Ratigan: Why is it inherently wrong for a mosque to exist near ground zero? And the reason I ask the question is this, are we operating as a society on the presumption that all Muslims are terrorists that want to kill us and as such any Muslim gathering place is a higher statistical probability of our own death or subjection to terrorism by the mere mathematical equivalency of Muslims equals terrorists?

Pataki: No... no, no. Dylan of course not. If this were a corner mosque for a local community, I don't think you would hear this reaction at all, but this is supposed to be a major center of Islamic... ah... whatever... tolerance... it's 12 to 15 stories high. This is not the neighborhood mosque... (crosstalk)

Ratigan: But what's the difference with it being Muslim?

Pataki: This is a symbol of Islam being built two blocks... (crosstalk)

Ratigan: What's wrong with that?

Pataki: Let me tell... the point is that it was Islamist terrorists who attacked us on September 11th they weren't Buddhists, they weren't Episcopalians (crosstalk)...

Ratigan: But they were Christians that bombed Oklahoma City, in other words we're making the leap between people who were subscribing to Islam and some interpretation who clearly attacked us...

Pataki: Right.

Ratigan: And saying that that subscription then applies in theory to all Muslims where we could do this with Christians...

Pataki: No... no... no! (crosstalk) Not at all... not at all. Dylan I'm kind of confused by your logic here or forgive me but lack of logic.

The only one confused here is Pataki after his talking points got stepped on.