EvilMonkey

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 05:06 PM) The $100 million comes from zakat, the obligation Muslims have to donate a percentage of their income. That money goes to mosques and charitable foundations and what have you. Sometimes it goes to fund jihad though and this is really hard to track or figure out where exactly the line is being crossed which is why it's so hard to stop terrorist financing (greatly simplified version but you get the picture). Looks like the Dutch helping pay for it as well, even though they didn't know it. http://www.nisnews.nl/public/210710_2.htm And I know what you mean about tracking it, etc. The Muslim American Society is the Muslim Brotherhood and so on.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 04:57 PM) Kinda like how the media basically accepted Eric Cantor's lying ass story about being shot at at face value. I KNOW you can do better than that, on all sides.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) Wow I didn't see that. So Alpha, you think the muslim building is being put 2 blocks from the WTC as a celebration and remembrance of how proud they are of 9/11? Ask a few questions. What is the signifigance of the name they chose for that mega-mosque? Is there a history of Muslims building mosques overlooking or near holy sites of conquered counties throughout thier history? Where is the 100 million+ funding coming from? Adding insult to injury, do they really need to plan for the opening day to be on 9/11/2011? I don't have time to get you links right now, I am limited in what i can access here at work. But the mosque is names after one of the largest built in Spain after the Muslims conquered them way back when, they are not saying where the money is comign from, yes, they have a history of doing just what I said and the opening day selected is just plain insulting. I believe the built the al Aqsa Mosque right on TOP of the Temple Mount just to spite Judaism It would be like the Japanese opening up a Japanese Cultural Appreciation Center within eyesight of the Arizona in Pearl Harbor a year or so after the war ended.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 04:37 PM) You know what's probably more sad than the fact that the Obama administration handled this so poorly is that nobody is out there talking about whether or not people like Andrew Breitbart and Fox News who ran with this should be held accountable for running with this video in the first place. It's fraudulent journalism by a biased media with an axe to grind. It's just a shame that we only hear about that part of the story when the slant affects Republicans. oh PLEASE! If you are going to even TRY to go that route, then you need to wonder if every damn paper in this country is going to be held accountable for running with all the crap they do before they even try to verify it. And when it effects Republicans, ALL YOU GET is the edited version, no time to even THINK about 'context', because with the R, it just doesn't matter.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 08:00 AM) People who don't live in NY seem way more sensitive about issues concerning 9/11 than people who live in the city actually are. People who don't live in Arizona seem way more sensitive about issues concerning their safety and border security than the people who live in the state actually are.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 21, 2010 -> 08:13 AM) First of all, if they're voting for something they believe is wrong out of fear of violence, they ought to lose their jobs. Second, let's try this another way, something that you'll get. Think of the positive PR that a white family who lost their farm because an African American social worker refused to help them would get if they just said "oh, we didn't realize the reaction we'd get from those sorts of organizations, we should have gone elsewhere for help." That had to be both the worst, and laziest, attempted comparrison that I have ever seen you do here.

Konerko

Actually was at a Cubs game with my Cub-fan brother in law. Had seats literally last row, way back under the deck behind home plate. My bro in law was embarrassed the whole time (it was a double header, and back in the Sosa days) because all the people around us were living up to the stereotype. Half were turned around in their seats and not watching the game, getting hammered and seemed more interested in conversation that the game. Well, second game starts, and Sosa wasn't playing. About the 4th inning, a girl sitting next to Mike (bro in law) turns to him and asks "Why isn't Sammy playing?" He turns to her and says "Oh I don't know, maybe because he went 0 for f*cking 5, which you may have guessed if you were WATCHING the game!" She gives him this blank stare, then turns back around and continues to not watch the game. Mike just turns to me and says "Not ONE F*CKING WORD!, JUST DON'T SAY ANYTHING!" DOH!

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 20, 2010 -> 12:29 PM) As you are probably familiar it is nearly impossible to have a community board agree on even the most mundane issues, so to have a community board agree 29-1 on ANY this particular issue is quite an accomplishment. Maybe they were all AFRAID to vote against it? Afraid of being thought of as bigots if they voted against it, or perhaps of potential violence. And just because the board voted for it does not mean that the people of NY are for it. If the Muslims in the area were truly interested in fostering cultural sensitivity, they would realize that a lot of people wold see them building a mosque on the sight of 9/11 would be considered insensitive, at best, to many. Are there any other locations they can choose in NYC? Does it HAVE to be that area? Think of the positive PR they would get if they said something like "We didn't realize the reactions many would have to our desire to build our center here, and how some would consider it poor taste. We desire to get along with all peoples and will look for another more suitable location'. But no, they willcry foul as usual, while building a 'monument' to their biggest strike against the Great Satan to date.

Alexei

Well, you also have the government axiom that if you come in under budget, then you really don't need that money next year either, so you get your budget cut. You have to overspend just to stay the same.

Alexei

Whenever the religious element of the right pops its head up and tries to do crap like this, or push creationism only in schools, mandatory prayer in schools or just try to interfere in the bedroom at all, it just pisses me off as it really turns off the average middle of the road voter. Most people dont want religion infringed upon, but they don't want it thrown in their faces either. When crap like this happens, never sure if it is two steps forward and one step back, or one step forward and two steps back.

Gordon B.

Rios

If the pitcher threw the ball right down the middle first pitch every time, I would think I would want my hitters swinging at that pitch every time. And I agree with what Milkman said, it just seems to me like I am always watching Konerko take first pitch strike right down the middle. I know it isn't always, but it sure seems like it.

Rios

Plus, if you dump that much gold at one time you will depress the price severely with that much on the market at once.

Carlos Q

Carlos Q

Konerko

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 9, 2010 -> 04:18 PM) Alpha, that's a monstrously long Sig...any chance that could be shortened somehow? Yeah, I didn't think the pic weas that big until I saw it last night. Too lazy to shrink it, just took that one down for now. I like the Algore line anyway, so made that bigger instead! No pun intended.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 9, 2010 -> 12:36 PM) 1. You missed the point. Someone said he got shot in the face, therefore the shooter must have been in front of the trick. I pointed out, no, there are other possibilities, very logical ones, such as the one I presented. No, you didn't. You said "I'd assume he was probably...", not something like "He could have been loking backwards..." The way your statement reads it is as if you are declaring your belief that he WAS looking backwards, not your belief that he COULD HAVE BEEN looking backwards. I get what you mean, I can just see how it can be read wrong. As for statements made all around, if they interviewed the old guy right after it happened, of course he could have said contradictory things. You tell me you could watch your stuff get stolen, almost ran over and shoot someone and not have adrenalin running thru your system that just kills your train of thought. IF the thieves tried to run him over, he was every bit justified in shooting the bastards over it. A car is a deadly weapon. I can 'understand' the DA trying to press some kind of charges, but the extreme ones he going for, and NOT charging the criminals, I hope that changes. As it stands, that is just wrong.

AJP

Rios