Just not here, neither.

[Stray Pooch]

Temecula, California, has little in common with New York City. But the debate over a new mosque in the sleepy suburban town east of Camp Pendleton echoes many of the themes expressed in the controversy surrounding the Park 51 Islamic center to be built near the World Trade Center site.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2012134,00.html?xid=rss-nation-yahoo#ixzz0xNaeiSA4


Nor here, if you please . . .


When the congregation of Grace Baptist Church held services in its new building last month, no protesters marched outside to mark the occasion. It's doubtful that protesters will gather later this month when the church throws an all-day party to dedicate the new brick building on the corner of Bradyville Pike and Veals Road. The words "Not Welcome" will probably not be spray-painted on the new church's sign.

The same cannot be said for the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro, which owns the neatly mown 15-acre field next to Grace Baptist and whose plans to build a mosque for its growing community has been caught in the net of anti-Islam sentiment in the U.S. Both of the signs the Center erected at the site of its future home were vandalized; the first had "not welcome" sprayed across it; the second was simply smashed in two. Since May when the Center gained building approval from Rutherford County, local Tea Party activists have aggressively fought to stop the mosque, staging protests, claiming that it was too big (inflating it from a modest 6,800 square feet to a whopping 53,000 square feet) and making it a campaign issue in recent elections. Republican Ron Ramsey, Tennessee's lieutenant governor and a gubernatorial candidate, gained national attention — and ridicule on The Colbert Report — after opining "you could even argue whether being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, a way of life or cult, whatever you want to call it?"

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2011847,00.html#ixzz0xNbEO92P


and certainly not here . . .  (same article as second, above)

Last February the Al-Farooq Mosque in Nashville was vandalized, with graffiti — a cross and "Muslims go home" spray painted on its facade. Earlier this year, a white supremacist was sentenced to 183 months in prison for his role in the 2008 bombing of the Islamic Center of Columbia. Attempts to build new mosques in other nearby cities, including Brentwood and Antioch, have been stopped.


Sign at anti-NY Mosque rally today

"EVERYTHING I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ISLAM I LEARNED ON 9-11"


Everything I need to know about the motivation behind this movement I learned from that sign.

[sirs]

Apples/Oranges, I'm afraid.  Unless of course, the Temeculans can showcase the 2 story buidling brought down by a crop duster hijacked by Islamic terrorists, right next to where the proposed site of the new Mosque is the be built

[Xavier_Onassis]

These yokels probably can muster up an adequate amount of hate. What they lack is the courage to stage a suicide attack. It does take more courage to die for a cause than risk a night in the slammer for vandalism, after all.

[sirs]

What the frell?

[Xavier_Onassis]

How does it not take more courage to risk your life rather than risk getting a couple of days in the hoosegow for vandalism?

Hitler was quite brave in WWI. Had every German been so brave, perhaps Germany would have won WWII. That is not to say that he was a nice guy. Bravery is one thing, decency is something unrelated. Brave means one can risk one's life without fear for something one believes in, or at least that is what it means to me. You can be brave while saving a small child from a raging fire, but you can also be brave stealing peanut butter.

It would require a lesser degree of bravery to drive your Hummer (assuming that there were no bombs)  into a Tennessee mosque than to fly a jetliner into the WTC, simply because the first event would have a greater possibility of survival. Defacing a sign announcing a new mosque to be built on a site would require almost no courage at all. At worst, they could arrest you for vandalism.

[sirs]

Well, apparently the 911 hijackers & Hitler are heros to Xo.  All that "courage"

(and for the record, anyone caught defacing or vandalizing anything, should be locked up for a few months, and provided a permanent set of graffati on their person)

[BT]

Well, apparently the 911 hijackers & Hitler are heros to Xo.  All that "courage"

I didn't see where he said that. What he said was it takes more courage to partake in an act that will result in your own death, like kamikazi pilots did, than it does to tag a building with spray paint.

I would have to agree with that statement.

[sirs]

Yep, all that "courage"......quite a thing to admire.  Especially with the results of that "courage"

[BT]

Do you believe it takes more courage to put your life on the line than it does to do petty vandalism?

XO made a pretty straight forward statement. Did he place a positive value upon the attacks?

[sirs]

Not if the result of "putting your life on the line" is in the taking of far more innocent lives

But that's just me

[BT]

Not if the result of "putting your life on the line" is in the taking of far more innocent lives

Most combat activity involves the chance of collateral damage, under your standards those soldiers are cowards. Is that what you meant to say?

[Christians4LessGvt]

What he said was it takes more courage to partake in an act that will result in your own death,
like kamikazi pilots did, than it does to tag a building with spray paint. I would have to agree with that statement.

Figures.....

So now "crazy" equals courage?

So Tim McVeigh had lots of courage blowing up the babies at the nursery
in OK City because he "partook in an act that resulted in his own death"?

So the underwear bomber that blows up an airliner full of civilians & infants has courage?
So John Wayne Gacy had courage?
So men that murder their wives/kids then blow their own brains out have "courage"?
So a whackjob that walks into a room full of infants and blows himself up has "courage"?
Quit pandering and using language that glorifies savages that are whack jobs.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I did not say that courageous terrorists should not be stopped or arrested or shot on sight.
One is brave if they risk their life. Whether this is the proper thing to do is a value judgment.
The Kamikaze pilots were, after all, defending fellow Japanese from having their ships sunk by US warships.

A German Nazi soldier falling on a grenade, thus saving the lives of his comrades, has performed the same act of bravery as an American soldier who does the same thing.

In the grand scheme of things, it may turn out that that one may have been a force for good and order and the other a force for evil. At the moment it occurs, both men are saving the lives of their comrades, though.

At some point, all lives are innocent, or none are. Firebombing Dresden is as vile or useful an act as firebombing Coventry. War is Hell. Everyone loses. It has meaning only to those who survive.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Being a wack job and being brave are not mutually exclusive: one can easily be both at the same time. Murder is insanity, The fact that one does so while in uniform may make it legal, but it does not make it sane.

[Xavier_Onassis]

So Tim McVeigh had lots of courage blowing up the babies at the nursery
in OK City because he "partook in an act that resulted in his own death"?

McVeigh's intent was not to kill babies. He was deranged, but he also sacrificed his life for an ideal, which was vengeance for the Waco affair. I would have been pleased had he been captured or killed before he committed his vile deed.
============================
So the underwear bomber that blows up an airliner full of civilians & infants has courage?
He was incompetent and blew up no one. I suppose he was brave, but I agree that he should have been arrested and jailed for a long, long time, if not for life. I am very glad he was so incompetent. There is something about hiding explosives in one's tighty whities that seems less than courageous.

So John Wayne Gacy had courage?
That would depend on the danger he faced. As I understand, he did not risk his own life, so I'd say, no. Gacy was a deranged sadist.
===============
So men that murder their wives/kids then blow their own brains out have "courage"?
Only if they are in danger from their wives. You do not seem to get the point: Bravery involves being threatened by someone other than one's self. One is not threatened by others when they commit suicide.
===============
So a whackjob that walks into a room full on infants and blows himself up has "courage"?
Only in the rare event that said infants are armed and in a homicidal mood and present a viable threat. Quite improbable.

Quit pandering and using language that glorifies savages that are whack jobs.
I do not have any obligation to do anything you say. Savages are brave if they risk their lives doing something that they believe in that is life-threatening to them.

As for myself, I am NOT brave. I cannot imagine myself killing anyone, unless backed into a corner with no other alternative. I have a great sense of self-preservation, which is rather the opposite of what I would call courageous. I do not get into fights. When I see trouble coming, I vanish. Members of my family have been quite successful at avoiding conflict. The last one to fire a shot in anger in my father's line fought in the Revolutionary War: my Civil War ancestors were doctors (one on each side). My grandfather was a preacher. My father was an accountant, 40 years old in 1941 and wore a truss because of a double hernia. He was given a priority job and kept books for a paint company. I successfully avoided Vietnam and am proud to have done so. I am sure that if I had gone to Vietnam, the war would still have been a disastrous loss, and I am glad that it did not make my life a disaster as well.

I do not consider bravery to be an asset.