Keith Olbermann | New York | News

Watch: Keith Olbermann on the 'Ground Zero Mosque'

Mosque_olbermann

Olbermann sounds off on the distracting controversy over the so-called 'Ground Zero mosque':

"Yet, in a country dedicated to freedom, forces have gathered to blow out of all proportion the construction of a minor community center; to transform it into a training ground for terrorists and an insult to the victims of 9/11 and a tribute to medieval Muslim subjugation of the West. There is no training ground for terrorists. There is no insult to the victims of 9/11. There is no tribute to medieval Muslim subjugation of The West. There is, in fact, no 'Ground Zero mosque.'"

"Despite the nobility of our founding and the indefatigable efforts of all our generations, there have always been those who would happily sacrifice our freedoms, our principles, to ward off the latest unprecedented threat, the latest unbeatable outsiders. Once again, at 45 Park Place, we are being told to sell our birth-right, to feed the maw of xenophobia and vengeance and mob rule. The terrorists who destroyed the buildings from which you could only see 45 Park Place as a dot on the ground, wanted to force us to change our country to become more like the ones they knew. What better way could we honor the dead of the World Trade Center, than to do the terrorists' heavy lifting for them? And do you think 45 Park Place is where it ends?"

A must-watch special comment, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Wow, JJ, did you get that play-the-victim strategy out of NOM's handbook?

    Posted by: nodnarb | Aug 17, 2010 3:55:29 PM


  2. But JJ, you don't see the inherent offense and disrespect towards people who had nothing to do with 9/11 other than actually experiencing it? The implication is that there's some connection. They should be punished for 9/11 as much as Dolly Parton should be punished for the Salem Witch Trials.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 3:56:02 PM


  3. who is talking about punishing anyone or forcing them to move? (well certainly some ppl in the US are, but I'm not) ... and btw, ill get catty for a moment - your Dolly Parton references are dumb and show how out of touch you actually are with the many complexities of Islam.

    Posted by: JJ | Aug 17, 2010 4:02:08 PM


  4. "I don't care about the mosque. I care that people are bullying innocent people out of town."

    Oh really? Once again, if it's not about their right to do it, and they are doing it...who's bullying someone? Is it bullying to say that dedicating a building to a faith that caused 9/11 is extreme offensive and in very, very poor taste? No. It's not racist, either.

    "Yea, and if they were radical terrorist Muslims I'd be with you saying they "shouldn't" build."

    Why? Your argument works for them, too. If this is just about their rights under the first amendment, they have a right to build there as well...that is, if they publicly stated that 9/11 was justified and a good thing. Since islam did cause 9/11, though not all muslims are terrorists or agree with radical muslims, all muslims are responsible.

    "Since they're not, I don't care. One little fucking bit."

    Apparently you do. And apparently you don't care about the consequences of a faith like islam.

    "If your little ideology argument is valid, and it probably is to some extent, then you have to oppose every church and mosque that
    exists."

    Not on legal grounds, for I value the first amendment. But so long as christianity and islam are responsible for needless suffering on this planet (and they are), you bet your goddamn ass I do on ethical grounds.

    "And in some sense, as I said, I do. I'd love to have a discussion about the merits of religion with these people. I wouldn't love to drive to NYC, in their backyard, and start yelling at them to GTFO."

    Well, it's all freedom of expression after all. And considering how offensive it is to some people, that that would be offensive to them is kind of a draw....

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:05:25 PM


  5. Right, complexities. Not black and white. So stop acting like it. These people had nothing to do with 9/11. And don't play coy with "who's punishing/forcing them to move?" Its not doing you any good.

    I chose Dolly Parton specifically because most of us realize what an amazing, wonderful person she is even while she embraces an ancient, awful, destructive religion that has brought much pain to our community. Complexities, remember?

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:05:57 PM


  6. "Joey Allen, do you also oppose the male genital mutilation that most Americans perform on their own children? I oppose genital mutilation for both girls and boys, how about you?"

    Are you seriously drawing an equivalence between female genital mutilation and circumcision? One prevents someone from experiencing any sexual pleasure for the rest of their lives, whereas male circumcision does not. When I read more about males dying regularly from being circumcised and developing life threatening infections as a result, you still wouldn't have an equivalence.

    The world isn't flat; all cultures aren't equal; objectively, some values encourage human flourishing and some prevent it.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:08:35 PM


  7. Whatever, Tank. I don't care what you say, I have no investment in the damn community center. It does make me sad to see these people being bullied on a national scale though. And I say the same thing when Muslims are the ones doing the bullying.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:09:15 PM


  8. Tank, the point still stands. Its "less" creepy and sick. Compelling.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:10:59 PM


  9. bullied? So expressing your reasonable opposition to a building dedicated to a faith that is responsible for the worst act of domestic terrorism in u.s. history nearby as poor taste, and completely insensitive...is bullying? Yeah, and the intolerance of intolerance is intolerance...hurrrr durrrrrrr. It's why I can't stand moonbats. I can't stand people of either persuasion in the u.s. (conservative or liberal). Both ultimately make highly unethical arguments.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:14:41 PM


  10. My gawd, you're a simpleton. Their faith did not cause 9/11. One fifth of the world's population is not responsible for 9/11.

    The only people responsible and who should be held accountable is the politically motivated extremists who manipulated and twisted Islam to suit their personal agenda.

    For someone who tries so hard to impress your intelligence upon this blog's audience, you are extremely stupid in this particular matter.

    Posted by: nodnarb | Aug 17, 2010 4:14:56 PM


  11. It doesn't stand because female genital mutilation is much, much, MUCH worse than male circumcision on purely objective grounds.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:16:22 PM


  12. Well take heart that the feeling is reciprocal, Tank.

    These Muslims have not been intolerant, they haven't demanded anyone else vacate their property. Tolerance isn't agreement or even compromise, its just tolerance.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:16:57 PM


  13. "My gawd, you're a simpleton. Their faith did not cause 9/11. One fifth of the world's population is not responsible for 9/11."


    So your assertion is that islam did not cause 9/11. You are an apologist for radical islam, and a fool. It is without question a fact that the strain of islam that the muslim terrorists subscribed caused them to commit the atrocities on 9/11. Ultimately, what you do by defending radical islam is to deny causality itself. Beliefs have consequences.

    Further, considering that the radical strains of faith are just as much islam as the moderate strains of faith, all faithful are responsible.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:18:58 PM


  14. Even agreeing with that statement, it doesn't somehow bolster the case for male mutilation rooted in religious tradition as well. You are essentially saying "its less sick and creepy." Okay... that's why I oppose BOTH. But I don't hold up male circumcision as some absolute indictment of the millions of Westerners who have done it.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:19:57 PM


  15. "It is without question a fact that the strain of islam that the muslim terrorists subscribed caused them to commit the atrocities on 9/11."

    Yea, a strain. A vastly different strain than the Muslims you are punishing for it.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:21:34 PM


  16. and yes, 1.57 billion muslims are responsible for 9/11. Just as every single participating self identifying christian has the blood of George Tiller on his hands. Picking and choosing which parts of your holy book you follow and endorse and encourage others to follow doesn't eliminate the responsibility you have for what others pick and choose and act on in your holy book...your faith.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:22:28 PM


  17. "Further, considering that the radical strains of faith are just as much islam as the moderate strains of faith, all faithful are responsible."

    And we're back to Dolly Parton and the crusades.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:23:00 PM


  18. Oh, by the way, that you would think I try at all to "impress my intelligence" on this blog's audience (and I don't...at all, because I honestly don't care about this blog's audience), indicates what little intellect you possess.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:23:49 PM


  19. So then you have a mighty task ahead of you, evicting all those preachers and rabbis in the name of 'sensitivity'.

    Posted by: Wes | Aug 17, 2010 4:24:45 PM


  20. "Further, considering that the radical strains of faith are just as much islam as the moderate strains of faith, all faithful are responsible."

    And we're back to Dolly Parton and the crusades"

    Annnd we're back to defending the no true scotsman fallacy.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:25:04 PM


  21. So your assertion is that HOMOSEXUALITY did not cause NAMBLA. You are an apologist for radical HOMOSEXUALS, and a fool. It is without question a fact that the strain of HOMOSEXUALITY that NAMBLA subscribed caused them to commit the atrocities on PEDOPHILIA. Ultimately, what you do by defending radical HOMOSEXUALS is to deny causality itself. Beliefs have consequences.

    Posted by: nodnarb | Aug 17, 2010 4:25:35 PM


  22. "So then you have a mighty task ahead of you, evicting all those preachers and rabbis in the name of 'sensitivity'."

    And aside from invalid reasoning, you don't know what ethics is! it must be so easy to be soooo ignorant and stupid.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:26:38 PM


  23. "Yea, a strain. A vastly different strain than the Muslims you are punishing for it."

    But it's still islam.

    Posted by: TANK | Aug 17, 2010 4:27:33 PM


  24. :cough: Islam is not like Germany or Japan. WE NEVER WENT TO WAR WITH AMERICA.

    Hu It doesn't matter what "seems" right, or what seems decent, but what we really stand for as a country. I say, allow the muslim to build the mosque. Every time we put Al Qaeda and Islam on the same level, we prove our seemingly permanent ignorance, and our ability to intelligently reason. Us Americans spend too much time listening to what the media tells us, and not enough time actually trying to find facts.


    and Thank you, Mayor Bloomberg, for extending the warm welcome to allow me to practice my faith freely in this great city of ours :)

    Posted by: Hussain | Aug 17, 2010 4:28:17 PM


  25. And NAMBLA is "a strain" of homosexuality. By your reasoning, all homosexuals are responsible for the actions of NAMBLA.

    Posted by: nodnarb | Aug 17, 2010 4:29:03 PM


  26. « | 1 2 3 4 5 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «FOX News Parent, News Corp, Gives $1 Million to Republican Governors Association« «