Building a Mosque near ground zero

[Sugar Dick]

Nobody is calling it "sacred ground" you f*cking flop knob.  What the f*ck does that even mean?  I understand its the premise of your argument, but seriously your arguing with nobody.

You dumb fracking hayseed, your whole line of reasoning for being against this is either that you think it's "too close" to the 9/11 site, or you're a bigoted bad person who's afraid of anybody that isn't white.

Which is it?

WTF?  Are you Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) or something?

Which is it, "sugar dick?"  Are they too close to the site, or do you hate people who aren't white?

Which one isn't "sacred"? 

[Sugar Dick]

Is this like when hippies and liberals do everything in their power to keep "evil" Wal-Mart out of town?

No, it's not, and I suspect you know that.
First, it's not hippies and liberals that are against Wal-Mart's expansion, it's union workers and small business owners (neither of which would be described as hippie or liberal) that feel Wal-Mart ignores unfair labor laws.  Second, the reason Wal-Mart has been rallied against is because what they're accused of doing is breaking the law.  The people associated with the Islamic center that will be built in lower Manhattan have broken no laws.  The people violating the rights of others in this equation are on your side of the circus. 

When is Wal-Mart going to be prosecuted for these crimes?  Seems like an AG's dream, a real home run for the little guy which would ensure re-election!

Are you bigoted against Wal-Mart?

[OK_Cat]

Jesus, 'clams!  Wal-Marts didn't fly a PLANE INTO A BUILDING like this Mooslums!

[pissclams]

Is this like when hippies and liberals do everything in their power to keep "evil" Wal-Mart out of town?

No, it's not, and I suspect you know that.
First, it's not hippies and liberals that are against Wal-Mart's expansion, it's union workers and small business owners (neither of which would be described as hippie or liberal) that feel Wal-Mart ignores unfair labor laws.  Second, the reason Wal-Mart has been rallied against is because what they're accused of doing is breaking the law.  The people associated with the Islamic center that will be built in lower Manhattan have broken no laws.  The people violating the rights of others in this equation are on your side of the circus. 

When is Wal-Mart going to be prosecuted for these crimes?  Seems like an AG's dream, a real home run for the little guy which would ensure re-election!

Are you bigoted against Wal-Mart?

If I was getting my ass kicked as hard as you have in this thread, I'd shift focus too.  Remember, the Wal-Mart thing was your strawman, not mine.  I just pointed out how bad of an analogy it was.  I love Wal-Mart.

But if you need examples, as you've asked for, here's a few-

Off-the-Clock Work. In 2000, Wal-Mart paid $50 million to settle a lawsuit that involved 69,000 workers in Colorado who had allegedly been forced to work off the clock. In 2002, a federal grand jury in Oregon found Wal-Mart employees were forced to work off the clock and awarded back pay to 83 workers. In December 2005, Wal-Mart was ordered to pay $172 million to 116,000 current and former California workers for violating a 2001 state law that requires employers to give 30-minute, unpaid lunch breaks to employees who work at least six hours. In the United States, Wal-Mart has 53 class action lawsuits over wage and hour violations. [New York Times, 11/19/04; Associated Press, 2/17/04; Associated Press, 9/19/05; Associated Press, 12/22/05.]

Wal-Mart Violated Worker Rights More than 2 Million Times, Minnesota Judge Rules Wal-Mart violated the law more than 2 million times over a six-year period by denying workers time for breaks and forcing them to work "off the clock" for no pay, a Minnesota judge has ruled. Dakota County District Judge Robert King ordered the company to pay $6.5 million in back pay. In addition, Wal-Mart faced fines as high as $2 billion for the wage-and-hour violations. The case ultimately ended in settlement, with Wal-Mart paying out $54 million in lost wages. [Workday Minnesota, 7/2/08; Associated Press, 12/9/08]

Hiring Undocumented Workers. Wal-Mart paid $11 million to settle a federal investigation called "Operation Rollback," which found hundreds of undocumented immigrants working off the clock to clean stores. In 2003, federal agents raided 61 Wal-Mart stores and arrested 250 undocumented immigrants. [Washington Post, 3/19/05; Los Angeles Times, 10/24/03.]

[Dugout DickStone]

I admire the crap out of Wal-MArt.

[Sugar Dick]

Is this like when hippies and liberals do everything in their power to keep "evil" Wal-Mart out of town?

No, it's not, and I suspect you know that.
First, it's not hippies and liberals that are against Wal-Mart's expansion, it's union workers and small business owners (neither of which would be described as hippie or liberal) that feel Wal-Mart ignores unfair labor laws.  Second, the reason Wal-Mart has been rallied against is because what they're accused of doing is breaking the law.  The people associated with the Islamic center that will be built in lower Manhattan have broken no laws.  The people violating the rights of others in this equation are on your side of the circus. 

When is Wal-Mart going to be prosecuted for these crimes?  Seems like an AG's dream, a real home run for the little guy which would ensure re-election!

Are you bigoted against Wal-Mart?

If I was getting my ass kicked as hard as you have in this thread, I'd shift focus too.  Remember, the Wal-Mart thing was your strawman, not mine.  I just pointed out how bad of an analogy it was.  I love Wal-Mart.

But if you need examples, as you've asked for, here's a few-

Off-the-Clock Work. In 2000, Wal-Mart paid $50 million to settle a lawsuit that involved 69,000 workers in Colorado who had allegedly been forced to work off the clock. In 2002, a federal grand jury in Oregon found Wal-Mart employees were forced to work off the clock and awarded back pay to 83 workers. In December 2005, Wal-Mart was ordered to pay $172 million to 116,000 current and former California workers for violating a 2001 state law that requires employers to give 30-minute, unpaid lunch breaks to employees who work at least six hours. In the United States, Wal-Mart has 53 class action lawsuits over wage and hour violations. [New York Times, 11/19/04; Associated Press, 2/17/04; Associated Press, 9/19/05; Associated Press, 12/22/05.]

Wal-Mart Violated Worker Rights More than 2 Million Times, Minnesota Judge Rules Wal-Mart violated the law more than 2 million times over a six-year period by denying workers time for breaks and forcing them to work "off the clock" for no pay, a Minnesota judge has ruled. Dakota County District Judge Robert King ordered the company to pay $6.5 million in back pay. In addition, Wal-Mart faced fines as high as $2 billion for the wage-and-hour violations. The case ultimately ended in settlement, with Wal-Mart paying out $54 million in lost wages. [Workday Minnesota, 7/2/08; Associated Press, 12/9/08]

Hiring Undocumented Workers. Wal-Mart paid $11 million to settle a federal investigation called "Operation Rollback," which found hundreds of undocumented immigrants working off the clock to clean stores. In 2003, federal agents raided 61 Wal-Mart stores and arrested 250 undocumented immigrants. [Washington Post, 3/19/05; Los Angeles Times, 10/24/03.]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

[Sugar Dick]

It's time to put this thread to bed.

We've got two point of views:

1) It's insensitive and reeks of malicious intent.  Building a Mosque, in area with virtually no Muslim population (I know they're are two in the area, each looks like hall closet), two blocks from an area where thousands of innocent people were killed in the name of an ideology practiced at Mosques.

2) Stopping it is a violation of liberty to practice religion and develop land in accordance with the law.

I think both are valid points and too much of this thread has been muddled with prodding, flaming, and sideways arguments (much of it done by that bad person Sugar Dick).  Opposing it doesn't make you a bigot, and supporting doesn't make you anti-american.

I just find it odd that liberals, who are so hellbent on sensitivity, are so strong in supporting it, just like conservatives, who are so supportive of individual liberty, are against it.  Seems like roles have been temporarily reversed.  Which is way it's such an interesting debate.

 

[pissclams]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

[michigancat]

I just find it odd that liberals, who are so hellbent on sensitivity, are so strong in supporting it, just like conservatives, who are so supportive of individual liberty, are against it.  Seems like roles have been temporarily reversed.  Which is way it's such an interesting debate.

It makes perfect sense when you realize the only individual liberty "conservatives" are in favor of is gun ownership.

[Sugar Dick]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

[pissclams]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills.  

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

[OK_Cat]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills.  

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

BOOM

But, 'clams, in fairness to "sugar dick," most catholics in Oklahoma are white.    Of course they aren't all terrorists.  That's silly.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills.  

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

McVeigh never claimed the bombing was done for religious reasons. He had delusions of a federal government conspiracy against the people, that is why he targeted a federal building.

[chunkles]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

[chunkles]

OK!  Now we're getting somewhere.

Let's say if McVeigh did it in the name of Catholicism, should we try to stop any new Catholic churches from being built there?  You know, for sensitivity?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

McVeigh was an agnostic, and most Wal-Mart protesters are union organized. BOOM

[pissclams]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

McVeigh was an agnostic, and most Wal-Mart protesters are union organized. BOOM

McVeigh was as Catholic as the 19 al-Qaeda terrorists were Muslim

[chunkles]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

McVeigh was an agnostic, and most Wal-Mart protesters are union organized. BOOM

JFC

[michigancat]

If Wal-Mart has been held to a different standard than Target or K-Mart in a particular city (either with wages or zoning or whatever) then the wal-mart one is valid, and the protesters are almost as stupid as mosque protesters.  

But I doubt there is any evidence of that happening.

[Sugar Dick]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills.  

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

since I never said they didn't have the right to build it, the whole reading comprehension insult is pretty ironic.

BOOM Your still dumb

[Sugar Dick]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

no need to embarrass yourself on his account, unless your being sarcastic

[chunkles]

yeah.  still some low-analogy iq going on.  'clams Catholic church analogy is solid.  The wal-mart one is dumb.  As is the Klan in harlem one.  

The wal-mart one would work if the protesters were trying to prevent the building of a wal-mart strictly because the greeters at some of the stores didn't say "Hi" to you and I don't care if they were 121 years old or wore helmets because of some "disability" but they were wrong to do it so all of wal-mart should know that WE DON'T APPRECIATE non-greeting greeters and yes I'm TOTALLY insinuating that the greeters are TERRORISTS.

no need to embarrass yourself on his account, unless your being sarcastic

it's what I do.

[CatsNShocks]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread.  
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood.  

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills.  

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

Was this church there before McVeigh did what he did?

[jtksu]

Here's an example of the corner we've painted ourselves into:  Gainsville city officials have denied a burn permit for the Dove World Outreach Center after it was announced that the church intended to burn copies of Koran to mark the 9th anniversary of the attacks on the WTC.  Apparently, burning books is not allowed under the city's burn ordinances.

[pissclams]

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.  Wal-Mart can be blocked from development based on public sentiment but a Mosque can't.  Is this the new libtard threshold, unbridled freedom to build whatever you want, wherever you want unless you've been forced to pay fines (of immaterial dollar amounts to the entire corporation) for labor law violations.

Since labor crimes are so important to determining whether development can be blocked, I was wondering what research you have on the Mosque developer?  Is it worthy of this freedom that Wal-Mart should be denied?

Congrats on your self-proclaimed "ass-kicking".

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
I never proclaimed to have kicked your ass.  That job was complete before I ever entered this thread. 
I never argued that labor crimes should be used as a determinant when deciding to put a mosque/wal-mart in your neighborhood. 

What I did do was point out the reason why people were opposed to Wal-Mart. - Perceived unfair labor practices

I also debunked your claim that the people protesting Wal-mart's expansion were liberals and hippies and in doing so I flushed your stupid analogy down the toilet.  It was a nice try though, I'll give you a C for effort.

What you should probably realize is that Wal-Mart CANNOT be blocked from development based upon public sentiment, and neither can a mosque.  You spent the good part of the last two hours developing your Mosque/Wal-Mart public sentiment arguement and (leap in) logic when you would have been better served spending your time working on that reading comprehension you clearly lack.

I said I was done with this thread, but because everything you posed is flat out wrong I have to post once more.

Liberals and hippies do protest Wal-Mart and try to keep it out.  Apparently so do labor unions.  Obviously small businesses don't like it.  Regardless of the group, the analogy is sound.  You're obviously too stupid to understand what an analogy is.  You could use leprechauns keeping a development out and it still works.

Secondly, Wal-Mart CAN be blocked form communities, it was in Lawrence for years and has been on communities in California and the Pac NW.  Depending on local law it can be done by referendum, zoning, etc.  FYI, things that have been developed can be forced to move, its called amortization.  You're just dumb and uninformed like most liberals.

As far as the ass-kicking goes, it's a f*cking internet thread with two opposing opinions.  Not only does claiming an "ass-kicking" make you a total f*cking dork, but it also makes you look like a fool.  If looking like an ignorant bad person is how you kickass, congrats you've accomplished it.

Thanks for the C, a good analogy for you grading me would be the disgruntled student filling out a teacher evaluation at the end of the year.  You're dumb and I'm the boss and the semester is over.

Again with the reading comprehension bro, such poor skills. 

I stated that the development of neither Wal-Mart, nor a Mosque, can be blocked by public opinion.  Sure zoning restrictions can keep any development out of an area where the proposed development doesn't meet the area's zoning laws.  The problem for you racist pricks who love to ignore the First Amendment is that the proposed mosque meets the zoning laws in lower Manhattan.  Your all-too-public opinion won't factor into the equation and the mosque will be built.  Sorry bud.



There's a Catholic church, St Joseph's Old Cathedral, located at 307 Northwest 4th Street, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.  This location is less a block and a half from where Tim McVeigh, an Irish Catholic terrorist, detonating a truck bomb in front of the Alfred P. Murrah Building that killed 168 people.

My assumption is that the destruction of this insensitive and malicious cathedral will be the subject of the next 6 page thread found in these forums.

since I never said they didn't have the right to build it, the whole reading comprehension insult is pretty ironic.

BOOM Your still dumb

hell of job, keep up the good work