This thread is not about the new mosque, but the one already there

[JollyRoger]

Couple of isolated incidents nationwide, a movement does not make.

Like hijackings?

 

[Whiskey_Lord]

I support the mosque because I just want to watch the world burn. Why so serious?

 

[MobBoss]

Again, this fact is irrelevant.

Maybe for you. For others? Not so much.

To construct an analogy, imagine there was a murder (or two) in a hotel last night. Would saying that all criminals who committed the crime are in the hotel justify taking radical action against all the inhabitants of the hotel? Should we jail all of them? Should we stop employing and allowing these people in our midst?

Would you stay in that hotel knowing two murders had just occurred in it?



I am not saying take action against anyone. I am saying make a common sense judgement based upon previous history. Just like most reasonable people wouldnt want to stay in a hotel where two murders had just occurred, no one wants to see a muslim mosque built that close to the site of the most significant act of muslim terrorism against america occurred.

You actually helped my point quite a bit with that analogy. Thanks.

Discrimination should only be directed at groups where the vast majority of the group is deserving of it, not a small percentage.

Sure. And a lot of people would discriminate against a motel where murders had just occurred.

 

[JollyRoger]

I wouldn't buy a coat near where skyscrapers collasped.

 

[Flying Pig]

I am not saying take action against anyone. I am saying make a common sense judgement based upon previous history. Just like most reasonable people wouldnt want to stay in a hotel where two murders had just occurred, no one wants to see a muslim mosque built that close to the site of the most significant act of muslim terrorism against america occurred.

No, but refusing to stay there ten years after the murders is stupid. The Taj in Bombay, where the Indian equivalent of 9/11 happened in 2008, is still their answer to the Ritz. And as I keep saying, not all terrorists are muslims in America; there are churches in Aldershot, Brighton, Omagh... where Christians committed terrorist attacks on British soil. Hell, the sunday after the Aldershot bombing all the catholics, protestants and all other christians went down to the chapel and prayed about what had just happened. Nobody there felt for a minute that those should be tarred with the same brush as the people who had done the attack. By the way, those nasty people in balaklavas did get rather a lot of support from the US before you found out how little fun being attacked is.

 

[useless]

Pre-9/11 Terrorists "were": White, Irish Catholics
After-9/11 Terrorists "were": Middle-Eastern Muslims

 

[kill fire]

No, its not. Its this:

Most terrorists are Muslims.

Actually it seems to be more like this:

Most terrorists are Muslims.

Therefore, all Muslims must be terrorists.

It may not make sense, but it seems to me to be the basic argument.

 

[MobBoss]

Actually it seems to be more like this:

Most terrorists are Muslims.

Therefore, all Muslims must be terrorists.

It may not make sense, but it seems to me to be the basic argument.

If you can, please link me someone actually quoting that all muslims are terrorists. Someone sane that is, and not a member of the KKK, WBC or something similar.

 

[useless]

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/ Who would of thought, eh?

 

[the343danny]

Seriously theres way more non Muslim terrorists than Muslim ones. As shown by useless's link theres more Jewish terrorists than Muslim ones

Perhaps for the Christians in this thread it would be better to think of it from your own point of view. Christian gatherings are prohibited near an area of a Westboro Baptist demonstration of any kind

 

[MobBoss]

http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-all-terrorists-are-muslims/ Who would of thought, eh?

That doesnt say 'all muslims are terrorists', nor does it quote anyone at all.

Who would have thought that you couldnt give adequate proof?

Seriously theres way more non Muslim terrorists than Muslim ones. As shown by useless's link theres more Jewish terrorists than Muslim ones

Dont you think something named 'loonwatch' might be a bit suspect on their facts?

Seriously.

 

[holy king]

But thats twice as far away as the other mosque!!

i love you mobby.

 

[holy king]

I LEARNED EVERYTHING I NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ISLAM ON 9/11

Nuff said.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-already-knows-everything-he-needs-to-know-abou,17990/

Man Already Knows Everything He Needs To Know About Muslims

SALINA, KS—Local man Scott Gentries told reporters Wednesday that his deliberately limited grasp of Islamic history and culture was still more than sufficient to shape his views of the entire Muslim world.

Gentries, 48, said he had absolutely no interest in exposing himself to further knowledge of Islamic civilization or putting his sweeping opinions into a broader context of any kind, and confirmed he was "perfectly happy" to make a handful of emotionally charged words the basis of his mistrust toward all members of the world's second-largest religion.

"I learned all that really matters about the Muslim faith on 9/11," Gentries said in reference to the terrorist attacks on the United States undertaken by 19 of Islam's approximately 1.6 billion practitioners. "What more do I need to know to stigmatize Muslims everywhere as inherently violent radicals?"

"And now they want to build a mosque at Ground Zero," continued Gentries, eliminating any distinction between the 9/11 hijackers and Muslims in general. "No, I won't examine the accuracy of that statement, but yes, I will allow myself to be outraged by it and use it as evidence of these people's universal callousness toward Americans who lost loved ones when the Twin Towers fell."

"Even though I am not one of those people," he added.

When told that the proposed "Ground Zero mosque" is actually a community center two blocks north of the site that would include, in addition to a public prayer space, a 500-seat auditorium, a restaurant, and athletic facilities, Gentries shook his head and said, "I know all I'm going to let myself know."

Gentries explained that it "didn't take long" to find out as much about the tenets of Islam as he needed to. He said he knew Muslims stoned their women for committing adultery, trained for terrorist attacks at fundamentalist madrassas, and believed in jihad, which Gentries described as the thing they used to justify killing infidels.

"All Muslims are at war with America, and I will resist any attempt to challenge that assertion with potentially illuminating facts," said Gentries, who threatened to leave the room if presented with the number of Muslims who live peacefully in the United States, serve in the country's armed forces, or were victims themselves of the 9/11 attacks. "Period."

"If you don't believe me, wait until they put your wife in a burka," Gentries continued in reference to the face-and-body-covering worn by a small minority of Muslim women and banned in the universities of Turkey, Tunisia, and Syria. "Or worse, a rape camp. That's right: For reasons I am content being totally unable to articulate, I am choosing to associate Muslims with rape camps."

Over the past decade, Gentries said he has taken pains to avoid personal interactions or media that might have the potential to compromise his point of view. He told reporters that the closest he had come to confronting a contrary standpoint was tuning in to the first few seconds of an interview with a moderate Muslim cleric before hastily turning off the television.

"I almost gave in and listened to that guy defend Islam with words I didn't want to hear," Gentries said. "But then I remembered how much easier it is to live in a world of black-and-white in which I can assign the label of 'other' to someone and use him as a vessel for all my fears and insecurities."

Added Gentries, "That really put things back into perspective."

 

[useless]

That doesnt say 'all muslims are terrorists', nor does it quote anyone at all.

Who would have thought that you couldnt give adequate proof?



Dont you think something named 'loonwatch' might be a bit suspect on their facts?

Seriously.

I'm actually still waiting for an arguement against the "mosque" that isn't "I'm offended" which is a pathetic arguement anyway, but one that you seem unable to deviate from.

 

[MobBoss]

I'm actually still waiting for an arguement against the "mosque" that isn't "I'm offended" which is a pathetic arguement anyway, but one that you seem unable to deviate from.

There have been several. Like preventing our enemies from considering it a 'victory mosque' for one.

However, if you choose to ignore such arguments. /shrug.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I think we ignored those arguments because they were total bollocks.

 

[useless]

Remember folks; Muslims are our enemies!

 

[MobBoss]

I think we ignored those arguments because they were total bollocks.

No, they werent.

I find your argument in support of the mosque total bollocks.

Does my opinion invalidate yours?

Should your opinion in turn invalidate mine?

Again, other argument has indeed been given. To ignore it and then claim no other argument has been given is simply disengenuous and not very accurate of the situation at all.

 

[useless]

Our argument is based upon legal fact. Your argument is based upon a bigoted view that all muslims are terrorists/terrorist sympathisers.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

No, they werent.

I find your argument in support of the mosque total bollocks.

Does my opinion invalidate yours?

Should your opinion in turn invalidate mine?

Again, other argument has indeed been given. To ignore it and then claim no other argument has been given is simply disengenuous and not very accurate of the situation at all.

No it isn't.

No.

Yes.

/repeat for 4 or more threads and you have your arguments in a nutshell.