Something performed by a Muslim that would be attributed to mental health issues if done by a Christian.
WTC Mosque Part Four!!!
- Thread starter Forty-Two
- Start date
kill fire
Enormous Midget
As far as I know terrorism means exactly what the word looks like it means.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
The word looks like it mean "in favour of terror", which it plainly does not. Try harder.
kill fire
Enormous Midget
Okay, to the best of my knowlage, a terrorist is someone who attempts to cause terror.
ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
What if it is called "Shock and Awe?" is it OK then?
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
So the director of The Excorcist was a terrorist?
Or certain Halloween-costume wearers . . .
kill fire
Enormous Midget
Or the Kool Aid Man.
But.... but..... but.... WHO THE FRAKKIN HELL CARES WHAT HE SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Read the damned Constitution. It makes everything he might say on the subject as irrelevant as a fart in a hurricane.
flamingzaroc121
Emperor
bernie14
Filter Manipulator
actually, if u follow the posts back, i was referring to muslims in europe (the good ones) and i'll go even further, i am critical of ALL muslims (including imam rauf) that (without risk to "life or limb") do not come out and denounce organizations like hamas or al queda, the same as i would be critical of christians that do not come out and denounce organizations like the ira or pedophiles.....
interesting, that would come as a surprise to most people who really know me (jerry springer defense
), but another interesting thing that i have realized is the the same amount of "rational thought" is required for:....all those musleems for the mosque must be al queda.....
and
....all those amerikuns against the mosque must be islamophobes....
see first point.....
But.... but..... but.... WHO THE FRAKKIN HELL CARES WHAT HE SAY!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Read the damned Constitution. It makes everything he might say on the subject as irrelevant as a fart in a hurricane.
forget to take your meds?
It's around 50% of those who are against the mosque, actually - that's what the polling has indicated - who are against it due to genuine intolerance; the rest are simply sympathetic towards those who are intolerant or otherwise don't think it's a wise idea in the same way that one wouldn't feel that a black man dating a white woman is a good idea in the 50s.bernie14 said:
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Or in the case of the Maryland man, a person who was an "environmentalist" instead of a Muslim, even though he was clearly suffering from many mental health issues. Claiming someone with particular views is a "terrorist" has apparently become a rationalization to be intolerant of the entire group.
I agree. I think you have a group of bigots who are staunchly opposed to it. mainly because they conflate terrorism with Islam. And there is another group that is trying to "respect their feelings" while deliberately ignoring the feelings of everybody else, especially the victims of these "feelings".
Forget to read the Constitution?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Ironic in that your comment had nothing to do with it (the consitution) either....
The consitution doesnt make what he says irrelevant, just that he has the right (within reason) to say it.
Whats relevant is that same constitution also protects our right to make his comments relevant....or not. We can either simply ignore them....or comment on them by virture of our own freedom of speech.
And this just in apparently: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...investor-contributed-designated-terror-group/
I wonder if this is why Imam Rauf wouldnt outright call Hamas a terrorist organization?
Yes, because some dude made a "significant" investment in the park 51 mosque also happened to donate $6,000 (really? 6 grand?) 2 years before the group he invested in was revealed to have supported Hamas, whatever that means. (Presumably this is what designated it a "terror organization.")
Oh wait it gets better: according to random Terror-Investigator-Guy-No-One-has-Ever-Heard-Of, he heard that other news outlets reported HLF had possible ties to other "terror organizations." Get this guy a Pulitzer!
Clearly, this story shows that Imam Rauf is corrupt and totally inextricably linked to this awful, shady and nefarious scheme to fund Hamas! The curtain has been peeled back!
Oh wait it gets better: according to random Terror-Investigator-Guy-No-One-has-Ever-Heard-Of, he heard that other news outlets reported HLF had possible ties to other "terror organizations." Get this guy a Pulitzer!
Clearly, this story shows that Imam Rauf is corrupt and totally inextricably linked to this awful, shady and nefarious scheme to fund Hamas! The curtain has been peeled back!
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
That's why I love freedom of speech so much. Their own words are really their worst enemy.
And I love how US citizens can openly give money to terrorist groups like the Jewish Defense League. But they are evil incarnate if they give money to any group which could possibly be associated with Muslim "terrorism", even if they gave the money two years before it was designated as being "bad".
Is it time we start compiling similar lists of those who gave money to organizations that bombed abortion clinics and killed or injured their workers, even if those organizations had never done so before the donations were made?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Care to provide some names of those prominant citizens? Can you? You should be able to since you state they do so 'openly'. Please give us some proof of your allegations...
And I only indulge in your red herring distraction for the simple reason I like asking you for proof of your allegations. Not that they really offer any counter to the situation of the Park51 funding...
Again, does anyone actually think this will help the situation? I dont.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Perhaps you would care to make a donation to an organization the FBI claims is a terrorist organization yourself?
http://www.jdl.org/index.php/get-involved/donate/
It's obviously no "red herring" to mention how hypocritical this clearly is after you brought the subject up. If anything, you mentioning it is the real "red herring" here since it clearly has nothing to do with why a handful of bigots were so "offended" in the first place.
And I see you clipped off the part about investigating those who gave to organizations that committed terrorist acts in the US against abortion clinincs and its workers. Coincidence, or don't you wish to discuss that hypocrisy as well?
http://www.jdl.org/index.php/get-involved/donate/
It's obviously no "red herring" to mention how hypocritical this clearly is after you brought the subject up. If anything, you mentioning it is the real "red herring" here since it clearly has nothing to do with why a handful of bigots were so "offended" in the first place.
And I see you clipped off the part about investigating those who gave to organizations that committed terrorist acts in the US against abortion clinincs and its workers. Coincidence, or don't you wish to discuss that hypocrisy as well?
