Mosque going up in NYC building

[DogOnPorch]

So tellme, what are they fighting for? Or is it that hard to answer? Here's your chance to educate me here.

Fighting for...fighting against = pure semantics.

Russian Soldier @ Stalingrad #1: I'm fighting for Communism and Mother Russia!

Russian Soldier @ Stalingrad #2: I'm fighting against National Socialism!

[suddenly, a German 150mm artillery round lands and kills them both.]

[Guest American Woman]

Why "even" them? They're a liberal group, who has spent a lot of time and effort decrying suicide bombings, terrorist attacks, and so on.

I've mentioned them a thousand times, and I've been told they're "probably" some sort of sneaky Islamists, a fifth column pretending to be moderates (along the same lines that Kimmy and Bonam feel the lack of evidence of violence in most mosques is itself a sinister development...that one about the Muslims holding an interfaith Thanksgiving dinner in honour of the local Christians shows us just how devious these murderous jihadists are).

But the MCC sure is convenient when the issue is right, isn't it?

Anyway, since they are self-evidently correct, you obviously have now quite a different view of Israel.

I honestly don't know what you're on about here. Why "even" them should be obvious. It's a group of Muslims, so they can't be bigots as I'm always accused of being, and they aren't Americans, so they have nothing to do with the Saudi/Bush connection that people raise for whatever reasons they do, yet they feel Saudi money for this mosque is an issue, also. Even though you can't see why it is. So I pointed it out. Hope that helps clarify things for you as to "why."

As for the rest of your post, I have no idea what you're on about regarding "what you've been told" when you "mentioned them a thousand times," because that has absolutely nothing to do with me. I see you even mentioned kimmy and Bonam, so perhaps you've had some sort of issue with them?

As for what I obviously think about Israel, I'm really wondering when/how this issue became about Israel...

Note how he asks you a question...answers it himself...then criticizes "your answer"...lol.

I've been criticized countless times in this thread for views people have insisted that I have, even though it's "views" they've put on me; views I've constantly denied. Pages and pages of people responding to me over views I don't have, things I haven't said.

It's like my sig line says ...................

[ToadBrother]

I've been criticized countless times in this thread for views people have insisted that I have, even though it's "views" they've put on me; views I've constantly denied. Pages and pages of people responding to me over views I don't have, things I haven't said.

YOu deny you hold those views, then say things that suspiciously look like you indeed do hold those views. As I've said, either you're a bigot, or you have serious problems communicating.

[Guest American Woman]

YOu deny you hold those views, then say things that suspiciously look like you indeed do hold those views. As I've said, either you're a bigot, or you have serious problems communicating.

Yes, I have serious problems communicating. I don't know how to communicate that I don't blame all Muslims, that I am not against this mosque but for the property and why it's available, that I believe they have the right to build there but I believe they should be empathetic and choose not to, that I hold them to no different standards than I do myself/my country/any other religion. I don't know how to communicate all of that other than to come right out and say it, as I just did, as I have countless times.

Obviously the problem lies with my inability to communicate. So by all means keep calling me a bigot, because it has nothing to do with your inability to understand plain English/refusal to accept what I do believe. The problem obviously lies with my serious problems communicating.

Again, as my sig line say .....................

[dre]

Yes, I have serious problems communicating. I don't know how to communicate that I don't blame all Muslims, that I am not against this mosque but for the property and why it's available, that I believe they have the right to build there but I believe they should be empathetic and choose not to, that I hold them to no different standards than I do myself/my country/any other religion. I don't know how to communicate all of that other than to come right out and say it, as I just did, as I have countless times.

Obviously the problem lies with my inability to communicate. So by all means keep calling me a bigot, because it has nothing to do with your inability to understand plain English/refusal to accept what I do believe. The problem obviously lies with my serious problems communicating.

Again, as my sig line say .....................

Nope, ToadBrother nailed this perfectly. You make one statement, and jump up and down screaming VICTIM! VICTIM! VICTIM! when people dont take you at your word. The problem is at this point youve made literally dozens of other contradictory statements.

Heres an example...

1. Im not racist!

2. Black people smell bad, and behave poorly.

The person that made those two statements is obviously going to be accused of being a racist. In your case though you reference your first statement and cry "WHAT DO YOU MEAN! I SAID I WASNT RACIST!!! WHY ARE YOU TWISTING MY WORDS".

The problem is your conflicting statements have left you with so little credibility that statement number 1 is no longer believable any more. As TB pointed out people are left scratching their heads as to whether youre bigotted or just seriously confused.

[Jack Weber]

Nope, ToadBrother nailed this perfectly. You make one statement, and jump up and down screaming VICTIM! VICTIM! VICTIM! when people dont take you at your word. The problem is at this point youve made literally dozens of other contradictory statements.

Heres an example...

1. Im not racist!

2. Black people smell bad, and behave poorly.

The person that made those two statements is obviously going to be accused of being a racist. In your case though you reference your first statement and cry "WHAT DO YOU MEAN! I SAID I WASNT RACIST!!! WHY ARE YOU TWISTING MY WORDS".

The problem is your conflicting statements have left you with so little credibility that statement number 1 is no longer believable any more. As TB pointed out people are left scratching their heads as to whether youre bigotted or just seriously confused.

Hey...

That sounds exactly like the few deluded dementoids that claimed reverse racism during Mr.Breitbarts self immolation a few weeks ago...

[DogOnPorch]

Meh...Islam still sucks.

[GostHacked]

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?app=core&module=search&section=search&do=quick_search&search_app=core&fromsearch=1

crap it did not work

I did a search on Dogs Islam Sucks ... it said it limited the search to the first 200.

Edited August 19, 2010 by GostHacked

[dre]

Meh...Islam still sucks.

Any thats exactly why you dont find yourself in AW's position in every single thread having a prolonged argument about what was said and what was meant. Youre consistant and up front. She doesnt like Islam and Muslims either but instead of just coming out and saying it she hides behind a facade of political correctness... and stomps up and down screaming VICTIM!, when people inevitably see through it.

[DogOnPorch]

For Muslims themselves, there's hope. They can become atheists like myself...as long as the Taliban don't find out.

Islam sucks though...and most y'all are afraid to say it. Perhaps it's the death threats...I dunno.

[GostHacked]

For Muslims themselves, there's hope. They can become atheists like myself...as long as the Taliban don't find out.

Islam sucks though...and most y'all are afraid to say it. Perhaps it's the death threats...I dunno.

No, you and I agree all religions suck. Islam sucks, Christianity sucks, Judaism sucks, Catholicism sucks. I guess you could argue the degree of a religions suckage.

[DogOnPorch]

No, you and I agree all religions suck. Islam sucks, Christianity sucks, Judaism sucks, Catholicism sucks. I guess you could argue the degree of a religions suckage.

As much as I dislike JWs and their door-to-door tactics, they do not plant bombs in the local marketplace to make a point.

[Jack Weber]

As much as I dislike JWs and their door-to-door tactics, they do not plant bombs in the local marketplace to make a point.

Neither do us wild and crazy Presbyterians...

Edited August 19, 2010 by Jack Weber

[DogOnPorch]

Neither do us wild and crazy Presbyterians...

The Western Branch of American Reform Presbylutheranism here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverend_Timothy_Lovejoy

[DogOnPorch]

It's the one true faith.

[ToadBrother]

Yes, I have serious problems communicating. I don't know how to communicate that I don't blame all Muslims, that I am not against this mosque but for the property and why it's available, that I believe they have the right to build there but I believe they should be empathetic and choose not to, that I hold them to no different standards than I do myself/my country/any other religion. I don't know how to communicate all of that other than to come right out and say it, as I just did, as I have countless times.

Obviously the problem lies with my inability to communicate. So by all means keep calling me a bigot, because it has nothing to do with your inability to understand plain English/refusal to accept what I do believe. The problem obviously lies with my serious problems communicating.

Again, as my sig line say .....................

Why would it be empathic not to build a mosque there? If people aren't blaming Islam entire, then having some Muslims building a mosque there surely can't be a problem.

Explain to me again how this proposed mosque is a problem.

[bloodyminded]

If people would let the subject drop, they'd quickly discover that there is no problem. Shortly, they wouldn't even notice or remember that it's there. The controversy feeds itself like a fire sucking oxygen.

[Guest American Woman]

Why would it be empathic not to build a mosque there? If people aren't blaming Islam entire, then having some Muslims building a mosque there surely can't be a problem.

Explain to me again how this proposed mosque is a problem.

I've explained my position over and over and quite clearly. I'll say this only. Anyone who claims I don't believe what I do believe is not worth my time. Anyone who claims I believe what I don't believe apparently can't address what I do believe. Anyone who claims I am a bigot for having concerns over this one mosque is calling a lot of other Muslims bigots, too. Bizarre as that is.

So I'll just take this opportunity to post some quotes:

"This is not a humble Islamic statement. A mosque such as this is actually a political structure that casts a shadow over a cemetery, over hallowed ground. 9/11 was the beginning of a kinetic war, it is not an opportunity for cultural exchange. It was the beginning of a conflict with those who want to destroy our way of life."

"From sunup to sundown Muslims are fasting and working on putting our needs tertiary to our God and our country, not what we need. They are abandoning these principles and saying, ‘Well, this is what we need and we are victims if you don’t let us do this. And we can do it, so we are going to.’ I think that is un-Islamic. That verse is one that teaches Muslims not only to be respectful but to actually treat equally other religions."

"First of all, aside from the issues of conflict with jihad, Islam teaches us, especially Muslims living in non-Muslim societies, to avoid conflict with our neighbors. We think this is an incredibly heedless project. It went forward without adequate planning or foresight, without anticipating reaction and it is absurd to think that there would not have been reaction. It is simply absurd. Second, there is the problem of Imam Feisal’s propensity to mix with radicals. And thirdly, there is a problem with the lack of transparency about money funding."

"...they want to use this Islamic center as a place for diplomacy to the Middle East to demonstrate that the United States is a place where Muslims thrive. But that has backfired because this could have been done in many other ways."

"[The mosque] has caused so much pain. There are many mosques already in New York, nobody has ever opposed a mosque, if there is opposition to a mosque on grounds of hatred I would be the first to confront it. But over here it is a matter of sensitivity and there is no residential community even near the community center."

"Outreach is a good idea, but outreach should be done in an appropriate time and manner, and this is not the place nor the time nor the manner. Outreach should be done in a setting that doesn’t encourage problems and controversy."

"They just want to force Islam upon the American people and it is going to be used around the world, especially in Islamic media. From the ashes of this destruction comes the flourishing of Islam and I think that is just the wrong message. It is not good for America or for Muslims."

If anyone other than a Muslim were to say what these Muslims are saying, the "you're a bigot!" pack would be all over them, misrepresenting what they say, accusing them of being Muslim/Islam hating bigots. The problem lies with all of you who cannot see that not everyone sees things the way you do and it's ok to question this project on the grounds that we have given. You don't have to agree with our reasons/position, but the problem is that you can't disagree with what we actually say/think. All you can do is throw your views on us and criticize us for not admitting what we don't believe. It's pure and utter ignorance.

link

Edited August 19, 2010 by American Woman

[Bonam]

Iran on the other hand is not a threat. Iran helped the US right after 9/11 with border patrols along the Iran Afghanistan borders. Iran actively wanted to help the US. We rarely hear about that. If they really wanted to help the US then, why are they considered a threat to the US?

They had different leadership in 2001 than they'd had recently.

[Smallc]

They had different leadership in 2001 than they'd had recently.

The guy actually in charge (not the president) was the same and has been for 21 years.

[ToadBrother]

They had different leadership in 2001 than they'd had recently.

Well, to be honest, the US has had some history of missing the boat. Mao made overtures to the Americans as the Nationalists were being chased off the mainland, but the US was approaching hysterical positions over the Red Scare and rebuffed him, sticking with the loser Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, who they had had a bizarre fixation on. Even Churchill after the Yanks entered the war was somewhat taken aback by how much influence the Generalissimo held over Roosevelt's administration.

Imagine if the US had been a bit more pragmatic in 1949-50, and had recognized the PRC as the legitimate government of China. Might have been very different for both the West and China.

[naomiglover]

So I'll just take this opportunity to post some quotes:

"This is not a humble Islamic statement. A mosque such as this is actually a political structure that casts a shadow over a cemetery, over hallowed ground. 9/11 was the beginning of a kinetic war, it is not an opportunity for cultural exchange. It was the beginning of a conflict with those who want to destroy our way of life."

Not that having an actual mosque there should make a difference, but the image that you and others are trying to create here is wrong. This is not a mosque because it has a prayer room. It's a community centre. It won't even look like a mosque.

When you try to pass yourself as an objective person, try to be a little more honest about the facts.

"From sunup to sundown Muslims are fasting and working on putting our needs tertiary to our God and our country, not what we need. They are abandoning these principles and saying, ‘Well, this is what we need and we are victims if you don’t let us do this. And we can do it, so we are going to.’ I think that is un-Islamic. That verse is one that teaches Muslims not only to be respectful but to actually treat equally other religions."

I know you're trying to score credibility points by quoting a Muslim, but Zuhdi Jasser is not an expert on Muslims or a representative of Muslims, so his comments have very little weight. Especially since he has aligned himself with one of the most outspoken Islamophobes like Daniel Pipes by writing in his magazine.

"First of all, aside from the issues of conflict with jihad, Islam teaches us, especially Muslims living in non-Muslim societies, to avoid conflict with our neighbors. We think this is an incredibly heedless project. It went forward without adequate planning or foresight, without anticipating reaction and it is absurd to think that there would not have been reaction. It is simply absurd. Second, there is the problem of Imam Feisal’s propensity to mix with radicals. And thirdly, there is a problem with the lack of transparency about money funding."

Re: Planning and foresight - The people behind the community centre are not affiliated or representatives of the people who flew planes into the towers. Why is this difficult to comprehend for you and the other ignorant people out there?

Re: Imam Feisal - trying to associate him with terrorists and radicals only makes whoever that is trying to do it look like an idiot. Not only that but he was an adviser to the Bush administration.

Re: Funds - How do you make the funds more transparent? Do you expect the same transparency with other organizations or just this one because they are Muslim?

"[The mosque] has caused so much pain. There are many mosques already in New York, nobody has ever opposed a mosque, if there is opposition to a mosque on grounds of hatred I would be the first to confront it. But over here it is a matter of sensitivity and there is no residential community even near the community center."

No one should feed those who are sensitive based on their ignorant and in many cases, bigoted views. Why should we feed it? Why do you want to feed it? Instead of succumbing to these illogical sensitivities, we should be addressing them with logic.

"Outreach is a good idea, but outreach should be done in an appropriate time and manner, and this is not the place nor the time nor the manner. Outreach should be done in a setting that doesn’t encourage problems and controversy."

The controversy, again, is based on illogical feelings. The people behind the community centre were not and had nothing to do with the attackers of 9/11.

"They just want to force Islam upon the American people and it is going to be used around the world, especially in Islamic media. From the ashes of this destruction comes the flourishing of Islam and I think that is just the wrong message. It is not good for America or for Muslims."

"They want to force Islam upon the American people"? by building a community centre with a prayer room? What rubbish.

The Daily Show has done a good job in covering the absurdity of the latest hysteria: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-16-2010/mosque-erade

Edited August 20, 2010 by naomiglover

[Guest American Woman]

Not that having an actual mosque there should make a difference, but the image that you and others are trying to create here is wrong. This is not a mosque because it has a prayer room. It's a community centre. It won't even look like a mosque.

When you try to pass yourself as an objective person, try to be a little more honest about the facts.

Ummmm. The quote you are responding to isn't mine. It's from a Muslim. So damn that Muslim for not being a little more honest with the facts, eh? Never mind that there is going to be a mosque. If it doesn't "look like one," that's all that matters.

I know you're trying to score credibility points by quoting a Muslim, but Zuhdi Jasser is not an expert on Muslims or a representative of Muslims, so his comments have very little weight. Especially since he has aligned himself with one of the most outspoken Islamophobes like Daniel Pipes by writing in his magazine.

Well, golly gee. We can't listen to a Muslim who has "aligned himself" with anyone you don't approve of. No siree, Bob! The fact that "he's written in his magazine" says it all. So we'll simply dismiss him. Obviously a Muslim who has written for a magazine you don't approve of is "no expert on Muslims."

Re: Planning and foresight - The people behind the community centre are not affiliated or representatives of the people who flew planes into the towers. Why is this difficult to comprehend for you and the other ignorant people out there?

Again, the "ignorant person" who said that is a Muslim, not me.

Re: Imam Feisal - trying to associate him with terrorists and radicals only makes whoever that is trying to do it look like an idiot. Not only that but he was an adviser to the Bush administration.

Oh. My. God. An advisor to the Bush administration. Guess that makes him .... what, exactly?

And that "idiot" you are referring to is a Muslim.

Re: Funds - How do you make the funds more transparent? Do you expect the same transparency with other organizations or just this one because they are Muslim?

Just this one because they are Muslim. Because this one is the only one that's Muslim. There are no other organizations that are Muslim other than this one. That's why there's been so much objection to it.*

Try reading what I've already written. I've clearly stated that any tax-exempt organization has a duty to make their funds transparent. This the last time I'll be repeating that.

No one should feed those who are sensitive based on their ignorant and in many cases, bigoted views. Why should we feed it? Why do you want to feed it? Instead of succumbing to these illogical sensitivities, we should be addressing them with logic.

Since they were all quotes from Muslims, you'll have to take up your objections with them and tell them that they, as American Muslims, have no right to feel that way. I'm sure knowing that naomiglover thinks they're ignorant will have a great effect on them. I'm sure they'll agree that a Canadian non-Muslim has more insight to it than American Muslims do.

I have to laugh, though. Evidently it's ok to insult Muslims who have a different view from y'all. 'No tolerance for you, you ignorant, bigoted Muslim!'

The controversy, again, is based on illogical feelings. The people behind the community centre were not and had nothing to do with the attackers of 9/11.

Well there's a new thought. One that hasn't been addressed at all in the 100 or so pages of this thread! (see my sig line..............)

"They want to force Islam upon the American people"? by building a community centre with a prayer room? What rubbish.

Yep. That Muslim is babbling rubbish. That Muslim has no right to feel the way he does. Who is he, an American Muslim, to say how some American Muslims feel about this?

The Daily Show has done a good job in covering the absurdity of the latest hysteria: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-16-2010/mosque-erade

Well, I guess I'm just going to have to give the Daily Show more credibility than I give these ignorant, bigoted Muslims. Or not.

*For the sarcastically impaired, that's sarcasm.

Edited August 20, 2010 by American Woman

[Machjo]

Well, to be honest, the US has had some history of missing the boat. Mao made overtures to the Americans as the Nationalists were being chased off the mainland, but the US was approaching hysterical positions over the Red Scare and rebuffed him, sticking with the loser Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, who they had had a bizarre fixation on. Even Churchill after the Yanks entered the war was somewhat taken aback by how much influence the Generalissimo held over Roosevelt's administration.

Imagine if the US had been a bit more pragmatic in 1949-50, and had recognized the PRC as the legitimate government of China. Might have been very different for both the West and China.

Mao was a propaganda genius. Among his policies included building a united Chinese front against Japan and so even tried to build with the Nationalist Party, and that party turned him down and still chose to fight a two-front war against both the Communist Party and Japan. This naturally attracted other political parties to build a coalition with the Communist Party instead of the Nationalist Party. Also, with the Communist Party fighting on the front lines distracting the Nationalist Party from fighting the Japanese, this had given Mao a very legitimate reason to march off the front lines and go on the long March, so as to not distract the Nationalist Party from fighting the Japanese. This also saved many Communist lives while the Nationalists were busy fighting on the front lines. So while the Nationalists were busy fighting, the Communists were marching through the countryside helping farmers. A propaganda coup. And Mao was very wise in insisting on the strictest rules of behaviour for his soldiers, such as no looting, no forced, conscription, etc.

Owing to his propaganda genius, he'd actually attracted some Nationalist turncoats. He'd even used US help to the Nationalist Party to his advantage. The Chinese, after two Opium Wars, decades of semi-colonization by various powers, and more recently Japanese aggression, were sick and tired of any foreign interference. The Communists were quick to seize on this American aid by advertising it far and wide thus painting the Nationalist Party as another party bought by foreigners.

No matter what we may think of Mao, we can't deny his propaganda genius. He'd even gone so far as to treat Japanese POW better than his own soldiers, and make sure those POWs know it, as a means of undermining Japanese morale. He'd even employed a Japanese woman, Hasegawa Teru, whom the Nationalists had formerly rejected by virtue of her nationality, to speak over the radio regularly informing her countrymen in Japanese of the reality of the brutality of the Japanese army in China.

So yes, foreign leaders can certainly learn much from Chairman Mao with regards to hearts and minds campaigns. He was the master of hearts an minds campaigns par excellence.

Somehow though, I doubt protesting the mosque in NYC will receive a favourable reception among the Iraqi and Afghan people and other Muslim peoples we're trying to 'liberate'. Not exactly a piece of propaganda genius at all.

[punked]

Talking points memo just did a whole story on how stupid Shady's "What about the Greek Church" argument was and why it was totally wrong. Shocking.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/question_amidst_mosque_flair-up_what_about_the_gro.php?ref=fpa