GZM imam: USA has more Muslim blood on its hands than Al-Qaeda

Posted by: ST on August 24, 2010 at 11:26 am

Is there really anything else we need to know about this man after this?

Waiting for the apologists on the left to feign ‘concern’ about the comments before asserting that he has the ‘right’ to say whatever he wants to, when none of this – not what he says, not the proposed site of the mosque – is about whether he has a right to do/say what he does, but whether or not it is right to do/say.

And we’re supposed to be “tolerant” when it comes to this blame-America firster? I don’t think so.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

11 Responses to “GZM imam: USA has more Muslim blood on its hands than Al-Qaeda”


  1. Tango says:

    ….sign of the times, ST. And it figures to get
    worse – probably much worse. **==

  2. The lefty loons that still support this mosque are crazy at worst and grossly misguided at best. It’s not a matter of their constitutional right to build it, it’s a question of morality and character. They can have the right to build it, but you don’t have to SUPPORT it. Get a clue. Political correctness will be the death of this country unless more people get a backbone like Pamela Geller and stand up. God bless her, I fear for her safety–how about that constitutional right–the right to personal safety? I wonder what the 3,000 that perished 9/11 would say about all this…

  3. Zippy says:

    Excellently phrased Texas..

    That’s exactly the point. It has nothing to do with ‘rights’ but the moral issue at hand. These leftist loonies have no idea of the consequence outside of their own misguided, well intentioned idiocies to contend with. There are far deeper consequences down the line that need to be kept from gaining momentum. The idea of creeping islam is a real threat folks.

  4. The Islamists are liars and deceivers. What gets me is how the left is so willing to believe everything they say and to take what they say as evidence they mean America no harm. The left has no understanding of Islam and Sharia law and yet are somehow certain in their defense of it. Brigitte Gabriel has said regarding radical Islam – “Americans should be very concerned, very very concerned for their lives and our national security and the direction this [Obama] administration is heading.” Islam is a very grave threat to America and everything we as Americans care about. Nothing in The Constitution requires us to tolerate those who wish to destroy us.

  5. John Bibb says:

    Once you say SHARIA LAW–you’ve said it all. This clown Imam is enabled to his own opinion–but he isn’t entitled to his own “facts”! Ship his sorry A** back to Somalia–or some other Islamic hellhole so he can really enjoy his religion to the max.

  6. bear1909 says:

    Is America Islamophobic? This bogus question has a direct tie-in to the forthcoming hand-wringing appeasers in America to the off-shore jihadists.

    The nature of the question skews the debate. If there is opposition to the building of the Young Moslems Community Attraction at Groud Zero, does it not do the opposition a grave injustice by pre-empting our civilized airing of viewpoints who oppose the “project”? (I oppose the unrestricted waging of cultural jihad by foreign agents on American soil. I am not opposing a “project”. But that is discussion for another time.) The question impugns motives of us opponents to Islamic jihad. As opponents we are not given the same media support where any similar impactive question is asked about Imam Rauf and Miss Daisy: “Do Rauf and Miss Daisy have a hidden agenda?” That question does the same thing as “Is America Islamophobic?”

    When a question impugns motives of a political opponent, it degrades the opportunity for dialogue and understanding. So, the media “assets” proposing the question are responsible for doing so by making this the focal point of the debate. This question is a yes or no which precludes open sharing of meaning in the way of any kind of answer in the affirmative or negative. In short, it is a box question that forces a yes or no answer. And whatever the answer, the respondent is automatically placed in defensive mode if the reply is “I think not.” It is as if our opponents can say with impunity: “Well how do you know you aren’t just being homophobic?”

    Well, maybe we can bring this into relevant terms by use of an analogy: Mommy is teaching Junior to be safe in the outside world. ‘Don’t take candy from strangers, Junior. Ever.’ So Junior does the right thing and turns down the candy offered to him by a store merchant one day while Junior is walking to school. The store merchant is Muslim. Is Junior Islamoophobic? Or is he following the wisdom of his Mommy who knows the best practice is to discriminate *positively* in order to ensure safety when confronted by strangers in any situation, no matter the “intent” of the stranger.

    Islamic jihadists attacked the United States on 9/11. The experienced struck horror and terror into the minds of millions of people in the United States, if not the world. Imam Rauf has said on record several things paraphrased here which seem to suggest 1) we had it coming and deserved it; 2) Islamic jihadists were correct in what they did by killing nearly 3000 people on 9/11; and 3) Islamic jihadist political organizations in the Middle East are not really terrorists but are worthy of respect by non-Muslim people, especially Americans (referring to Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood affiliate organization that has taken root in Gaza as the paramilitary opponent of the state of Israel.).

    So here we are, Americans, who have been violated by strangers on 9/11, murdered to be exact, and we are now asked (Are you opposing further actions by jihad supporters) Do you resist because you are phobic toward an entire class of people who practice the same religion? Junior is asked if he is refusing the candy because he is Islamophobic. What Junior is in effect doing is refusing candy from a stranger, because his Mommy knows that strangers lure children into dangerous situations that have led to sexual violation and even death with candy, the same stuff the Muslim merchant is offering to Junior out on the sidewalk in front of the store.

    Now, the Muslim merchant’s store has areas inside the store that are hidden from the view of the outside world, plenty of places to lure a small child into with further promises of more candy and fun. Does this mean the Muslim merchant intends to do so? No one knows. But what we do know is that if the Muslim merchant was well-intentioned he would not solicit contact with a child using candy *for no reason* or for some lofty reason * I want to make sure Junior is not afraid of strangers, namely me. Why bother? Can’t Junior just go to and from school without having to accept gratuitous gestures from a stranger? Doe Junior’s Mom have to risk her child’s safety so Muslim Merchant doesn’t “feel” that Junior and his Mom are Islamophobic?

    Do we have to allow the YMCA to be built at ground zero so Muslim’s don’t feel we are phobic about them? How does a thirteen story YMCA help us not feel phobic? Aren’t there simpler more constructive (sorry) ways to improve relations that don’t involve unindicted co-conspirators such as the Committee on Islamic American Relations? Isn’t there a way to do that by keeping religious practice within the American tradition of separating church and state? No Ten Commandments in the courthouse and no footbaths in the community college student center. Can’t the high ranking sheikhs of Islam in America castigate the jihadist violators of innocents the world over? Won’t it help us be less phobic (if we are for good reasons, say 9/11’s murder spree) if mosques weren’t used to preach violent overthrow of the United States government?

    Questions abound. Islam is addicted to violence. Another analogy: if a drunk is violating someone in their family with their addiction to alcohol, does the victim gain anything by the drunk bringing a shiny new car home after drinking all day in a bar, saying “here! this is a gift for you!” The victim would rather have the drunk give up drinking. Stop violating him/her. I dont need a mosque. I need you to stop trying to conquer the world with your religious and political code.

    The question’s origin is also problematic. The Ground Zero Mosque and the US President-in-Name-Only’s utterly inappropriate support of its construction, among many other perceived travesties involved (Bloomberg’s greenlighting, the mainstream media’s condemnation of opponents to the “project” as “bigots” etc) brought the question into front cover significance. Was anyone wondering about our collective profile on Islam and it’s minions before this controversy?
    So is the question the appropriate question if one is searching for understanding of the destination for the “bridge” Muslim Imam and Miss Daisy seek to build with their 13 story Young Moslem’s Community Attraction at Ground Zero?

  7. Live Free Or Die says:

    To the ‘Moderate’ Muslim Imam, as with all adherents to Mohammedanism, there is no such thing as ‘innocent non-Muslims’. All are kuffar, and must convert, dhimmi, or die.

  8. coolbreeze says:

    This “imam” and his wicked witch “wife” are both associated with the Moslem Brotherhood. Theyve been planning this, in Malaysia, since 2004. Rauf and his cohorts not only must not be allowed to build this “victory” mosque, they need to be kicked out of the country period, they have been sent by the wahabbis and the Moslem brotherhood to destroy America from within. They only deserve an introduction to Mr Smith and Mr Wesson.

  9. coolbreeze says:

    BTW-one thing-since when do non-citizens suddenly have constitutional rights? The rights outlined in the US constitution are supposed to be applied to American citizens.

  10. Jo says:

    Again I always ask, what is in that Kool Aid the ‘love everybody, equal rights for all no matter what’ Demtards are drinking???

  11. Kate says:

    I believe bear is right when he says it’s the questions that are being asked that are so telling….instead of looking at the facts of the issue and understanding that Islam is not truly a religion but a political movement involving a cult of religion, the media has turned the tables and made anyone who asks questions into some kind of phobic idiot.

    Here in lies the problem with the liberal controlled media outlets who actually observe that religion is the opiate of the people and would love to rid society of any vestige of God. Why not make this a battle royale between two competing “religions” and maybe they will destroy their witness before others? This is where the Christians of the world need to be careful, but not milquetoasts. Be bold and ask questions and be willing to give an answer that affirms God ways and not man’s ways.