WTC Mosque Part Four!!!

[bernie14]

What would be your opinion if they were to add an interfaith chapel in addition to the mosque?

good question, if access is equal (to mosque and chapel), i dont think i would have a problem...

 

[JollyRoger]

I can understand the California issue. Religious buildings should be regulated like strip clubs . . . at least 1,000 feet from elementary or secondary schools, child-care centers, community centers, public parks or open space where children tend to congregate, and at least 1,000 feet apart from each other.

 

[naterator]

Apparently, Temecula, CA is also far too close to hallowed ground zero for many:

Bigots would have you believe that this was brought on by the actions of the NY mosque builders, for 'worsening relations between Muslims and Americans'.

Kind of like how those darn Negroes, with provocative and unpopular notions of equality, forced all those innocent policemen to turn the dogs and fire hoses on them at protests.

 

[bernie14]

Apparently, Temecula, CA is also far too close to hallowed ground zero for many:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2012134,00.html



Madera, CA mosque attacked three times in one week:

Mosque attack in California refers to Ground Zero

thank you for pointing out just how little "islamophobia" has to do with the ground zero argument....in the first article, a ratio of 3 to 1 defended the rights of the muslims to worship in peace and your second article mentions some isolated case which is being considered a hate crime....very far from the 3/4 americans who r against the mosque

 

[Formaldehyde]

BigKind of like how those darn Negroes, with provocative and unpopular notions of equality, forced all those innocent policemen to turn the dogs and fire hoses on them at protests.

At least nobody is lynching Muslims yet, much less assassinating one of their major leaders.

 

[Bill3000]

your numbers "a little off" by the latest polls, as is your logic;



so according to the poll, u can have a favorable view of islam and still be against the mosque?

Okay, I think you must clearly fail at math, because I said that 50% of those who are opposed to the mosque do so for intolerant reasons. Your poll confirms what I said, as it said that 39% of Americans have an unfavorable view of Islam, and 88% of those are against the mosque. With 71% of Americans being against the mosque that means .88*39/71 = ~48% of those who are against the mosque due to their intolerance, just off by 2 percentage points from my rough estimate. I didn't say that you could have a favorable view of Islam and against the mosque, just that half of those who are against the mosque do so because they are intolerant of Islam. This isn't counting the people who are against the mosque because it is insensitive to those who are ultimately intolerant of Islam. (probably within those who are indifferent of Islam) With 48% of those against the Mosque due to their Islamophobia, you cannot in any sense say that it has nothing to do with the "ground zero" argument just because only 14% (.42*42/71) of those who are against the mosque are favorable of Islam.

 

[JollyRoger]

Can't even enjoy chicken fried bacon without being terrorized:

Despite the smells of fried dough and roasted meat wafting from the Minnesota State Fair, Salim and Zuleyha Ozonder were focused on the people who were leaving, not the food or festivities beckoning from across the street.

Each time a new wave of people exited, the young Minneapolis residents — who hadn't eaten all day — tried to press into their hands a small, glossy card that read "Islam Explained" on one side. On the other, it had about 180 words of background on a religion whose adherents fear is being misunderstood by too many Americans as violent and depraved.

"You just want people to take the card, spend a minute reading it and say, 'Oh. They're not terrorists,'" said 27-year-old Zuleyha. She and her husband, like other Muslims, were fasting during daylight hours for the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

For most fairgoers, the last thing on their mind is religion — particularly the renewed controversy over Islam in America amid tension over plans for an Islamic center and mosque a few blocks from New York City's ground zero. But volunteers with the Minnesota chapter of Islamic Circle of North America saw the mostly white, Christian fair crowd as just the type of audience that might benefit from greater understanding.

The "Great Minnesota Get-Together" is one of the largest and best-attended state fairs in the country. Every day for 12 days through Labor Day, hundreds of thousands of people stream onto the fairgrounds north of St. Paul to scarf highly caloric food, stare at farm animals, clamber onto carnival rides and enjoy concerts by country singers and classic rock dinosaurs.

"What are they doing here?" said Paulette Kahlstorf of Zimmerman, who declined a card from Zuleyha as she left the fairgrounds with her husband. "I didn't come here for that."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_muslims_at_the_fair

 

[naterator]

At least nobody is lynching Muslims yet, much less assassinating one of their major leaders.

Sorry if i was unclear, I meant to expect a blame the victim mentality, not that the levels of difficulty faced by the 2 groups was comparable.

 

[Ajidica]

Can't even enjoy chicken fried bacon without being terrorized:


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_muslims_at_the_fair

I'll have to check that out. I'm going to the Minnesota State Fair tomorrow.

 

[MobBoss]

No, nobody gives money to the JDL. That's why they solicit donations on a public website and have a number of members both here and in Israel.

Who is on the member list here?

And you still haven't addressed why we aren't treating Christians who support organizations that have bombed abortion clinics and killed their workers the same way as you want to treat those who gave to organizations long before they were declared as supposedly supporting terrorism.

Actually, I am sure they are under observation as well. Almost any radical organization w/violent tendencies is these days.

And I already said such groups should be tracked. What more do you want?

Aren't they also evil "terrorists" like those who support Hamas? Should we use your standard against those who made contributions even before the organizations engaged in terrorism as you wish to do here?

Which *organizations* would those be?

And why haven't you openly condemned these organizations as much as Imam Rauf has condemned Muslim terrorism?

I have. Many times right on these forums. For example, I condemn the WBC all the time. Directly. How many times has Imam Rauf called Hamas a terrorist group? Hmm?

 

[Ajidica]

I have. Many times right on these forums. For example, I condemn the WBC all the time. Directly. How many times has Imam Rauf called Hamas a terrorist group? Hmm?

None. But on the other hand he has spoken out numerous times against terrorism and was Bush's Middle East peace envoy.
Does the imam have to conform to every view you posses in order for you to accept him?

Unless the government steps in, the protesters cannot force Park51 to leave. The government getting involved in religous issues is on very shakey ground.

good question, if access is equal (to mosque and chapel), i dont think i would have a problem...

So your objection is not the the mosque itself, but rather it having religous exclusivity?
Interesting.
MobBoss, if Park51 were to include an interfaith chapel in addition to the mosque, would you still have a problem with it?

 

[Formaldehyde]

I have. Many times right on these forums. For example, I condemn the WBC all the time.

I'm obviously not referring to the WBC here. Nearly everybody thinks they are nuts. Besides, I don't think they have committed any acts of terror. Do you?

For instance, where was your condemnation of Bill O'Reilly for repeatedly stating Tiller the "Baby Killer" on the air? Almost everybody in this forum was appalled and codemned O'Reilly for doing so after Tiller's vicious murder in a Christian church. But I certainly don't remember you doing so. Weren't you defending these individuals who openly provoked his murderer into killing him with their continual rhetoric of hatred? Wouldn't you classify taking the life of an innocent civlian like this an act of "terrorism" based on your own use of the word?

Have you ever condemned an Israeli atrocity, and the US vetoing of any accompanying UN Security Council resolution against them afterwards?

Have you ever condemned a terrorist attack against Iran, or even Turkey?

 

[Traitorfish]

Another sign read, "Wake up America, the enemy is here."

()

 

[holy king]

well, that's why you have all those private weapns.

 

[Traitorfish]

If I didn't have this gun, the King of England could just come in here any time he wants and start pushing you around. Do you want that? Well, do ya?

 

[Ajidica]

()

This actualy reminds of a Mel Brooks joke.

Reporter: Here I am talking with the Two-Thousand year old man. Tell me sir, what did you think of Paul Revere?
Two Thousand year old man: An anti-semite -------.
Reporter: What makes you think that?
Two Thousand year old man: As soon as I moved into the neighborhood he ran around screaming "The Yiddish are coming! The Yiddish are coming!"
Reporter: No sir, you have it wrong. He was screaming "The British are coming! The British are coming!"
Two Thousands year old man: Oh.

OT but I couldn't resist posting that.

 

[MobBoss]

None. But on the other hand he has spoken out numerous times against terrorism and was Bush's Middle East peace envoy.
Does the imam have to conform to every view you posses in order for you to accept him?

Not every view, no. But since we do have freedom of speech, going ahead and calling a blatently terrorist organization as 'terrorist' is one that would help me accept him. A lot.

Unless the government steps in, the protesters cannot force Park51 to leave. The government getting involved in religous issues is on very shakey ground.

Well, its not a 'religious issue' yet, as the Park51 developers havent applied for a non-profit qualification yet, and also owe the city of New York around 250k in back taxes on the property...

MobBoss, if Park51 were to include an interfaith chapel in addition to the mosque, would you still have a problem with it?

If it were 'interfaith' it wouldnt be a mosque now would it?

I'm obviously not referring to the WBC here. Nearly everybody thinks they are nuts. Besides, I don't think they have committed any acts of terror. Do you?

I would say the same demograph that find the WBC nuts, also find abortion clinic bombers/shooters just as nuts.

For instance, where was your condemnation of Bill O'Reilly for repeatedly stating Tiller the "Baby Killer" on the air?

Is Bill O'Reilly now a radical religious terrorist?

Seriously, Form. He is a pundit. Its his job to say such things. You are simply helping his ratings by watching him say it.

And saying abortion doctors are 'baby killers' isnt even in the same league as bombing an abortion clinic. Even you would admit that. Or at least I would hope you would.

Almost everybody in this forum was appalled and codemned O'Reilly for doing so after Tiller's vicious murder in a Christian church.

I dont even remember that happening, let alone 'almost everybody' in the forum talking about it. Do you have a link to a thread talking about it so I can see what you are referencing? Please link it.

But I certainly don't remember you doing so. Weren't you defending these individuals who openly provoked his murderer into killing him with their continual rhetoric of hatred?

Nope. I think people who bomb or murder should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Wouldn't you classify taking the life of an innocent civlian like this an act of "terrorism" based on your own use of the word?

Depends on the specific incident. Certainly could be domestic terrorism sure.

Have you ever condemned an Israeli atrocity

I dont think we will agree on whats an atrocity. Just sayin.

and the US vetoing of any accompanying UN Security Council resolution against them afterwards?

Not sure what you are trying to accomplish with the red herring here. Why dont you point to something we would both agree is an atrocity, and go from there.

Have you ever condemned a terrorist attack against Iran, or even Turkey?

I dont live in either of those two countries. Could you be a bit more specific as to the act? I would condemn it if I actually thought it a terrorist attack. That fair enough for you?

 

[Ajidica]

Not every view, no. But since we do have freedom of speech, going ahead and calling a blatently terrorist organization as 'terrorist' is one that would help me accept him. A lot.

Hamas in many ways is the de facto government of Gaza. Since he has condemned the terrorist activities, asking him to condemn it would be like asking someone to condemn an allied government.
Is there a single view he doesn't have to share with you for you to accept him? He has freedom of speach and has condemned Islamic terrorism.

Well, its not a 'religious issue' yet, as the Park51 developers havent applied for a non-profit qualification yet, and also owe the city of New York around 250k in back taxes on the property...

Is the tax issue something the protesters can do?

If it were 'interfaith' it wouldnt be a mosque now would it?

Did you miss the words "In addition to"?

 

[Jos Ballenbak]

()

I demand to know who that black guy is!!!

BECAUSE HE IS: AWESOME!!!

 

[Formaldehyde]

Is Bill O'Reilly now a radical religious terrorist?

O'Reilly has certainly "preached" hatred, as the clip of him frequently ranting about Tiller prior to his murder "proves". Yet you do nothing to condemn him, or any of the other fanatics, who share your own opinions. Even so, you try to condemn Imam Rauf for merely not speaking up loudly enough about a single "terrorist" entity, even when he has made it quite clear that he does not support terrorism in any form.

And saying abortion doctors are 'baby killers' isnt even in the same league as bombing an abortion clinic. Even you would admit that. Or at least I would hope you would.

It most certainly is. Where do you think these religious nuts get their opinions from on both sides?

Why do you continue to condemn one side for supposedly spreading hatred and violence, while not condemning the other which is clearly doing so?

I dont even remember that happening, let alone 'almost everybody' in the forum talking about it. Do you have a link to a thread talking about it so I can see what you are referencing? Please link it.

You don't remember the "bake sale for terrorists" thread, or any of the others where Bill O'Reilly's opinions regarding Tiller were discussed at length?

But lets not forget that Tiller was also a man that performed late term third tri-mester abortions as well. I dont think he should have been shot and killed....but the idea of dismembering and removing a viable third term baby isnt exactly palatable for many people either...

Now wait a minute. Are you actually trying to say that cutting up and removing an otherwise viable baby that could indeed live outside the womb is 'just a job'?

Thats just horrible, and is precisely why we need a late term abortion ban.

Again, simply because its legal...doesnt make it right. I dont advocate this guy getting killed - I dont think its the answer to the problem; but lets at least make it clear why he was shot.

And thats what makes the practice of it so horrible.

(Emphasis mine.)

AFAIK you have yet to criticize Bill O'Relly, or anybody else, for fomenting so much hatred towards a fellow Christian who had a very honorable job as a medical doctor and was highly respected by his church members. Instead, you keep trying to rationalize the opinions which spark these religious nutjobs into committing these despicable acts while trying to defend it through propaganda you apparently heard somewhere instead of the facts.

Isn't that what you are trying to claim Muslim religious figures in the US are doing, even though you really have no "proof" to justify it?

Nope. I think people who bomb or murder should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Yet you still apparently won't condemn those who deliberately incite that violence through propaganda and even deliberate lies.

I dont think we will agree on whats an atrocity. Just sayin.

Exactly. And I bet neither does Imam Rauf agree with you and Israel in this matter, or most of the rest of the world for that matter. Yet you apparently want him to become a pawn of Israeli/reactionary propaganda while ignoring the basic facts.

I would condemn it if I actually thought it a terrorist attack.

Indeed. That is exactly my point. You are selectively condemning what you personally think is terrorism. Yet you are trying to find fault with those whom you think are doing it to a much lesser extent than you apparently do.