Muslims in NYC Planning to Build Second Mosque Near Ground Zero (1 Viewer)

[John555]

So you still hate America?

Of course I do. I'm Religious.

Glad we finally got that straight. Now I have to go check my backyard for Muslim terrorists.

 

[drummer]

So you still hate America?

Of course I do. I'm Religious.

Glad we finally got that straight. Now I have to go check my backyard for Muslim terrorists.

I planted bombs back there. Don't worry. It just launches a bunch Latter Day Christ fliers all over your lawn.

 

[Jewell]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness?

Absolutely, they are. That's precisely why we don't need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world. Reasonable, objective people already know that people in the United States enjoy more freedoms than citizens of most nations. Our track record is well established, and that's why so many people immigrate here.What's not well established is Rauf's track record. Why must the U.S. prove that it holds up to it's ideals, but Rauf doesn't have to prove that he lives up to his espoused ideals. Rauf insists that "[r]ather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam."If he's serious about "advocating for human rights, including higher standards for the treatment of women," as he claims, he should open his mosque where women actually need "higher standards" of treatment. Take for example Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.Instead of wasting critical time "educating" Americans on the true teaching and values of Islam, he should educate those Muslims who he says have "hijacked" its meaning in the name of terrorism and human rights abuses.

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

 

[drummer]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness?

Absolutely, they are. That's precisely why we don't need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world. Reasonable, objective people already know that people in the United States enjoy more freedoms than citizens of most nations. Our track record is well established, and that's why so many people immigrate here.What's not well established is Rauf's track record. Why must the U.S. prove that it holds up to it's ideals, but Rauf doesn't have to prove that he lives up to his espoused ideals. Rauf insists that "[r]ather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam."If he's serious about "[a]dvocating for human rights, including higher standards for the treatment of women," as he claims, he should open his mosque where women actually need "higher standards" of treatment. Take for example Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.Instead of wasting critical time "educating" Americans on the true teaching and values of Islam, he should educate those Muslims who he says have "hijacked" its meaning in the name of terrorism and human rights abuses.

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

In fairness, you could easily pick apart any Religious leader, especially Pat Robertson, who has espoused radical rhetoric in the name of Christ. Terrorist rhetoric. Yet he has a network to build churches nationwide.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....

Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

 

[ScottyFargo]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

The terrorists are trying to alter how America works by making us react with fear and anger. They don't like Americanized Muslims, they want fundamentalists like they are.

 

[timschochet]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world: 1. We do not consider Islam to be the moral equal of Christianity and Judaism.2. We equate Islam with the 9/11 attacks against this nation.3. We do not respect the term "moderate Islam"; to us, all Islam is radical, evil, and our enemy. If the protests hadn't started, I agree that it wouldn't have really matter. But now it absolutely does.

 

[timschochet]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

The terrorists are trying to alter how America works by making us react with fear and anger. They don't like Americanized Muslims, they want fundamentalists like they are.

Exactly. 1n 1942, the Japanese armed forces were delighted that we chose to send 100,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps. It allowed them to claim the moral high ground especially in the some of the Asian countries they conquered (this is well-documented in John Toland's The Rising Sun.) Plus, the Japanese hated the Japanese-Americans whom they believed were traitors to Japan. It's sad to see that we keep repeating the same sad history over and over.

 

[drummer]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

It does matter. The issue is really not of opposing a church as it is opposing a threat of a culture with a background that has a lot of violence within it. Yet if we historically looked at violence within religion and/or culture, or violence against it...Well, there is some pretty heady data there.

 

[Christo]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....

Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world:

I stopped reading here. Here's the difference between you and me. I understand that the rest of the world acts like it loves us when we do stuff for them, hates us when we bomb them but otherwise really doesn't care for us. Whatever happens in this case will change no one's mind about us.

 

[drummer]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

The terrorists are trying to alter how America works by making us react with fear and anger. They don't like Americanized Muslims, they want fundamentalists like they are.

Americans are subject to conditioning by picking one side or the other. Liberals and Conservatives are just labels now, with the media being a proxy to compile data on what side sells more.

 

[the moops]

Absolutely, they are. That's precisely why we don't need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world.

Seems to me you are saying that, since we as a country have been tolerant enough to let those Muslims build some mosques, that our work is done now and we can start limiting their freedoms.That's precisely why we DO need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world.

 

[Steve Tasker]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world: 1. We do not consider Islam to be the moral equal of Christianity and Judaism.2. We equate Islam with the 9/11 attacks against this nation.3. We do not respect the term "moderate Islam"; to us, all Islam is radical, evil, and our enemy. If the protests hadn't started, I agree that it wouldn't have really matter. But now it absolutely does.

The people who WANT to paint the US as a country that devalues/disrespects Islam are going to do so regardless of what happens. This is an issue because a bunch of people who are looking for a reason to get pissed off decided they wanted to make it an issue.Whole lot of in here.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

It does matter. The issue is really not of opposing a church as it is opposing a threat of a culture with a background that has a lot of violence within it. Yet if we historically looked at violence within religion and/or culture, or violence against it...Well, there is some pretty heady data there.

Could you english that up a bit? TIA

 

[drummer]

Absolutely, they are. That's precisely why we don't need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world.

Seems to me you are saying that, since we as a country have been tolerant enough to let those Muslims build some mosques, that our work is done now and we can start limiting their freedoms.That's precisely why we DO need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world.

If we boiled it down to it being another Church and or community center built (BTW, proposing a Youth Center has it's own cultural challenges,as well as civic issues and funding where I live) outside of it being Muslim, then jon_mx would...............

Hold on. I was trying to figure out what jon_mx would do outside of the Internet.

 

[John555]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world: 1. We do not consider Islam to be the moral equal of Christianity and Judaism.2. We equate Islam with the 9/11 attacks against this nation.3. We do not respect the term "moderate Islam"; to us, all Islam is radical, evil, and our enemy. If the protests hadn't started, I agree that it wouldn't have really matter. But now it absolutely does.

The people who WANT to paint the US as a country that devalues/disrespects Islam are going to do so regardless of what happens. This is an issue because a bunch of people who are looking for a reason to get pissed off decided they wanted to make it an issue.Whole lot of in here.

How else do you go 32 pages on one topic without the beating of dead horses?

 

[drummer]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

It does matter. The issue is really not of opposing a church as it is opposing a threat of a culture with a background that has a lot of violence within it. Yet if we historically looked at violence within religion and/or culture, or violence against it...Well, there is some pretty heady data there.

Could you english that up a bit? TIA

Sorry dude. Been drinkin' a bit before the 49ers\Vikings pre-season game.

 

[Jewell]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

The terrorists are trying to alter how America works by making us react with fear and anger. They don't like Americanized Muslims, they want fundamentalists like they are.

Exactly. 1n 1942, the Japanese armed forces were delighted that we chose to send 100,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps. It allowed them to claim the moral high ground especially in the some of the Asian countries they conquered (this is well-documented in John Toland's The Rising Sun.) Plus, the Japanese hated the Japanese-Americans whom they believed were traitors to Japan. It's sad to see that we keep repeating the same sad history over and over.

at comparing imprisoning thousands of our own citizens to asking some people if they wouldn't mind moving their proposed facility several blocks away.Besides, we're asking the developers not to build one mosque in one particular location. There are no Churches allowed in Sharia areas and even moderate Muslim nations limit the number of non-Islamic religious facilities. Where is this supposed moral high ground?

 

[John555]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

It does matter. The issue is really not of opposing a church as it is opposing a threat of a culture with a background that has a lot of violence within it. Yet if we historically looked at violence within religion and/or culture, or violence against it...Well, there is some pretty heady data there.

Could you english that up a bit? TIA

Sorry dude. Been drinkin' a bit before the 49ers\Vikings pre-season game.

That is cool. I almost agreed with whatever it was you thought you were saying.

 

[timschochet]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

The terrorists are trying to alter how America works by making us react with fear and anger. They don't like Americanized Muslims, they want fundamentalists like they are.

Exactly. 1n 1942, the Japanese armed forces were delighted that we chose to send 100,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps. It allowed them to claim the moral high ground especially in the some of the Asian countries they conquered (this is well-documented in John Toland's The Rising Sun.) Plus, the Japanese hated the Japanese-Americans whom they believed were traitors to Japan. It's sad to see that we keep repeating the same sad history over and over.

at comparing imprisoning thousands of our own citizens to asking some people if they wouldn't mind moving their proposed facility several blocks away.Besides, we're asking the developers not to build one mosque in one particular location. There are no Churches allowed in Sharia areas and even moderate Muslim nations limit the number of non-Islamic religious facilities. Where is this supposed moral high ground?

We are not a Muslim nation. Why imitate them?

 

[the moops]

There are no Churches allowed in Sharia areas and even moderate Muslim nations limit the number of non-Islamic religious facilities.

This has to be one of the stupidest arguments the right has been making during this whole issue. Do you guys realize how foolish this makes you look?

 

[drummer]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

It does matter. The issue is really not of opposing a church as it is opposing a threat of a culture with a background that has a lot of violence within it. Yet if we historically looked at violence within religion and/or culture, or violence against it...Well, there is some pretty heady data there.

Could you english that up a bit? TIA

Sorry dude. Been drinkin' a bit before the 49ers\Vikings pre-season game.

That is cool. I almost agreed with whatever it was you thought you were saying.

In the end we're all people. I'd be right beside you if you needed help. That's how I was raised, and that's how I will raise. Now, I have to go watch Alex Smith.

 

[timschochet]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....

Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world:

I stopped reading here. Here's the difference between you and me. I understand that the rest of the world acts like it loves us when we do stuff for them, hates us when we bomb them but otherwise really doesn't care for us. Whatever happens in this case will change no one's mind about us.

Well, I strongly disagree with you there. The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

 

[mad sweeney]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness?

Absolutely, they are. That's precisely why we don't need to build the community center near Ground Zero to show our tolerance and freedom to the rest of the world. Reasonable, objective people already know that people in the United States enjoy more freedoms than citizens of most nations. Our track record is well established, and that's why so many people immigrate here.What's not well established is Rauf's track record. Why must the U.S. prove that it holds up to it's ideals, but Rauf doesn't have to prove that he lives up to his espoused ideals. Rauf insists that "[r]ather than fear Shariah law, we should understand what it actually is. Then we can encourage Muslim countries to make the changes that achieve the essence of fairness and justice that are at the root of Islam."

If he's serious about "advocating for human rights, including higher standards for the treatment of women," as he claims, he should open his mosque where women actually need "higher standards" of treatment. Take for example Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran.

Instead of wasting critical time "educating" Americans on the true teaching and values of Islam, he should educate those Muslims who he says have "hijacked" its meaning in the name of terrorism and human rights abuses.

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

This is ridiculously absurd even for this thread. If he's serious why doesn't he do it somewhere else?

 

[timschochet]

Frank Rich is a progressive whom I rarely agree with, but boy does he make some great points on this issue:

THE “ground zero mosque,” as you may well know by now, is not at ground zero. It’s not a mosque but an Islamic cultural center containing a prayer room. It’s not going to determine President Obama’s political future or the elections of 2010 or 2012. Still, the battle that has broken out over this project in Lower Manhattan — on the “hallowed ground” of a shuttered Burlington Coat Factory store one block from the New York Dolls Gentlemen’s Club — will prove eventful all the same. And the consequences will be far more profound than any midterm election results or any of the grand debates now raging 24/7 over the parameters of tolerance, religious freedom, and the real estate gospel of location, location, location.

Here’s what’s been lost in all the screaming. The prime movers in the campaign against the “ground zero mosque” just happen to be among the last cheerleaders for America’s nine-year war in Afghanistan. The wrecking ball they’re wielding is not merely pounding Park51, as the project is known, but is demolishing America’s already frail support for that war, which is dedicated to nation-building in a nation whose most conspicuous asset besides opium is actual mosques.

So virulent is the Islamophobic hysteria of the neocon and Fox News right — abetted by the useful idiocy of the Anti-Defamation League, Harry Reid and other cowed Democrats — that it has also rendered Gen. David Petraeus’s last-ditch counterinsurgency strategy for fighting the war inoperative. How do you win Muslim hearts and minds in Kandahar when you are calling Muslims every filthy name in the book in New York?

You’d think that American hawks invested in the Afghanistan “surge” would not act against their own professed interests. But they couldn’t stop themselves from placing cynical domestic politics over country. The ginned-up rage over the “ground zero mosque” was not motivated by a serious desire to protect America from the real threat of terrorists lurking at home and abroad — a threat this furor has in all likelihood exacerbated — but by the potential short-term rewards of winning votes by pandering to fear during an election season.

We owe thanks to Justin Elliott of Salon for the single most revealing account of this controversy’s evolution. He reports that there was zero reaction to the “ground zero mosque” from the front-line right or anyone else except marginal bloggers when The Times first reported on the Park51 plans in a lengthy front-page article on Dec. 9, 2009. The sole exception came some two weeks later at Fox News, where Laura Ingraham, filling in on “The O’Reilly Factor,” interviewed Daisy Khan, the wife of the project’s organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Ingraham gave the plans her blessing. “I can’t find many people who really have a problem with it,” she said. “I like what you’re trying to do.”

As well Ingraham might. Rauf is no terrorist. He has been repeatedly sent on speaking tours by the Bush and Obama State Departments alike to promote tolerance in Arab and Muslim nations. As Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic reported last week, Rauf gave a moving eulogy at a memorial service for Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter murdered by Islamist terrorists in Pakistan, at the Manhattan synagogue B’nai Jeshurun. Pearl’s father was in attendance. The Park51 board is chock-full of Christians and Jews. Perhaps the most threatening thing about this fledgling multi-use community center, an unabashed imitator of the venerable (and Jewish) 92nd Street Y uptown, is its potential to spawn yet another coveted, impossible-to-get-into Manhattan private preschool.

In the five months after The Times’s initial account there were no newspaper articles on the project at all. It was only in May of this year that the Rupert Murdoch axis of demagoguery revved up, jettisoning Ingraham’s benign take for a New York Post jihad. The paper’s inspiration was a rabidly anti-Islam blogger best known for claiming that Obama was Malcolm X’s illegitimate son. Soon the rest of the Murdoch empire and its political allies piled on, promoting the incendiary libel that the “radical Islamists” behind the “ground zero mosque” were tantamount either to neo-Nazis in Skokie (according to a Wall Street Journal columnist) or actual Nazis (per Newt Gingrich).

These patriots have never attacked the routine Muslim worship services at another site of the 9/11 attacks, the Pentagon. Their sudden concern for ground zero is suspect to those of us who actually live in New York. All but 12 Republicans in the House voted against health benefits for 9/11 responders just last month. Though many of these ground-zero watchdogs partied at the 2004 G.O.P. convention in New York exploiting 9/11, none of them protested that a fellow Republican, the former New York governor George Pataki, so bollixed up the management of the World Trade Center site that nine years on it still lacks any finished buildings, let alone a permanent memorial.

The Fox patron saint Sarah Palin calls Park51 a “stab in the heart” of Americans who “still have that lingering pain from 9/11.” But her only previous engagement with the 9/11 site was when she used it as a political backdrop for taking her first questions from reporters nearly a month after being named to the G.O.P. ticket. (She was so eager to grab her ground zero photo op that she defied John McCain’s just-announced “suspension” of their campaign.) Her disingenuous piety has been topped only by Bernie Kerik, who smuggled a Twitter message out of prison to register his rage at the ground zero desecration. As my colleague Clyde Haberman reminded us, such was Kerik’s previous reverence for the burial ground of 9/11 that he appropriated an apartment overlooking the site (and designated for recovery workers) for an extramarital affair.

At the Islamophobia command center, Murdoch’s News Corporation, the hypocrisy is, if anything, thicker. A recent Wall Street Journal editorial darkly cited unspecified “reports” that Park51 has “money coming from Saudi charities or Gulf princes that also fund Wahabi madrassas.” As Jon Stewart observed, this brand of innuendo could also be applied to News Corp., whose second largest shareholder after the Murdoch family is a member of the Saudi royal family. Perhaps last week’s revelation that News Corp. has poured $1 million into G.O.P. campaign coffers was a fiendishly clever smokescreen to deflect anyone from following the far greater sum of Saudi money (a $3 billion stake) that has flowed into Murdoch enterprises, or the News Corp. money (at least $70 million) recently invested in a Saudi media company.

Were McCain in the White House, Fox and friends would have kept ignoring Park51. But it’s an irresistible target in our current election year because it revives the most insidious anti-Obama narrative of the many Fox promoted in the previous election year: Obama the closet Muslim and secret madrassa alumnus. In the much discussed latest Pew poll, a record number of Americans (nearing 20 percent) said that our Christian president practices Islam. And they do not see that as a good thing. Existing or proposed American mosques hundreds and even thousands of miles from ground zero, from Tennessee to Wisconsin to California, are now under siege.

After 9/11, President Bush praised Islam as a religion of peace and asked for tolerance for Muslims not necessarily because he was a humanitarian or knew much about Islam but because national security demanded it. An America at war with Islam plays right into Al Qaeda’s recruitment spiel. This month’s incessant and indiscriminate orgy of Muslim-bashing is a national security disaster for that reason — Osama bin Laden’s “next video script has just written itself,” as the former F.B.I. terrorist interrogator Ali Soufan put it — but not just for that reason. America’s Muslim partners, those our troops are fighting and dying for, are collateral damage. If the cleric behind Park51 — a man who has participated in events with Condoleezza Rice and Karen Hughes, for heaven’s sake — is labeled a closet terrorist sympathizer and a Nazi by some of the loudest and most powerful conservative voices in America, which Muslims are not?

In the latest CNN poll, American opposition is at an all-time high to both the ostensibly concluded war in Iraq (69 percent) and the endless one in Afghanistan (62 percent). Now, when the very same politicians and pundits who urge infinite patience for Afghanistan slime Muslims as Nazis, they will have to explain that they are not talking about Hamid Karzai or his corrupt narco-thug government or the questionably loyal Afghan armed forces our own forces are asked to entrust with their lives. The hawks will have to make the case that American troops should make the ultimate sacrifice to build a Nazi — Afghan, I mean — nation and that economically depressed taxpayers should keep paying for it. Good luck with that.

Poor General Petraeus. Over the last week he has been ubiquitous in the major newspapers and on television as he pursues a publicity tour to pitch the war he’s inherited. But have you heard any buzz about what he had to say? Any debate? Any anything? No one was listening and no one cared. Everyone was too busy yelling about the mosque.

It’s poignant, really. Even as America’s most venerable soldier returned from the front to valiantly assume the role of Willy Loman, the product he was selling was being discredited and discontinued by his own self-proclaimed allies at home.

 

[Jewell]

Exactly. 1n 1942, the Japanese armed forces were delighted that we chose to send 100,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps. It allowed them to claim the moral high ground especially in the some of the Asian countries they conquered (this is well-documented in John Toland's The Rising Sun.) Plus, the Japanese hated the Japanese-Americans whom they believed were traitors to Japan. It's sad to see that we keep repeating the same sad history over and over.

at comparing imprisoning thousands of our own citizens to asking some people if they wouldn't mind moving their proposed facility several blocks away.Besides, we're asking the developers not to build one mosque in one particular location. There are no Churches allowed in Sharia areas and even moderate Muslim nations limit the number of non-Islamic religious facilities. Where is this supposed moral high ground?

We are not a Muslim nation. Why imitate them?

And how is asking that one community center be moved to a more palatable location is any way imitating them? We're still allowing the community center, just not at the particular location. The size of the area where we "prefer" they not build a community center is several blocks. The size of the area where they "prohibit" building of non-Islamic religious building is the size of Saudi Arabia. Not exactly comparable.

 

[the moops]

Not exactly comparable.

Indeed.So why the #### do you keep bringing it up?

 

[mad sweeney]

Exactly. 1n 1942, the Japanese armed forces were delighted that we chose to send 100,000 Japanese Americans to internment camps. It allowed them to claim the moral high ground especially in the some of the Asian countries they conquered (this is well-documented in John Toland's The Rising Sun.) Plus, the Japanese hated the Japanese-Americans whom they believed were traitors to Japan. It's sad to see that we keep repeating the same sad history over and over.

at comparing imprisoning thousands of our own citizens to asking some people if they wouldn't mind moving their proposed facility several blocks away.Besides, we're asking the developers not to build one mosque in one particular location. There are no Churches allowed in Sharia areas and even moderate Muslim nations limit the number of non-Islamic religious facilities. Where is this supposed moral high ground?

We are not a Muslim nation. Why imitate them?

And how is asking that one community center be moved to a more palatable location is any way imitating them? We're still allowing the community center to have drinking fountains, just not at the particular location where WE have ours. The size of the area where we "prefer" they not build a community center is several blocks. The size of the area where they "prohibit" building of non-Islamic religious building is the size of Saudi Arabia. Not exactly comparable.

Fixed some of that for you. And I bolded the last part because you actually made a salient point. We are not comparable to SA, so trying to say "they are worse than what we want" is really just plain not comparable.

 

[Christo]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....

Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world:

I stopped reading here. Here's the difference between you and me. I understand that the rest of the world acts like it loves us when we do stuff for them, hates us when we bomb them but otherwise really doesn't care for us. Whatever happens in this case will change no one's mind about us.

Well, I strongly disagree with you there. The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

I don't even know what this means.

 

[John555]

Well, I strongly disagree with you there. The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

I don't even know what this means.

I think it means we need to kill the radicals leaders, so then the moderate ones can get promoted.

 

[timschochet]

Let's all stop for a second and look at this from a big-picture standpoint....

Does any of this really matter? I mean really, really matter?

Yes. It matters if those opposed win, and the community center is not built. It sends a strong message to the world:

I stopped reading here. Here's the difference between you and me. I understand that the rest of the world acts like it loves us when we do stuff for them, hates us when we bomb them but otherwise really doesn't care for us. Whatever happens in this case will change no one's mind about us.

Well, I strongly disagree with you there. The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

I don't even know what this means.

I know. It shows.

 

[timschochet]

We're still allowing the community center, just not at the particular location.

Why? I have yet to hear a rational explanation why this should not be allowed. You agree that mosques in themselves are not wrong. You agree that Islam as a whole should not be held responsible for 9/11. So why shouldn't a Muslim Community Center be built two blocks away from Ground Zero? Please explain.

 

[Parrothead]

Hey Mad Sweeney, you never answered me.. do you or do you not consider christianity as barbaric as islam?

when I posted the article about Saudi Arabia considering paralyzing someone, you used the bible as an example as similar barbarism.. being that I agreed, and am an athiest, I am interested in why you keep defending the islamic religion, and if you find it to as barbaric that christianity... can you explain this? you keep dodging me, saying I am tying to "trap" you..

 

[Jewell]

So are the building of mosques nationwide not testament to American values of equality and goodness, which flies in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish?

It doesn't fly in the face of what the terrorists were trying to accomplish. Mosques throughout the U.S. (and the world) is exactly what the terrorists are trying to accomplish.

This is ridiculously absurd even for this thread. If he's serious why doesn't he do it somewhere else?

I'm dead serious and it's hardly a novel idea. Many prominent figures believe this, and many members of our own military believe this. As I pointed out before, Mad Sweeney, you prefer to argue your own unsupported opinion. I prefer to use the first hand account of people who have come in contact with Radical Islam. Here's another....F. Owen Smith is a former Army Battalion Surgeon -- 3rd/12th Special Forces Group -- having served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is the proud father of a daughter -- USMC Captain (Iraq) -- and son -- Army 82nd Airborne Ranger Captain (Afghanistan)

For the Americans who believe that Islam is truly the religion of peace, and who believe the men who flew airliners into the World Trade Center were not "true Muslims" but just a handful of "crazies," and who believe Muslim terrorists plotting to blow up Fort Dix are mere ‘criminals' to be handled by the justice system in the same way as convenience-store stick-up artists, and who believe the Army physician who donned ritual garb and shouted religious slogans as he shot 12 people to death was just a ‘sad case', and who believe that the vast majority of Muslims are "moderates" who, when the balloon goes up, are really ‘on our side', the Inkblot Mosque is a shining symbol for the freedom of the United States, the tolerance of Americans and the true ‘celebration of our diversity'.

On the other hand, for the Americans who believe that Islam is a barbaric throwback, and who believe the vast majority of Muslims calling themselves ‘moderates' will not only not resist but actively assist when sharia (Islamic law) comes creeping into our social fabric, as it has in the UK, and who have lost loved ones in the far-flung wars against "extremism," the Inkblot Mosque is a symbol for the looming specter of the enslavement of the United States, the suicidal ‘tolerance' of Americans for the intolerant, and the funeral dirge of a society slowly slouching towards Gomorrah.

Yet a third group making their own projections onto The Inkblot Mosque are the people outside the U.S., Muslim or otherwise, and for those people, given the fact that the mosque is being erected on the very soil of Ground Zero, in and on a building actually damaged by parts from one of the airplanes, what else can they see but the symbol of the victory of Islam and the submission of America? After all, the word Islam itself means "submission."

We Americans need to wake up to the fact that World War III is upon us and recognize, as The Great Emancipator said, "Now we are engaged in a great [worldwide] war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived [in the rights of the individual] and so dedicated [to the rights of the individual], can long endure."

And the great battle now being waged is not merely at Ground Zero or in Washington, D.C., but over the whole planet and that is the to-the-death struggle between collectivism and individualism, a war in which -- our president's recent collectivist policies notwithstanding -- we Americans are supposed to be the individualists.

Whether Islam is the religion of peace and non-violence, as so many of its adherents violently claim, or the religion of war and violence, as so many of the rest of us non-violently claim, one thing is certain: The religion of Islam, indeed, the entire Muslim way of life is collectivist, and to the limited extent that system recognizes individual rights at all, those rights belong only to males. How "American" is that?

But it is not the particular and peculiar form of collectivism represented by Islam that is the danger to us and our way of life, but rather collectivism itself, to which we, as Thomas Jefferson pledged, ought to "swear upon the altar of God, eternal hostility," whether in our modern day that collectivism comes in the form of sharia or a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the government's "right" of eminent domain.

Make no mistake; we are in an apocalyptic struggle that can only end with one system in control and the other in submission. Either we will see the victory of the collective, which will move history backwards, or the triumph of the individual, which will allow the continued existence and advance of Western Civilization. LINK

Apparently though, Mad Sweeney, you have a better understanding of Radical Islam than a member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and you're more intelligent than a surgeon.

EDIT: To tell the truth, I think some of the most radical Imams would even admit that's their goal. Some are not shy about making these ambitions known.

These took about one second to find. You should try Google, Mad Sweeney. It's your friend.

Muslim Cleric Calls for Global Jihad and World Conquest

Imam: Muslims will Conquer and Rule Europe!

Shall we keep arguing that world conquest is on the Radical Muslim's list of "Things to Do"?

 

[timschochet]

Hey Mad Sweeney, you never answered me.. do you or do you not consider christianity as barbaric as islam?when I posted the article about Saudi Arabia considering paralyzing someone, you used the bible as an example as similar barbarism.. being that I agreed, and am an athiest, I am interested in why you keep defending the islamic religion, and if you find it to be no more barbaric that christianity... can you explain this? you keep dodging me, saying I am tying to "trap" you..

I'm not Sweeney but I will answer this question.1. First, there is nothing intrinisic about Islam, IMO, which makes it either more or less barbaric than Christianity.2. Christianity is roughly 2000 years old, Islam is roughly 1500 years old. During the first 1000 years of Islam's existence, it was far more civilized than Christianity, IMO. 3. In the last 500 years, Christianity has been more civilized than Islam, but not by a large margin.4. In recent decades, Christianity is far more civilized than Islam.5. None of this, however, is relevant to the issue at hand.

 

[Parrothead]

Islam

so is Islam barbaric or not?

As barbaric as the Bible.

well? Is islam as barbaric as christianity? remember, I am an athiest..

yes or no will suffice

 

[Parrothead]

Hey Mad Sweeney, you never answered me.. do you or do you not consider christianity as barbaric as islam?when I posted the article about Saudi Arabia considering paralyzing someone, you used the bible as an example as similar barbarism.. being that I agreed, and am an athiest, I am interested in why you keep defending the islamic religion, and if you find it to be no more barbaric that christianity... can you explain this? you keep dodging me, saying I am tying to "trap" you..

I'm not Sweeney but I will answer this question.1. First, there is nothing intrinisic about Islam, IMO, which makes it either more or less barbaric than Christianity.2. Christianity is roughly 2000 years old, Islam is roughly 1500 years old. During the first 1000 years of Islam's existence, it was far more civilized than Christianity, IMO. 3. In the last 500 years, Christianity has been more civilized than Islam, but not by a large margin.4. In recent decades, Christianity is far more civilized than Islam.5. None of this, however, is relevant to the issue at hand.

Hi Tim-You seem like a nice guy who types alot... anyway, MS is defending muslims and using christianity as an example of barbaric activites.. being an athiest, I despise both, and am simply wondering why he bends over backwards to defend one invisible god cult over another?

 

[datonn]

Apparently though, Mad Sweeney, you have a better understanding of Radical Islam than a member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and you're more intelligent than a surgeon.

Do you realize how absolutely quiet the FFA would be if people here were required to have "a better understanding of ________" or be "more intelligent than a surgeon?!" I hate the type of argument you are making, because there are intelligent people on both sides of any issue. Intelligence isn't the question here. What is in question is agenda. You can warp facts and stats to tell any story you want to. What is interesting is why and how those facts and stats are being used.Question though: Is that member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan an expert on the Muslim faith? Is he a Muslim? Has he ever read the Koran? Or has he just taken his own personal experiences (many of which will be almost completely governed by the branch of the military he serves in and what his superiors tell him to do and think) and put 2 and 2 together to come up with his "educated" opinion about every follower of Islam?

 

[Jewell]

Apparently though, Mad Sweeney, you have a better understanding of Radical Islam than a member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and you're more intelligent than a surgeon.

Do you realize how absolutely quiet the FFA would be if people here were required to have "a better understanding of ________" or be "more intelligent than a surgeon?!" I hate the type of argument you are making, because there are intelligent people on both sides of any issue. Intelligence isn't the question here. What is in question is agenda. You can warp facts and stats to tell any story you want to. What is interesting is why and how those facts and stats are being used.

Please, Datonn, I'm very reasonable and I know that you are reasonable too because we've debated and I've respected that you kept the argument to the merits. Mad Sweeney was the one who suggested that my position was so outlandish that I should leave this site. Don't punish the person that's merely defending themselves and their position from a personal attack.Should I have called Mad Sweeney's intelligence into question? No. But is was a reactionary response to him suggesting my position was stupid. As usual the guy reacting get's called for the penalty.

 

[abricru]

Getting a little testy at a NYC hearing

Of all places a muslim mosque could be built, why build on the same soil where muslim terrorists killed over 3000 innocent people? And wrecked have on the whole city? If built it will always be a bone of contention and protests.

I just read an article the other day that said they are still finding bone fragments and human remains blocks from ground zero. Fortunately, I did not lose a loved one on 9/11, but if I had, I sure would not want a mosque built upon what amounts to be a mass gravesite.

 

[ScottyFargo]

F. Owen Smith is a former Army Battalion Surgeon -- 3rd/12th Special Forces Group -- having served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is the proud father of a daughter -- USMC Captain (Iraq) -- and son -- Army 82nd Airborne Ranger Captain (Afghanistan)

For the Americans who believe that Islam is truly the religion of peace, ...the Inkblot Mosque is a shining symbol for the freedom of the United States, the tolerance of Americans and the true ‘celebration of our diversity'.

o.k.

On the other hand, for the Americans who believe that Islam is a barbaric throwback, and who believe the vast majority of Muslims calling themselves ‘moderates' will not only not resist but actively assist when sharia (Islamic law) comes creeping into our social fabric, as it has in the UK, and who have lost loved ones in the far-flung wars against "extremism," the Inkblot Mosque is a symbol for the looming specter of the enslavement of the United States, the suicidal ‘tolerance' of Americans for the intolerant, and the funeral dirge of a society slowly slouching towards Gomorrah.

k, fear and bigotry, sounds about right, too.

Yet a third group making their own projections onto The Inkblot Mosque are the people outside the U.S., Muslim or otherwise, and for those people, given the fact that the mosque is being erected on the very soil of Ground Zero, in and on a building actually damaged by parts from one of the airplanes, what else can they see but the symbol of the victory of Islam and the submission of America? After all, the word Islam itself means "submission."

Yeah, it's not on the very soil of Ground Zero, and Islam means submission to Allah, not to Islamists. Christians are all about worshipping their God, so this is not an unfamiliar concept in America. To point it out is very Glen Beck-Conspiracy Theorist, however.

We Americans need to wake up to the fact that World War III is upon us and recognize, as The Great Emancipator said, "Now we are engaged in a great [worldwide] war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived [in the rights of the individual] and so dedicated [to the rights of the individual], can long endure."

Entertaining hyperbole, fires me up, I don't know about you.

And the great battle now being waged is not merely at Ground Zero or in Washington, D.C., but over the whole planet and that is the to-the-death struggle between collectivism and individualism, a war in which -- our president's recent collectivist policies notwithstanding -- we Americans are supposed to be the individualists.

Whether Islam is the religion of peace and non-violence, as so many of its adherents violently claim, or the religion of war and violence, as so many of the rest of us non-violently claim, one thing is certain: The religion of Islam, indeed, the entire Muslim way of life is collectivist, and to the limited extent that system recognizes individual rights at all, those rights belong only to males. How "American" is that?



1st: Huh? and 2nd: That's not cool, at all. However, Christianity has it's fair share of sexism against women. So it's a good thing for all of us that none of this religious b.s. will be allowed to infect our government any time soon. Muslims are still subject to American secular law, the same as anybody else.

But it is not the particular and peculiar form of collectivism represented by Islam that is the danger to us and our way of life, but rather collectivism itself, to which we, as Thomas Jefferson pledged, ought to "swear upon the altar of God, eternal hostility," whether in our modern day that collectivism comes in the form of sharia or a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the government's "right" of eminent domain.



Thomas Jefferson said lots of stuff. Including "The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." So clearly he was crazy, so let's just ignore him on this issue.

Make no mistake; we are in an apocalyptic struggle that can only end with one system in control and the other in submission. Either we will see the victory of the collective, which will move history backwards, or the triumph of the individual, which will allow the continued existence and advance of Western Civilization. LINK



Hell yeah, hyperbole. Maybe this even deserves a "HELL YEAH, CANARD!"

Apparently though, Mad Sweeney, you have a better understanding of Radical Islam than a member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and you're more intelligent than a surgeon.

Dude sounds a bit biased and shellshocked, bro

 

[Jewell]

F. Owen Smith is a former Army Battalion Surgeon -- 3rd/12th Special Forces Group -- having served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is the proud father of a daughter -- USMC Captain (Iraq) -- and son -- Army 82nd Airborne Ranger Captain (Afghanistan)

For the Americans who believe that Islam is truly the religion of peace, ...the Inkblot Mosque is a shining symbol for the freedom of the United States, the tolerance of Americans and the true ‘celebration of our diversity'.

o.k.

On the other hand, for the Americans who believe that Islam is a barbaric throwback, and who believe the vast majority of Muslims calling themselves ‘moderates' will not only not resist but actively assist when sharia (Islamic law) comes creeping into our social fabric, as it has in the UK, and who have lost loved ones in the far-flung wars against "extremism," the Inkblot Mosque is a symbol for the looming specter of the enslavement of the United States, the suicidal ‘tolerance' of Americans for the intolerant, and the funeral dirge of a society slowly slouching towards Gomorrah.

k, fear and bigotry, sounds about right, too.

Yet a third group making their own projections onto The Inkblot Mosque are the people outside the U.S., Muslim or otherwise, and for those people, given the fact that the mosque is being erected on the very soil of Ground Zero, in and on a building actually damaged by parts from one of the airplanes, what else can they see but the symbol of the victory of Islam and the submission of America? After all, the word Islam itself means "submission."

Yeah, it's not on the very soil of Ground Zero, and Islam means submission to Allah, not to Islamists. Christians are all about worshipping their God, so this is not an unfamiliar concept in America. To point it out is very Glen Beck-Conspiracy Theorist, however.

We Americans need to wake up to the fact that World War III is upon us and recognize, as The Great Emancipator said, "Now we are engaged in a great [worldwide] war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived [in the rights of the individual] and so dedicated [to the rights of the individual], can long endure."

Entertaining hyperbole, fires me up, I don't know about you.

And the great battle now being waged is not merely at Ground Zero or in Washington, D.C., but over the whole planet and that is the to-the-death struggle between collectivism and individualism, a war in which -- our president's recent collectivist policies notwithstanding -- we Americans are supposed to be the individualists.

Whether Islam is the religion of peace and non-violence, as so many of its adherents violently claim, or the religion of war and violence, as so many of the rest of us non-violently claim, one thing is certain: The religion of Islam, indeed, the entire Muslim way of life is collectivist, and to the limited extent that system recognizes individual rights at all, those rights belong only to males. How "American" is that?



1st: Huh? and 2nd: That's not cool, at all. However, Christianity has it's fair share of sexism against women. So it's a good thing for all of us that none of this religious b.s. will be allowed to infect our government any time soon. Muslims are still subject to American secular law, the same as anybody else.

But it is not the particular and peculiar form of collectivism represented by Islam that is the danger to us and our way of life, but rather collectivism itself, to which we, as Thomas Jefferson pledged, ought to "swear upon the altar of God, eternal hostility," whether in our modern day that collectivism comes in the form of sharia or a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding the government's "right" of eminent domain.



Thomas Jefferson said lots of stuff. Including "The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." So clearly he was crazy, so let's just ignore him on this issue.

Make no mistake; we are in an apocalyptic struggle that can only end with one system in control and the other in submission. Either we will see the victory of the collective, which will move history backwards, or the triumph of the individual, which will allow the continued existence and advance of Western Civilization. LINK



Hell yeah, hyperbole. Maybe this even deserves a "HELL YEAH, CANARD!"

Apparently though, Mad Sweeney, you have a better understanding of Radical Islam than a member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and you're more intelligent than a surgeon.

Dude sounds a bit biased and shellshocked, bro

I obviously disagree with your positions, but I can respect them. Hell, even the author of the above piece acknowledges that Americans fall into two camps on this issue. We're just in different camps.Do you have any response for those videos I linked after that article where radical clerics are calling for European and Global domination?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I just read an article the other day that said they are still finding bone fragments and human remains blocks from ground zero. Fortunately, I did not lose a loved one on 9/11, but if I had, I sure would not want a mosque built upon what amounts to be a mass gravesite.

I'm pretty sure they plan to pour a layer of concrete over the remains and then build the mosque on that. The mass gravesite would be inside what amounts to be a basement - like mausoleum.

 

[Parrothead]

I just read an article the other day that said they are still finding bone fragments and human remains blocks from ground zero. Fortunately, I did not lose a loved one on 9/11, but if I had, I sure would not want a mosque built upon what amounts to be a mass gravesite.

I'm pretty sure they plan to pour a layer of concrete over the remains and then build the mosque on that. The mass gravesite would be inside what amounts to be a basement - like mausoleum.

I know you are being "sarcastic", but this is a pretty ####ty thing to say

 

[ScottyFargo]

I obviously disagree with your positions, but I can respect them. Hell, even the author of the above piece acknowledges that Americans fall into two camps on this issue. We're just in different camps.Do you have any response for those videos I linked after that article where radical clerics are calling for European and Global domination?

I haven't checked them out, but when I get a chance I'll revisit them. I get the different camps deal, and I don't believe that everyone who opposes this is stemming from bigoted or fear filled area. I know it's a complicated issue because of the symbolism of the attacks. I'm no fan of Islam. I think a lot of what they do sucks, and I'm not even really a fan of the moderately religious because I think, like Hitchens, that moderate religion keeps doors open for fundamentalists because there will always be disagreements on the interpretation of scripture. Parrothead has been asking MadSweeney whether Islam is as barbaric or less than Christianity, so here are my thoughts on that.I do believe that there are a lot of correlatives between Christianity and Islam, though. I think whatever, maybe he was an Imam, muslim-dude said that "Judaism-middle school, christianity-high school, islam-college" is off base because Islam is centuries behind Christianity. Christianity went through rough patches, too, but fundamentalism has (relatively recently) fallen out of favor, so it is much tamer by comparison, and more mature than Islam because of it.So the terrible things that people do in the name of Islam sucks. Shariah law sucks, theocracy, it's all bad. Subjugation of women, I would hate to see an increase of that in America. I don't think it will happen though, because the rules are set up to prevent that. I don't know what the U.K. is doing with their civil Shariah courts, but that seems dangerous to me. One law for all, equality for all, religious freedom for all is what seems right to me. I think we're looking at two religions that have gone through some similar trials, share similar traits, that exist on different timelines. As Tim pointed out, historically these roles had been reversed, which is a scary thought. I would love it if Islam could pull itself away from fundamentalism. I have no clue what that would take, but I don't think that having an enlightened nation revoke rights of those who follow that religion will accomplish much in that regard.

 

[Christo]

The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

I don't even know what this means.

I know. It shows.

Given your proclivity for diarrhea of the keyboard, your curt response betrays your lack of understanding as well.

 

[Parrothead]

The key to winning the battle against Islamic fundamentalism is to promote moderate Muslims. We fail to do so at our peril.

I don't even know what this means.

I know. It shows.

Given your proclivity for diarrhea of the keyboard, your curt response betrays your lack of understanding as well.

that is funny

 

[mad sweeney]

Hey Mad Sweeney, you never answered me.. do you or do you not consider christianity as barbaric as islam?when I posted the article about Saudi Arabia considering paralyzing someone, you used the bible as an example as similar barbarism.. being that I agreed, and am an athiest, I am interested in why you keep defending the islamic religion, and if you find it to as barbaric that christianity... can you explain this? you keep dodging me, saying I am tying to "trap" you..

I lost track of what thread that was in. I am not defending Islam, it's as dumb as any other deity based religion. However, the ridiculous "Monument to 9/11" at Ground Zero argument IMO does more harm than good. It further emphasizes an us vs them mentality/war with Islam and associates all Muslims with Al Qaeda, even as the people making the allegations claim they don't. There's no proof whatsoever that there are any ties with any terror organizations. There are some potentially fundamentalists in the fold? So what, there are fundamentalists in every Christian fold too. People who actively fight against US law to work against groups of people they don't like based on their faith. But we can't have any Muslims who disagree or want change in the US? They're here to stay, we might as well accept that fact and support people that are trying to modernize the religion and bring it in line with the values and freedom of the US. I used the Bible as an example because it's a very violent book at times and even the NT values that Christianity supposedly supports have been modified over time to fit into the freedoms of the US. In one of the other religious threads awhile ago someone posted an essay on how only a generously given 3.5 of the 10 commandments are law in the US (and 2 grudgingly given points were law prior to the Bible in the Code of Hammurabai). There are YMCAs and JCCs in the area, this is a land of religious freedom and there are people screaming to have this blocked, going so far as to call out Obama to do something (and then when he backs up their right to do so they hammer him for not paying enough attention to national concerns and shouldn't be weighing in on local matters ). Too many people are acting like this is an infestation of terrorists who are somehow going to piss on America from the 13th floor and overcome the legal system and turn the US into a Shariah based theocracy. I'd really like to see how many of the most ardent opposition would welcome a hardcore Christian based theocracy, my guess is a lot of them.

 

[datonn]

Please, Datonn, I'm very reasonable and I know that you are reasonable too because we've debated and I've respected that you kept the argument to the merits. Mad Sweeney was the one who suggested that my position was so outlandish that I should leave this site. Don't punish the person that's merely defending themselves and their position from a personal attack.

Should I have called Mad Sweeney's intelligence into question? No. But is was a reactionary response to him suggesting my position was stupid. As usual the guy reacting get's called for the penalty.

Yeah, I hear you. I'm not picking on you. I just want you to make sure that when you are taking the other side of an issue like this, that you can walk that walk. Not to convince other people that you are right...but to help you confirm to yourself that where you stand on the issue passes those kind of tests.I noticed you omitted a part of my post in your quoting of my last reply:

"Question though: Is that member of the U.S. Special Forces who has served in both Iraq and Afghanistan an expert on the Muslim faith? Is he a Muslim? Has he ever read the Koran? Or has he just taken his own personal experiences (many of which will be almost completely governed by the branch of the military he serves in and what his superiors tell him to do and think) and put 2 and 2 together to come up with his "educated" opinion about every follower of Islam?"

If you're going to post something as "evidence" for others being wrong in their belief on what most/all Muslims believe, as an example, you need to expect and hopefully be prepared for a response like the above paragraph. Am I saying you are right or you are wrong? Nope. I don't care about the minutia of your squabble with Mad Sweeney! All I care about is people being being able to back-up statements like your quoting that Special Forces member.

Not about you! If Mad Sweeney posted that as "evidence," I'd have posted the exact same reply.

 

[mad sweeney]

Hey Mad Sweeney, you never answered me.. do you or do you not consider christianity as barbaric as islam?when I posted the article about Saudi Arabia considering paralyzing someone, you used the bible as an example as similar barbarism.. being that I agreed, and am an athiest, I am interested in why you keep defending the islamic religion, and if you find it to be no more barbaric that christianity... can you explain this? you keep dodging me, saying I am tying to "trap" you..

I'm not Sweeney but I will answer this question.1. First, there is nothing intrinisic about Islam, IMO, which makes it either more or less barbaric than Christianity.2. Christianity is roughly 2000 years old, Islam is roughly 1500 years old. During the first 1000 years of Islam's existence, it was far more civilized than Christianity, IMO. 3. In the last 500 years, Christianity has been more civilized than Islam, but not by a large margin.4. In recent decades, Christianity is far more civilized than Islam.5. None of this, however, is relevant to the issue at hand.

Hi Tim-You seem like a nice guy who types alot... anyway, MS is defending muslims and using christianity as an example of barbaric activites.. being an athiest, I despise both, and am simply wondering why he bends over backwards to defend one invisible god cult over another?

The Bible is not just Christianity, but that's not really important. Can you please show me where I defended Islam over any other religion? TIA