Plan to Build Mosque Near Ground Zero Riles Families of 9/11 Victims

[quote name='berzirk']I'll disagree. I'll bet you could get away with a Bible burning and catch less flak than what those dickheads in FL are doing with the Qur'an. This is nothing more than my opinion, but the reverance for the books themselves seem to be held at different levels by the respective believers. Muslims won't let the Qur'an touch the ground, do a ritual cleansing of the hands, face, and feet before touching the book. Christians don't hold to these same beliefs, so perhaps defacing the Bible would upset them, but it wouldn't be met with the same reaction as Muslims who have very different rules for handling their book. My 2 cents at a 2 cent discount.

You'd hope that our military leaders, political leaders, and religious leaders speaking out against the Qur'an burning party on the grounds that it could end up harming American servicemen would be enough for them to not be dickheads, but clearly they have a platform and revel in the attention.

I guess people just need validation that they are assholes sometimes.[/QUOTE]When I said that, I meant the outrage here in the states would be higher. But for the hell of it, lets say the folks burning the bibles were Muslims, or hell anything other than Christian. Franklin Graham's head would explode, Pat Robertson would have a stroke, and fox news would be in a tizzy. If it got out that the bible burners were liberals, oh man the GOP would have a field day.
 
[quote name='berzirk']Haa haa haa. Knoell... I'll just shake my head and laugh so you can acknowledge that I read your insane posts. Anything more than that justifies them as worth replying to.[/QUOTE]

What you don't have a response?

Me: You guys disliking people burning korans is an emotional response, it is legal, stop having an irrational childish tantrum. We should not be outraged, protest, or ask him to not do it. /sarcasm

You: You guys thinking building a mosque of islam near a site where islamic extremists killed 3000 people is insensitive is an irrational emotional response. Therefore there should be no outrage about it, because it is perfectly legal, and any outrage, or sensitivity is simply you people having a childish tantrum. /actually serious

See the difference? You are actually serious in your ridiculous point. Your consistency is abhorring.
 
Some of the most radical people in the world are giving their disgusting opinion on this mosque:

HOST: Is [the opposition] hurting our troops?
[COLIN] POWELL: I think eventually it will. … And I’m saying to myself, what is wrong with this? and does it make a difference whether it’s two, three, four, five or 10 blocks away? And the answer is, if you believe in our system and if you understand why we can do it at the Pentagon and Walter Reed, then you can’t make a distinction between two, three, five and 10 blocks. I think it should go forward. [...]
 
[quote name='IRHari']Some of the most radical people in the world are giving their disgusting opinion on this mosque:

HOST: Is [the opposition] hurting our troops?
[COLIN] POWELL: I think eventually it will. … And I’m saying to myself, what is wrong with this? and does it make a difference whether it’s two, three, four, five or 10 blocks away? And the answer is, if you believe in our system and if you understand why we can do it at the Pentagon and Walter Reed, then you can’t make a distinction between two, three, five and 10 blocks. I think it should go forward. [...][/QUOTE]

I thought we already cleared up that the Pentagon Chapel was not actually a mosque on its own. minus credibility points for mr powell :cry:
 
[quote name='Knoell']What you don't have a response?

Me: You guys disliking people burning korans is an emotional response, it is legal, stop having an irrational childish tantrum. We should not be outraged, protest, or ask him to not do it. /sarcasm

You: You guys thinking building a mosque of islam near a site where islamic extremists killed 3000 people is insensitive is an irrational emotional response. Therefore there should be no outrage about it, because it is perfectly legal, and any outrage, or sensitivity is simply you people having a childish tantrum. /actually serious

See the difference? You are actually serious in your ridiculous point. Your consistency is abhorring.[/QUOTE]

*Sigh. I'm afraid facts are getting in the way again. One of our highest ranking military says this will put people's lives at risk overseas. The President of the United States and the head of the State Department says this will endanger Americans. This would be akin to a city planner saying the Park 51 building would negatively impact traffic and could lead to dangerous driving conditions, which is one of the exact examples I gave of someone's opposition to the building for factual reasons instead of emotional.

Dude, do you fail in other facets of life too, or just on this point? It's really getting old. I'm making efforts to politely ignore you, but then you continue to say "look at me, look at me" with disconnected follow-ups. I'll make you a deal, if you quit posting in the thread, I'll quit posting.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I thought we already cleared up that the Pentagon Chapel was not actually a mosque on its own. minus credibility points for mr powell :cry:[/QUOTE]

So you don't object to Muslims praying near GZ? You seem to be okay with Muslims praying at the Pentagon even if there isn't an official mosque there.
 
[quote name='berzirk']*Sigh. I'm afraid facts are getting in the way again. One of our highest ranking military says this will put people's lives at risk overseas. The President of the United States and the head of the State Department says this will endanger Americans. This would be akin to a city planner saying the Park 51 building would negatively impact traffic and could lead to dangerous driving conditions, which is one of the exact examples I gave of someone's opposition to the building for factual reasons instead of emotional.

Dude, do you fail in other facets of life too, or just on this point? It's really getting old. I'm making efforts to politely ignore you, but then you continue to say "look at me, look at me" with disconnected follow-ups. I'll make you a deal, if you quit posting in the thread, I'll quit posting.[/QUOTE]

That is not why you are emotionally upset about the Koran burning, but sure we can go with it. Remember way back when we said that a mosque rising nearly as close to the ashes of WTC as possible may be a recruiting tool for terrorists that what they do works? Oh yeah that was discounted as a nonissue, or if they didn't build it they would do the same thing(they really could still build it, just somewhere else).

Also I wonder what that does to the islamic extremisim/christian extremism equilibrium? Since they are all equal right? I mean if a crazy extremist burns some korans and muslims feel the need to riot and kill people because of it, they must be equal right. I wonder what would happen if a muslim burned some bibles? Probably just talk our ears off. Oops nevermind the extremists just kill the christians not the bibles.

Islamic extremism isnt more prevelant or consistant nope./sarcasm
 
[quote name='IRHari']So you don't object to Muslims praying near GZ? You seem to be okay with Muslims praying at the Pentagon even if there isn't an official mosque there.[/QUOTE]

This is the clear moment where a lot of people should see that you don't understand the issue.
 
The issue is supposed sensitivity of building a mosque near GZ. I think you're conceding that you don't have a problem with Muslims praying near GZ (because you don't have a problem with Muslims praying IN the actual Pentagon which is hallowed ground just like GZ.)

But if they build a prayer space to pray in near GZ (i.e a mosque), holy shit its douchy.
 
[quote name='Knoell']That is not why you are emotionally upset about the Koran burning, but sure we can go with it. Remember way back when we said that a mosque rising nearly as close to the ashes of WTC as possible may be a recruiting tool for terrorists that what they do works? Oh yeah that was discounted as a nonissue, or if they didn't build it they would do the same thing(they really could still build it, just somewhere else).

Also I wonder what that does to the islamic extremisim/christian extremism equilibrium? Since they are all equal right? I mean if a crazy extremist burns some korans and muslims feel the need to riot and kill people because of it, they must be equal right. I wonder what would happen if a muslim burned some bibles? Probably just talk our ears off.

Islamic extremism isnt more prevelant or consistant nope./sarcasm[/QUOTE]

I'm not emotionally upset by it at all! I think it's hilarious, because as I mentioned in the other thread, burning a Qur'an is one of the very few acceptable ways to destroy a Qur'an according to muslims.

Your analogy falls apart (again) when you try to compare these two completely separate issues. There are troops in so-called Muslim countries, and our military leaders are saying in their expert opinion, this Qur'an burning could add unnecessary risks to these soliders lives.

And for the record, I never thought this COMMUNITY CENTER and mosque would ever be used as a recruitment tool domestically or internationally, so I'm getting lumped in with people's agreements that I don't necessarily support.

You've apparently lost the last point you tried to make, so once again you're jumping to something else like qualifying extremism.

Will this blanket statement appease you?: Being an asshole is assholish, no matter who you are. There, we've covered all assholes. Happy yet?
 
[quote name='IRHari']The issue is supposed sensitivity of building a mosque near GZ. I think you're conceding that you don't have a problem with Muslims praying near GZ (because you don't have a problem with Muslims praying IN the actual Pentagon which is hallowed ground just like GZ.)

But if they build a prayer space to pray in near GZ (i.e a mosque), holy shit its douchy.[/QUOTE]

Ohhh I forgot to comment on the "prayer room" that you guys made seem was the most minor part of it. Minor in that it will accomadate 1000-2000 muslims. Prayer space indeed. There isn't anything wrong with that other than you guys attempting to be misleading making it seem small.

Anyways back to the real point which is that the guy building it wants to use ground zero as a way to mend relations.

Rauf insists the effort is meant to help heal the wounds of 9/11, "We've approached the community because we want this to be an example of how we are cooperating with the members of the community, not only to provide services but also to build a new discourse on how Muslims and non-Muslims can cooperate together to push back against the voices of extremism."
Click to expand...

Sounds perfectly fine but, he cannot engage cooperation on his own terms. If the people of ny aren't ready to have a symbol to a religion that extremist participants of that religion destroyed. Then so be it. If he wanted to fulfill his goal of uniting muslims and non-muslims he would appease both sides. What will building the thing a few blocks away do to hurt his cause? People will still be able to pray, a mosque will still be built, non-muslims, and muslims will be working side by side as usual. What does moving the mosque hurt besides his ego?
 
[quote name='Knoell']Ohhh I forgot to comment on the "prayer room" that you guys made seem was the most minor part of it. Minor in that it will accomadate 1000-2000 muslims. Prayer space indeed. There isn't anything wrong with that other than you guys attempting to be misleading making it seem small.

Anyways back to the real point which is that the guy building it wants to use ground zero as a way to mend relations.



Sounds perfectly fine but, he cannot engage cooperation on his own terms. If the people of ny aren't ready to have a symbol to a religion that extremist participants of that religion destroyed. Then so be it. If he wanted to fulfill his goal of uniting muslims and non-muslims he would appease both sides. What will building the thing a few blocks away do to hurt his cause? People will still be able to pray, a mosque will still be built, non-muslims, and muslims will be working side by side as usual. What does moving the mosque hurt besides his ego?[/QUOTE]

Watch his interview from last night on CNN. He goes into this at great length.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Anyways back to the real point which is that the guy building it wants to use ground zero as a way to mend relations. [/QUOTE]

This is the clear moment where a lot of people should see that you don't understand the issue.

[quote name='Knoell']Ohhh I forgot to comment on the "prayer room" that you guys made seem was the most minor part of it. Minor in that it will accomadate 1000-2000 muslims. Prayer space indeed. There isn't anything wrong with that other than you guys attempting to be misleading making it seem small.[/QUOTE]

You need to concede the contradiction. You are okay with Muslims praying near Ground Zero. You are not okay with them building a space in which to pray near Ground Zero.
 
[quote name='berzirk']I'm not emotionally upset by it at all! I think it's hilarious, because as I mentioned in the other thread, burning a Qur'an is one of the very few acceptable ways to destroy a Qur'an according to muslims.

Your analogy falls apart (again) when you try to compare these two completely separate issues. There are troops in so-called Muslim countries, and our military leaders are saying in their expert opinion, this Qur'an burning could add unnecessary risks to these soliders lives.

And for the record, I never thought this COMMUNITY CENTER and mosque would ever be used as a recruitment tool domestically or internationally, so I'm getting lumped in with people's agreements that I don't necessarily support.

You've apparently lost the last point you tried to make, so once again you're jumping to something else like qualifying extremism.

Will this blanket statement appease you?: Being an asshole is assholish, no matter who you are. There, we've covered all assholes. Happy yet?[/QUOTE]

This is like saying burning a flag is the most respectful way to do it. You are wrong and taking it out of context.

So if a bunch of christian extremists threatened to riot and kill people, would that be a good reason to stop the mosque from being built?

I wasn't referring to you on that point, i was referring to the fact we were all talking about it. You mostly were likely against the theory. Try to keep up.

I still think burning Korans are a horrific and terrible idea, but come on man try to be more consistent.
 
[quote name='IRHari']This is the clear moment where a lot of people should see that you don't understand the issue.



You need to concede the contradiction. You are okay with Muslims praying near Ground Zero. You are not okay with them building a space in which to pray near Ground Zero.[/QUOTE]

No, because the guy is building it for other reasons than a prayer room. He is building it to use it as a symbol, praying is secondary in his cause for this mosque. He is placing it in that location to force a cooperation that can only occur on its own.

Edit: Taking his stated goal, do you think placing the mosque there has helped achieve his goal or hurt it? Would it be much more successful if he moved it?
 
[quote name='Knoell']This is like saying burning a flag is the most respectful way to do it. You are wrong and taking it out of context.

So if a bunch of christian extremists threatened to riot and kill people, would that be a good reason to stop the mosque from being built?

I wasn't referring to you on that point, i was referring to the fact we were all talking about it. You mostly were likely against the theory. Try to keep up.

I still think burning Korans are a horrific and terrible idea, but come on man try to be more consistent.[/QUOTE]

AHH HAA HAA HAA HAA. YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

What am I wrong about on this? It's a fact that burning the Qur'an is the proper way to destroy it. This is why I find it so funny. If he planned on throwing them on the ground and trampling them, I would be offended.

...and again, your analogy makes no sense. Let's say you were a rational person and the idea of building a COMMUNITY CENTER and mosque (which by the way, will also house prayer space for jews and christians) wasn't douchy or offensive. That you took at face value that they wanted to cooperate with the community in an interfaith way. OK, that seems like a noble idea, right? OK, let's assume they want to build a victory mosque and make it a thumb in the eye of America. Now we have to assume the worst, and in fact call the organizers liars.

Now, let's say you want to burn Qur'ans because Islam is of the devil. You umm...well, you can assume that they, uh...you know. OH WAIT! There's no f*****g way this can be twisted into a positive event to bring groups together. We have to assume the mosque guy is lying in order for it to be offensive. There's no need to assume the pastor is lying, he's already offensive to any rational person. (I use the term rational, because this is a legal principle)

So off topic, why do you think you find yourself on the opposing side of the issue any time Islam comes up? Just out of personal curiosity. Do you despise the faith more than others? Do you think Muslims are attacking your way of life and liberty? What brings you to that side of the argument every single time. I know the reasons why I stand where I do, I'm curious why you stand where you do.
 
[quote name='berzirk']AHH HAA HAA HAA HAA. YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

What am I wrong about on this? It's a fact that burning the Qur'an is the proper way to destroy it. This is why I find it so funny. If he planned on throwing them on the ground and trampling them, I would be offended.

So off topic, why do you think you find yourself on the opposing side of the issue any time Islam comes up? Just out of personal curiosity. Do you despise the faith more than others? Do you think Muslims are attacking your way of life and liberty? What brings you to that side of the argument every single time. I know the reasons why I stand where I do, I'm curious why you stand where you do.[/QUOTE]

Ask a muslim if a christian pastor burning the koran is the most respectful way to do it. You are taking it out of context like you do everything.

Your analogy is screwed up man. How do we have to assume the mosque guy is lying for it to be insensitive? It is right there, he picked that spot BECAUSE it was a sore spot.

Off topic? I find myself consistantly on the side of freedom and independance. If someone wanted to stop a muslim from burning bibles in America, I would legally be on his side, just like I am with the priest. I would ask the muslim not to do it, protest, etc but I would not be for a legal alternative to stopping him from doing it.

How about this, you give me an example of something I am unfairly against muslims for. Wait let me save you some time.

Mosque - He can build it, people can protest it.
Burning Korans - He can burn them, people can protest it.
Islamic Extremists - There are alot of them in the world today, they have no right to do what they do.

I know, so unfair. Lets look at you.

Mosque - He can build it, people protesting it are children having tantrums.
Burning Korans - He cannot burn them, people protesting are fine.
Islamic Extremists - There are just as many wackos in the world as christianity, judaism, etc

Why do you find yourself defending islam from EVERYTHING, even when they deserve to be rightly critiqued as every other religion is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Knoell']It is right there, he picked that spot BECAUSE it was a sore spot.[/QUOTE]

You need to prove this to us with empirical evidence.
 
[quote name='IRHari']You need to prove this to us with empirical evidence.[/QUOTE]
will his own words due?

Rauf insists the effort is meant to help heal the wounds of 9/11, "We've approached the community because we want this to be an example of how we are cooperating with the members of the community, not only to provide services but also to build a new discourse on how Muslims and non-Muslims can cooperate together to push back against the voices of extremism."
Click to expand...

Or are you going to try telling me that he is trying to heal the wounds of 9/11 and coincidentally picked a building near ground zero that was damaged from 9/11.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I thought we already cleared up that the Pentagon Chapel was not actually a mosque on its own. minus credibility points for mr powell :cry:[/QUOTE]

Colin Powell acknowledged it was an islamic prayer room, not a mosque on its own. Minus credibility points for Knoell for not doing his homework ;)

[quote name='Knoell']Or are you going to try telling me that he is trying to heal the wounds of 9/11 and coincidentally picked a building near ground zero that was damaged from 9/11.[/QUOTE]

You seem to think Rauf chose that spot out of malice. Salt in the sore spot wound as it were. You need to prove that.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Colin Powell acknowledged it was an islamic prayer room, not a mosque on its own. Minus credibility points for Knoell for not doing his homework ;)



You seem to think Rauf chose that spot out of malice. Salt in the sore spot wound as it were. You need to prove that.[/QUOTE]

minus points for IRHari for not including the link when he quoted the guy. :roll: You guys can't catch on to keeping things in context can you?

It doesn't have to be out of malice it just has to be sore. I could say something about someones dad getting murdered, and it could be sore for someone listening whose dad got murdered. It wasn't out of malice, and I certainly didn't murder his dad, but it was sore nonetheless.
 
[quote name='Colin Powell']And the answer is, if you believe in our system and if you understand why we can do it at the Pentagon and Walter Reed[/QUOTE]

lawl, YOU were the one who looked at this quote and assumed he thought there was a mosque there. Look shit up instead of just assuming brah. I'm not going to do your work for you, look it up yourself if you think it's ambiguous.
 
[quote name='Knoell']minus points for IRHari for not including the link when he quoted the guy. :roll: You guys can't catch on to keeping things in context can you?

It doesn't have to be out of malice it just has to be sore. I could say something about someones dad getting murdered, and it could be sore for someone listening whose dad got murdered. It wasn't out of malice, and I certainly didn't murder his dad, but it was sore nonetheless.[/QUOTE]

Him picking a location that is a sore spot to some people is not the same thing as saying, "he picked that spot BECAUSE it was a sore spot."
 
[quote name='IRHari']lawl, YOU were the one who looked at this quote and assumed he thought there was a mosque there. Look shit up instead of just assuming brah. I'm not going to do your work for you, look it up yourself if you think it's ambiguous.[/QUOTE]

Quote in context next time, or at least cite your work.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/nyregion/11religion.html?_r=1&hp

^for Knoell who is so douchy he doesn't do his own research before he gives his opinion
Over the next few days, noticing some fellow Muslims on the job, Mr. Abdus-Salaam voiced an equally essential question: “So where do you pray at?” And so he learned about the Muslim prayer room on the 17th floor of the south tower.
Click to expand...

This is so insensitive; how dare they practice Islam in the same building that was destroyed in the name of Islam!
 
Knoell: Ask a muslim if a christian pastor burning the koran is the most respectful way to do it. You are taking it out of context like you do everything.


berzirk:whistle2:-I AM A F*****G MUSLIM!!! My friends and I were laughing about it today in fact after our Eid prayer (today marking the end of Ramadan). Please contextualize THAT!

Knoell: Your analogy is screwed up man. How do we have to assume the mosque guy is lying for it to be insensitive? It is right there, he picked that spot BECAUSE it was a sore spot.

berzirk:whistle2:---Purely speculation, and you assuming the worst. Qur'an burning by a pastor has no way it can be twisted as sensitive or good manners. The NY guys could conceivably think they were doing a great service by creating this interfaith community center. I don't know what's in their hearts either, but one has an out for positivity, where as the other is purely negative.

Knoell: Off topic? I find myself consistantly on the side of freedom and independance. If someone wanted to stop a muslim from burning bibles in America, I would legally be on his side, just like I am with the priest. I would ask the muslim not to do it, protest, etc but I would not be for a legal alternative to stopping him from doing it.

berzirk:whistle2:---So you side with freedom, but think people who are expressing their freedoms for reasons you don't agree with are douchy? Dude...do you see how silly that sounds when it's down in writing?

Knoell: How about this, you give me an example of something I am unfairly against muslims for. Wait let me save you some time.

Knoell:
Mosque - He can build it, people can protest it. (but they are douchy and insensitive for building it)
Burning Korans - He can burn them, people can protest it. (but you think it's the same level of insensitivity that people building an interfaith community center display)
Islamic Extremists - There are alot of them in the world today, they have no right to do what they do. (who thinks murderers are good? Way to really stand up on a platform and condemn the group that all sane people condemn :|

I know, so unfair. Lets look at you.

Mosque - He can build it, people protesting it are children having tantrums. (paraphrased, yes, I said that)
Burning Korans - He cannot burn them, people protesting are fine. (I never said it or anything remotely close to it)
Islamic Extremists - There are just as many wackos in the world as christianity, judaism, etc (I never said it or anything remotely close to it)

Knoell: Why do you find yourself defending islam from EVERYTHING, even when they deserve to be rightly critiqued as every other religion is.

berzirk:whistle2:-....I'm F*******G Muslim! And have I critiqued Christianity or Judaism anywhere in this thread? No. Please stop pretending like I'm bashing other religions because I have done absolutely nothing of the sort. Others have in this thread, but not me.
 
[quote name='berzirk']Knoell: Ask a muslim if a christian pastor burning the koran is the most respectful way to do it. You are taking it out of context like you do everything.


berzirk:whistle2:-I AM A F*****G MUSLIM!!! My friends and I were laughing about it today in fact after our Eid prayer (today marking the end of Ramadan). Please contextualize THAT!

So as a muslim you are saying a christian pastor burning the koran is the respectful way to do it? If you leave out the fact that the christian pastor is burning it then maybe it would be a respectful way to dispose of it, but that would be taking it out of context.

Knoell: Your analogy is screwed up man. How do we have to assume the mosque guy is lying for it to be insensitive? It is right there, he picked that spot BECAUSE it was a sore spot.

berzirk:whistle2:---Purely speculation, and you assuming the worst. Qur'an burning by a pastor has no way it can be twisted as sensitive or good manners. The NY guys could conceivably think they were doing a great service by creating this interfaith community center. I don't know what's in their hearts either, but one has an out for positivity, where as the other is purely negative.

How am I assuming the worst? The guy has clearly stated the reasoning behind the location, he wants to repair the divide in muslim and non-muslim relations caused by 9/11. The problem is that it isn't his decision to repair relations, and even if it was, this is clearly making it worse. The two situations are comparable because they are both rights that should be defended regardless of our like and dislike, agreement, or disagreement for them but at the same time they can be protested against without a smear campaign against anyone who disagrees. You guys labeling anyone against the mosque as bigots would be as bad as anyone labeling people against the guy burning korans as anti free speech. It is a smear campaign plain and simple without any effort to determine peoples true feelings, or disregard them offhandedly when you do hear them.

Knoell: Off topic? I find myself consistantly on the side of freedom and independance. If someone wanted to stop a muslim from burning bibles in America, I would legally be on his side, just like I am with the priest. I would ask the muslim not to do it, protest, etc but I would not be for a legal alternative to stopping him from doing it.

berzirk:whistle2:---So you side with freedom, but think people who are expressing their freedoms for reasons you don't agree with are douchy? Dude...do you see how silly that sounds when it's down in writing?

Apply what you just said to yourself. You side with the freedom to protest but you think people who are expressing(protesting) their freedoms for reasons you don't agree with are bigots?

As I have said before he can do what he wents, build a mosque/community center wherever he wants, the location is a bit controversial for what he is trying to achieve, and he would have much more success with his goals if he moved it. This isn't about a guy thats only dream is to build a mosque in his neighborhood, he picked the location because of 9/11. People are still sensitive there about an attack on our country involving radicals of that religion. This is why a few blocks away would be fine, and mosques all over the country are fine where they are. If you disagree with that point fine, but that doesn't make it less relavent of a reason for the people against it, and it doesn't mean you can revert them to bigots because you disagree.

Knoell: How about this, you give me an example of something I am unfairly against muslims for. Wait let me save you some time.

Knoell:
Mosque - He can build it, people can protest it. (but they are douchy and insensitive for building it)
Burning Korans - He can burn them, people can protest it. (but you think it's the same level of insensitivity that people building an interfaith community center display)
Islamic Extremists - There are alot of them in the world today, they have no right to do what they do. (who thinks murderers are good? Way to really stand up on a platform and condemn the group that all sane people condemn :|

I know, so unfair. Lets look at you.

Mosque - He can build it, people protesting it are children having tantrums. (paraphrased, yes, I said that)
Burning Korans - He cannot burn them, people protesting are fine. (I never said it or anything remotely close to it)
Islamic Extremists - There are just as many wackos in the world as christianity, judaism, etc (I never said it or anything remotely close to it)

Knoell: Why do you find yourself defending islam from EVERYTHING, even when they deserve to be rightly critiqued as every other religion is.

berzirk:whistle2:-....I'm F*******G Muslim! And have I critiqued Christianity or Judaism anywhere in this thread? No. Please stop pretending like I'm bashing other religions because I have done absolutely nothing of the sort. Others have in this thread, but not me.

I was never claiming you did, but other religions are regularly criticized for their flaws in just about anything, but anytime islam is criticized for much of anything we have a defense force coming to their aid, and calling anyone present bigots, or idiots that don't understand that other religions have flaws too. (because 1 wrong + 1 wrong = all is well :roll:).


[/QUOTE]
..,.
 
314396590_39cbfb456c.jpg


We are such islamiphobes when we complain about 1 mosque that is around the vicinity of an major attack that killed alot of people. We are so intolerant. :roll::roll::roll:
 
[quote name='depascal22']No. You're an Islamophobe when you equate those 19 hijackers with every peaceful member of the same religion.[/QUOTE]

Yep because that is the extent of islamic extremism.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Quoted for postererity.[/QUOTE]

Not sure what you are getting at. Are you trying to disagree that islamic extremism extends beyond those 19 hijackers?

Or are you yet again trying to make discrimination or racism out of me correcting your gross understatement of islamic extremism.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Again, I'm not the one equating 19 hijackers with EVERY member of a religion.[/QUOTE]

Neither am I. But I also am not the one equating the entirety of islamic extremism to 19 hijackers.
 
So why should it shift toward most of them being extremists? Wouldn't all religious followers be extremist according to your narrow definitions then?
 
^^ meh. He apologizes for the bigotry and craziness the media has propped up against Muslims. I wonder when someone will apologize for the bigotry and craziness directed against the Tea Party, equating the whole with a few extremists and rattling of intolerant slurs against them.


P.S. who are all the cons?
 
Don't pull a fucking misdirect, dude. And quit playing like it's the media that props up hatred for Muslims. I thought the media loved minorities anyway. So what is it?

Not one person has said the Tea Party can't build a community center or a national headquarters near Ground Zero.
 
[quote name='depascal22']Don't pull a fucking misdirect, dude. And quit playing like it's the media that props up hatred for Muslims. I thought the media loved minorities anyway. So what is it?

Not one person has said the Tea Party can't build a community center or a national headquarters near Ground Zero.[/QUOTE]

That comment was in response to the NYTimes link over apologies (which I implied was hypocritical given the current animosity toward the Tea Party from many people on the left including NYT writers). It wasn't suppose to be extrapolated to other stuff like the mosque. You produced the misdirection here.

Also, to answer your other questions...
I'd say the media is responsible for the Muslim outcry of Terry Jones' koran burning plan. Do you disagree?

And the mainstream media (everything but Fox) leans left-of-center, and therefore promotes left issues, not necessarily minorities (and you've pointed out how the Tea Party is "full of angry white Christians" so how are the Tea Party members a minority?). Stop drinkin the cool aid. Stop misdirecting. And stop sounding like a total b*tch.
 
The Tea Party is mostly a bunch of people who lost an election. They're against big government when it's run by a Democratic president. They're overwhelmingly socially conservative. I would stand up for the 'animosity' against the Tea Party, I just wish they had stood up to the animosity toward the anti-war movement.

As I recall, questioning your President (Bush) during a war time undermined the President and gave aid and comfort to the enemy. After barely 2 years of Obama, I guess that means our enemies felt like we gave them a rimjob.
 
A political coalition with a "Miss America Pageant" quality platform is *exactly* the same thing as a religion.

Making fun of a group of dumbasses is *exactly* the same thing as regarding a fifth of the world's population as uncivilized terrorists.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']A political coalition with a "Miss America Pageant" quality platform is *exactly* the same thing as a religion.

Making fun of a group of dumbasses is *exactly* the same thing as regarding a fifth of the world's population as uncivilized terrorists.[/QUOTE]

so why does one deserve an apology and not the other. That was my point depascal failed to grasp.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']A political coalition with a "Miss America Pageant" quality platform is *exactly* the same thing as a religion.

Making fun of a group of dumbasses is *exactly* the same thing as regarding a fifth of the world's population as uncivilized terrorists.[/QUOTE]

The size is irrelevant. You stick to your ideals of defending a group from being boiled down to a few outspoken people, right? The tea party is that group but you disagree with their ideas. Just because you disagree with those ideas does not give you right to discredit an entire movement. Debate it, sure. disagree with it, sure. Analyze it, sure. But don't sidestep the issue by calling them idiots.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Just because you disagree with those ideas does not give you right to discredit an entire movement.[/QUOTE]

He absolutely has that right. Stop fucking shitting on the Constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top