![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Aug. 4th, 2010
Well, was there or wasn't there one?
Aug. 4th, 2010 11:02 amAhmadinejad survives 'assassination attempt'.
No, wait, there was no assassination attempt. It was just fireworks. Thrown at his car. Because everyone in Iran loves Ahmadinejad.
EVERYONE.
Especially if you know what's good for you.
No, wait, there was no assassination attempt. It was just fireworks. Thrown at his car. Because everyone in Iran loves Ahmadinejad.
EVERYONE.
Especially if you know what's good for you.
Hey, remember when
Aug. 4th, 2010 11:14 amI said that the "Ground Zero" mosque had cleared the last bureaucratic hurdle to begin construction? (You know, yesterday?)
Yeah.... seems a bunch of assholes (led by Pat Robertson, no less), plan to file suit, claiming that the building in question actually does deserve landmark status, and thus, a mosque can't be built there.
On one hand, this is shrewd. This is about the only possible tactic they could take which wouldn't get them laughed out of court for violating "freedom of religion". And this building has been there since 1858 (info taken from the first paragraph of this article.)
On the other hand, considering that NO ONE KNOWS WHO THE ARCHITECT WAS, it's kind of hard to say whether it should be a landmark or not. Yeah, if it was designed by a famous architect, that would be a point in it's favor.
But considering that these assholes are not protesting because a 'historic old building is being torn down', but because a mosque is going up in it's place.... well, this suit should be shot down as quick as fucking possible.
Edit: Oh yeah, and it turns out that a couple of those "dangerous Muslims who won't 'refudiate' the mosque" are actually moderates, have openly condemned Al-Qaeda, and they're Sufi (which is the most accommodating of all branches of Islam). But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good blind hate, amirite?
Yeah.... seems a bunch of assholes (led by Pat Robertson, no less), plan to file suit, claiming that the building in question actually does deserve landmark status, and thus, a mosque can't be built there.
On one hand, this is shrewd. This is about the only possible tactic they could take which wouldn't get them laughed out of court for violating "freedom of religion". And this building has been there since 1858 (info taken from the first paragraph of this article.)
On the other hand, considering that NO ONE KNOWS WHO THE ARCHITECT WAS, it's kind of hard to say whether it should be a landmark or not. Yeah, if it was designed by a famous architect, that would be a point in it's favor.
But considering that these assholes are not protesting because a 'historic old building is being torn down', but because a mosque is going up in it's place.... well, this suit should be shot down as quick as fucking possible.
Edit: Oh yeah, and it turns out that a couple of those "dangerous Muslims who won't 'refudiate' the mosque" are actually moderates, have openly condemned Al-Qaeda, and they're Sufi (which is the most accommodating of all branches of Islam). But hey, why let facts get in the way of a good blind hate, amirite?
In other news
Aug. 4th, 2010 12:08 pmBigoted assholes ask for stay of judge's ruling in advance of the ruling, but only if it's against the bigoted assholes.
Because letting gay people marry would cause California to slide into the ocean, just like the last time.
Oh, wait....
Because letting gay people marry would cause California to slide into the ocean, just like the last time.
Oh, wait....