9/11

Quinnipiac poll: New York voters oppose Ground Zero mosque

From June 21 – 28, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,183 New York City registered voters over the proposal to build a Cordoba House “Muslim mosque and cultural center two blocks from Ground Zero” They were asked, “Do you support or oppose this proposal?” The Quinnipiac University Poll found:

New York City voters oppose 52 – 31 percent … Opposition to the mosque is 56 – 31 percent among white voters, 45 – 34 percent among black voters and 60 – 19 percent among Hispanic voters. Opposition among religious groups is 66 – 22 percent among Jews, 66 – 24 percent among white Catholics and 46 – 36 percent among white Protestants.

“New York enjoys a reputation as one of the most tolerant places in America, but New Yorkers are opposed to a proposal to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero. Is it because we’re still nursing the wounds from the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center or is it more like bigotry?” asks Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

Abraham Maslow found that the ultimate manifestation of discrimination is genocide.

With due respect to Mr. Carroll, real world experience does not make for ignorant prejudice; a more accurate example of prejudice is what the followers of shariah law felt when they slaughtered 2,976 people on 9/11.

Congress must defend 9/11’s sacred ground and expose the Islamist imams

Office of the Honorable John Boehner
United States Congressman, 8th Congressional District (Ohio)

Office of the Honorable Mitch McConnell
United States Senator, Kentucky

June 21, 2010
.

Dear Congressman Boehner and Senator McConnell,

Thank you in advance for your time. I would like to ask if you will review and share with your congressional colleagues the following information which includes, but is not limited to, a collection of quotes and documented activities pertaining to a number of Islamic preachers (Imams) in America.

It is important to know that for them, being truthful to Americans would place their agenda in jeopardy; and when confronted, their strategy is to maintain that their words have been “taken out of context,” to dismiss critics as fringe groups who irrationally fear Islam, and to throw out accusations of “anti-Muslim bigotry” and “intolerance”.

They falsely play victim and have no legitimate defense; for it is their prejudices, religious intolerance, and ideological dogma that can threaten safety and civil society.

When the audience is the American public, these particular ideologists will speak of peace, dialogue and inclusiveness. When they are in front of their co-religionists, the conversation changes.