleared the last municipal impediment to construction of a 13-story mosque and community center just blocks from Ground Zero.” By the way, this building was a tattered, former coat factory, an eyesore to the neighborhood.

    Now comes the Post canoodling. “But important questions linger. The vote, which denied landmark protection for a building that must be demolished to make way for the mosque was hailed by Mayor Bloomberg and others as an affirmation of religious liberty of a peculiarly American sort. As, of course, it was.”

    The “affirmation of religious liberty of a peculiarly American sort,” was a reference I suppose to our constitutional right to have these religious freedoms. “As, of course, it was.” And, of course, it is. Of course, here, here for religious freedom!

    Having A Supply Of Healthy Foods That Last Just Makes Sense (AD)

    But on the other hand, the Post goes on to say, “Just imagine the city fathers of, say, Riyadh so graciously clearing the way for construction of a 13-story cathedral in the Saudi capital. As if.”

    “As if” is irrelevant, in that Riyadh’s culture has its own very different laws and rules, which may seem harsh to Westerners. But then there is a supposedly civilized America involved in three brutal wars in Muslim countries, with Iraq decimated, and 50,000 troops still on board; Afghanistan under continuing fire, after 30 years of fighting wars, 10 of them against Russia, with a CIA sponsored Mujahedeen, recruited, trained, armed and paid for to do the US’s dirty work in toppling Russia; and now with random drone bombings proceeding in Pakistan, saber rattling against purported Taliban and “Al Qaeda” members, and real peace nowhere in sight in any locale. So why would we be surprised that a cathedral would not be welcomed in Riyadh? And for what reason, to further colonize the Middle East and the Central and Western Caucasus? As you can see, we’re working on a US-centric logic train. And the train is pulling out of the station now.

    The Post says, “Indeed, such a notion renders risible [laughable] criticism of the sort leveled by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, among others, before the vote. CAIR had denounced opponents of the projects as ‘bigots and extremists.’”

    Toot, toot! Since the project has received such aggressive feedback, such as a Ground Zero construction worker trying to organize his fellow workers not to work on what will be the $100 million construction of this new building, which will house a mosque as well as a cafeteria, a swimming pool, and other facilities open to the public at large, as would a YMCA or YHMA, this would seem to be quite an overreaction. Not to mention some of the more vicious comments to follow, which certainly sound like they comes from “bigots and extremists.” So let’s move our logic train along to the ad hominem attack.

    “That’s pretty rich, coming from an organization [CAIR] that in 2007 was named an unindicted co-conspirator in connection with a plot to support the terrorists of Hamas — and that has seen several of its former officials and staffers convicted on terror-related charges.”

    The plot, as mentioned, was an “unindicted co-conspirator” of what? A plot to support the terrorists of Hamas, which is the duly elected government of Palestine, which has been defending Gaza against the incursions and attacks of Israel, which in the larger historical picture has been engulfing and devouring Palestine for over 60 years, starting before the two-state solution went into effect in 1948, in Israel’s self-proclaimed “War of Independence,” which was a massive attack on Palestine that involved one of the largest forced migrations in modern history.

    Around a million people were expelled from their homes at gunpoint, civilians were massacred, and hundreds of Palestinian villages destroyed. Denied for almost six decades, had it happened today it could only have been called “Ethnic cleansing.” And that is exactly what it was, as painfully detailed in Jewish historian Ilan Pappe’s landmark book, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine.

    Toot, toot! Something is rotten in Palestine, which is today the largest outdoor concentration camp, and a miniscule part of Israel, which has claimed the lion’s share of Palestine’s land. But let us return now to our logic train, now that we have established another point of historical view for the observation of passing current events.

    The Post writes, “Fact is, the project has drawn opposition from a lot of level-headed folks — most particularly families of 9/11 victims.”

    In all due respect for my Jewish friends who lost relatives, as for those Muslims families that lost family members, and others, these 9/11 victim families, these people remain in the anguish of grief, depression, anger, and a whole range of emotions that adjoin the sudden, violent loss of loved ones. Even my dear friend, Bob Mcilvaine, who lost a son in 9/11, can hardly get through a few paragraphs of describing the incident without choking up, having tears coming to his eyes, and flat curse out the “sons of bitches” responsible for 9/11, whom he doesn’t happen to think were Muslims. Bob has devoted his life to going around the world and crusading for 9/11 Truth, that is, what really happened that day and who was behind it. He is a noble man, who will tell you up front, he can’t always reign in his emotions. In fact, , speaking with Manny Badillo, who lost his first responder uncle, and carries his grief on his lapel as well. This was taped at a meeting for 9/11 Victim families.

    Let me also add my friend Ellen Mariani, whose husband perished on Flight 175, and who sued the government both for wrongful death and then presented a RICO suit for the entire Bush Administration, both of which were denied because “they might endanger national security,” the blanket statement for truth-covering.

    Appropriate anger remains with Mrs. Mariani since the Victims Compensation Fund considers her not qualified for any kind of compensation because she would not at first accept the “hush money.” Yet, in the denial of two trials, the VCF has not shown any financial award to compensate her, but has tied her and her attorney in legal knots, whose unmitigated violations and fraudulent actions fill a stack of legal briefs, and act as a form of ongoing punishment for her daring to seek justice. God forbid!

    That said, let’s get back on the New York Post logic train again, which once more exhorts the rights of Muslim Americans, but then makes a strange leap . . .

    “Let’s be clear: Muslim Americans have a right to worship where they please. And that includes a site in the shadow of Ground Zero, if they so insist. Clearly, though, this is a complicated issue. The 9/11 mass murder, after all, was committed in the name of Islam.”

    Oh really. That is what I know the government tells us and the 9/11 Commission of Omission, but not what millions of others in the US and around the world believe. As to the facts for instance, WTC Lessee Larry Silverstein and his partners raised the insurance benefit on the WTC on July 24, 2001, just six weeks before 9/11 to $3.6 billion. That was higher than the $3.2 billion paid for the 99-year lease, payable at $100 million per year.

    Silverstein and Partners also managed to include insurance liability if airliners hijacked by terrorists hit the buildings. How incredibly prescient of them was that? Also, when exactly that happened and the two towers were hit within seven minutes, they demanded to be paid for two separate incidents, $7.2 billion dollars.

    The insurance companies refused. And a suit lingered for years, until then New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in 2007 brokered a deal for receipt of $4.56 billion. As to Mr. Silverstein’s 47-story building, Tower 7, which no airliner hit, he received some $500 million for it. It fell at 5:20 PM on 9/11, after Silverstein said on TV at 3 PM that “there had been so much pain and suffering, that ‘we’ decided to ‘pull it,’” which is jargon for an internal demolition, which cannot be set up in less than two hours, but would take weeks, months, to set up so that the steel-framed building came down in 6.5 seconds into its own footprint, not unlike Towers 1 and 2 did, falling within 10 to 12 seconds at the speed of gravity in freefall into their own footprints, indicating similar, pre-planned internal demolitions.

    Some 1200 architects and engineers support this notion, members of Architects and Engineers for ae911truth, headed up by architect Richard Gage.

    To continue, on the more dubious NY Post logic train, we arrive at this comment, “Moreover, as Dan Senor of the Council on Foreign Relations wrote in The Wall Street Journal, whatever the project’s stated goals, ‘in the minds of many who are swayed by the most radical interpretations of Islam . . . it will be celebrated as a Muslim monument erected on the site of a great Muslim ‘military’ victory.” And “ . . . that’s why the question of who precisely will pay to build the $100 million project is so compelling.

    So now, a CFR member tells us, the most radical interpreters of radical Islam will celebrate this Ground Zero Mosque as a Muslim monument erected on the site of a great Muslim ‘military victory,” which in and of itself is an enormous breach of unresolved fact and an even larger insult to the Muslim community at large, inflaming its uninformed opposition with further misguided rage.

    Also, its implication is that dark forces are bankrolling the $100 million project. Yet is it equaling compelling as the multi-billions in US aid to Israel’s war machine, which include 300 to 400 nuclear warheads at its nuclear reactor in Dimona in the Negev desert, originally constructed with the help of the French is 1956. What’s more, hundreds of millions of dollars from private Jewish organizations are donated to Israel every year. Yet, no one dares impugn the motives or individuals who donate this money, or even the US, the biggest of bankers, for fear of being called “an anti-Semite.” Yet, the New York Post can hop on its strange logic-train and arrive at this conclusion . . .

    “At first, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf insisted the funds would be raised entirely from the Muslim-American community. But then he told an Arabic-language newspaper in Britain that funding would also come from Arab countries. And it should be noted that Rauf’s father was the long-time director of the Islamic Center of New York, which built the mosque on Third Avenue and 96th Street — a project funded primarily by the governments of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim nations. Now, the Saudis openly fund mosques abroad, spreading the radical Wahhabi strain of Islam, as a means of pacifying their own home-grown radicals. So it would be particularly troubling if Rauf’s funding comes from abroad — particularly from Riyadh.”

    So now the Post is demonizing Muslim contributors to the Islamic Center of New York, which built the beautiful mosque on Third Avenue and 96th Street. And now, the Post mentions the “the Saudis openly fund mosques abroad, spreading the radical Wahhabism strain of Islam as a mean of pacifying their own homegrown radicals.”

    Yet the Israel-leaning Jewish Americans can contribute as much as they like to their Zionist friends abroad. Those contributors include Murdoch, Larry Silverstein, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Richard Pearle,. Dov Zakheim, Judge Alvin Hellerstein, and dozens of others in government and industry. Yet they are not to be considered as our homegrown radical “neocons,” patronizing an agenda from the think tank PNAC, The Project for the New American Century, which included the necessity for an inciting incident like a new “Pearl Harbor” (9/11), to incite the peaceful citizens of America to embark on a world march for hegemony, starting with Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden was supposed to have conducted the operation from a cave.

    Yet, bin Laden has not been found since. In fact, the CIA recently announced that the video tape in which bin Laden admitted to committing the crime of 9/11 was a fake, with a look-almost-alike bin Laden, who was fatter, wore gold (a Muslim no-no), and whose voice, according to voice morphology testing, was not the same as the real Osama bin Laden. In fact, David Ray Griffith, the US’s most prominent 9/11 scholar, detailed extensively in his book Osama bin Laden — Dead or Alive, that bin laden died in late December 2001, and was buried in Pakistan, according to Pakistani newspapers.

    Also, the FBI removed bin laden from its site as the Most Wanted individual for the crime of 9/11 several years ago. There was not enough evidence, they claimed. And the US Army lost track of him when they had him cornered in Tora Bora years ago. Is it possible that his value as a poster boy for “Muslim wrong-doing” was obviously greater than catching the real man, originally employed by the CIA for its Afghanistan jihad?

    Bin laden had also been suffering from a severe kidney condition, which brought him into the American Hospital at Dubai in August of 2001 for kidney dialysis. There he met with his CIA handler, probably to discuss matters of the Afghanistan Mujahedeen against the “Russian atheists,” for which he had been recruited, as were many Muslim men by the CIA, which also funded, armed and trained these men for warfare against the Soviet Union, which lasted for ten years, with the Soviets routed in defeat. Yet, we have personally picked up that deadly torch since 2001 with no victory in sight.

    Similarly, the 19 Muslim “hijackers” of 9/11, 15 of whom were Saudis (which land we have never attacked given its copious oil) were pulled from photograph files only days after 9/11 and shown as the perpetrators. Shortly after the public swallowed it all, FBI Chief Robert Mueller said we couldn’t be absolutely sure these were the “hijackers.” In fact, eight of them were reported living in Middle Eastern countries, obviously victims of identity theft. So, there you have a thumbnail version of the situation.

    As to Israel, we need briefly to discuss the Five Dancing Israelis, who worked for Daniel Suter and his Urban Moving Systems company in New Jersey. On 9/11, a white company van was seen with five man dressed in Arab clothing dancing about as the twin towers were falling, directly across the Hudson River. One man stood on the roof of the van flicking his cigarette lighter, the smoke of the towers behind him, as another man shot video of the action.

    Irate individuals who witnessed them called the police, who arrived, searched their vans with K-9s sniffing for explosives, traces of which were found. Also, some $1,800 in cash was found in the van, plus maps of the NYC subways, bridges and tunnels. When the police then FBI arrested these men, they claimed they were our friends not our enemies.

    Yet, after 72 days of arrest, they were released to Israel, where they appeared on a TV show, claiming that they were there to “document the event.” How could they have known there was an event to document if they weren’t involved in it? Their video was not exactly a home movie.

    There was a second white Urban Moving Systems van found off an exit ramp of the George Washington Bridge, also with traces of explosives in it, cash, and maps of the NYC subways, bridges and tunnels. Still, a third white UMS van was found on King Street between Sixth Avenue and Varick Street, only minutes from the Holland Tunnel. Only this one had painted on its panels a scene of a jetliner crashing into one of the Twin Trade Towers. It also had two more Arab-looking gents who were not Arabs, but Israelis, wrested to the ground by police and arrested. Nothing was heard of them after. Presumably, they were returned safe and sound to Israel as well.

    Actually, on that no-fly day of 9/11, even before a number of Saudi Royals were flown out of the country, there was an El-Al flight that had taken off for Israel. Perhaps Daniel Suter was onboard or on an earlier flight. It begs the question why did that plane full of people have to get to Israel so fast on that day?

    These are just a few of the highlights from the Israel as putative suspect reel.

    Now, back to our last return to the New York Post logic train, asking about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, “[e]specially given his own disturbing ties to figures like Hossein Mahallati, Iran’s former UN ambassador and an unabashed supporter of Hamas.”

    Let’s be clear, Hamas, for many of the reasons mentioned already, is the duly elected government of Palestine. If it engages in warfare with Israel, it is to protect its own dwindling number of people. And I, as an American of Christian birth, also refuse to label Hamas a terrorist organization, particularly in the face of 60 plus years of Zionist terrorism in Palestine against the indigenous population.

    The technique has always been to label the Arabs the terrorists, even as the Zionists blew up the King George hotel, killing hundreds of Brits and others, who were the remaining force of occupation at the time, who soon packed up and left. Thus, where the logic train finally arrives is at the self-righteous purity of Zionist Israel’s actions . . .

    “Not to mention Rauf’s own pointed refusal to label Hamas a terrorist organization — and his statement, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, that ‘United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.’” After all, they were just that, as has been described in this piece and have been in books, DVDs and films at great length. But let’s get back to the NY Post illogic train . . .

    “Which is why he [Rauf] and those behind the mosque project owe it to all New Yorkers to make their plans and — especially — their finances fully transparent, now that they’ve effectively been given a green light to build?

    “If, as he says, he means to be a force for reconciliation, Rauf must begin by demonstrating to New Yorkers that he has no ties to those who support global terrorism — either ideologically or financially.”

    Yet, will the Israeli Zionist government declare their innocence in acts of terrorism against the Palestinians, the British, the French, and even the Americans, including the sinking of the US Liberty, an intelligence ship on the high seas in international waters bombed by Israeli war planes and its Navy, and whose sailors were then strafed over a period of nine hours by said planes, leaving 37 dead and 174 wounded Americans.

    These are not the acts of friends, but of enemies it would seem, who from 1976 to 1996 also sold billions in arms and nuclear weapons to the post-Nazi, anti-apartheid government of South Africa, and who still function as arms and nuclear arms dealers to the world, to uphold their own personal form of terror.

    Nor will I paint the many Jewish friends I have who are among the most decent people I know with this same brush. This is an appeal to protect the innocent in all cases as well as to condemn the guilty. And it is the innocent who must be considered here, too, in the building of the Ground Zero Mosque, given the inflated and misled feelings of self-styled, often ignorant patriots. We don’t want to turn Ground Zero or New York into another self-righteous but racist Selma, Alabama.

    Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer and life-long resident of New York City. Reach him at gvmaz@verizon.net. His new book, State Of Shock: Poems from 9/11 on” is available at www.jerrymazza.com, Amazon or Barnesandnoble.com. He has also written hundreds of articles on American and world politics as an Associate Editor of Online Journal.


Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Similar Threads

  1. The Ground Zero Mosque Will Be The Strangest Building In Manhattan
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2010, 06:09 AM
  2. Ground Zero Mosque Controversy: A CIA Orchestrated Event
    By Unhypnotized in forum September 11th attacks (911)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 13th, 2010, 06:46 AM

Tags for this Thread