Ah yes, the favourite sport of the politically correct. The fifty-yard guilt dash. A group of Muslims motivated by hatred and fanaticism slit the throats of flight attendants, flew hundreds of screaming, terrified passengers to a fiery death, and killed thousands of Americans in one of the most barbaric acts of terrorism in history, and we must ask ourselves what America did wrong. Naughty, naughty America!!!
If you can’t express your opinion without nine exclamation points I would say that’s a rant by definition. Valteron, if you are not able to discuss this in a rational manner, start another BBQ Pit thread.
Have you looked at the stats for various European countries? They are up to 10% in France, for example. Have you looked at their birth rate in countries of Europe compared to the infidels (the rest of us)?
Okay, “. . . .we must ask ourselves what Evil America did wrong.” Is that better?
While we must not cave to the demands of terrorists, it would be prudent to educate ourselves on just what they are so upset with us about. Instead, a lot of us swallowed whole a bunch of crap about how they “hate us for our freedoms”. I guess it’s a whole lot easier to drum up support for a war using this kind of nonsense than to acknowledge that they are mad at us because we are over there.
Not particularly. The issue is the content of the posts: an anti-Islamic screed belongs in the Pit. (The number of exclamation points you used just helps demonstrate that you’re ranting rather than debating.) We’ve had a couple of threads and pages of debate on whether this facility is a good idea. If you want to discuss the merits of the idea, go ahead. But go to The BBQ Pit if you want to engage in more Islam-bashing.
And of course, it’s not at all possible for us to have done something to deserve it anyway. That’s good to know–does this apply to ANY atrocity committed against civilians, or only ones committed by brown people? Fallujah and several Afghani villages want to know.
When I encounter a problem between a user and a programmer or a customer and a clerk, I generally try to identify the sources of the conflict. I frequently find that even when one party is clearly “wrong” in their ultimate actions, there were missteps by the other party that led to the actions, (reactions, overreactions, whatever). Noting that the U.S. has engaged in political and economic actions that have fostered an attitude that permits al Qaida to engage in effective recruiting is not an effort to “blame” the U.S. for al Qaida’a actions; it is an effort to get the U.S. to consider taking different actions in the future to minimize the effectiveness of al Qaida recruiting. I am sure that al Qaida will always be able to recruit some people to their ranks, just because hatred is a good way to get people roused up, (as you so frequently demonstrate), but their recruitment would be less successful if there were fewer actions by the U.S. that could be construed as offensive, and I would think that making their recruitment less successful would be a goal worth pursuing.
Of course, some folks simply prefer to set blame at the feet of everyone else and never accept responsibility for anything that they have done, but I do not find that to be a particularly good way to live.
Just for the record, please note that many people on this thread seem to assume that opponents of the ground-zero Mosque are calling for it to be legally and forcefully prevented, which would be a clear violation of the civil rights of Muslim-Americans.
I stand to be corrected since I have not memorized every one of the postings on this rather long thread, but I believe what most opponents of the Mosque are saying is that it is in poor taste to build it there. Even President Obama, in his most recent statement of clarification, made a distinction between the RIGHT to build it and the WISDOM of doing so.
The constant demand that opponents of the mosque define how far away from ground zero the building must be is a false argument, because it is up to the Muslims to recognize that the proposed Cordoba House (named after a city in Spain once conquered and controlled by Islam) is offending a lot of people in America and the world.
In terms of RIGHTS, if the Muslims were to acquire the actual lot where the WTC towers stood, and were to build, with Saudi money, a multi-million dollar structure called the Victory Mosque, I would STILL defend their RIGHT to do so. And I suspect every American court up to the SCOTUS would defend that right.
But now let’s talk about good taste. Let’s talk about a religion that claims to be areligion of peace and allegedly wants to integrate into American life.
And let us ask people like Tomndebb and others to flip the question around. Let us ask them: “How close is too close?” What if a giant mega-mosque built on the very site of the WTC had a plaque on it with the quote from the Koran, “Death will find you, though you live in high towers” (which was widely quoted in the Muslim world after 9-11) would you find that tasteless and provocative?
Once again, I repeat, I would agree that Muslims in America have a RIGHT, legally speaking, to build a Mosque at the spot with that quotation in front of it.
So how about it? How close is too close? What is too provocative and insensitive? I suspect you cannot answer that question any more than I can answer the opposite question, because it is a matter of good faith and good taste THAT MUST BE DETERMINED BY THE MUSLIMS THEMSELVES, SHOWING SENSITIVITY TO THE FEELINGS OF A LARGE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WHO, THE POLLS TELL US, ARE OPPOSED TO THIS MOSQUE.
As one poster put it early in this thread, would you build a German cultural centre in Auschwitz? How about just outside the barbed wire? How about 500 yards away? How far is far enough? If a majority of Jews and Poles told you that putting such a centre within a couple of blocks of the extermination camp was offensive, would you call them bigots and racists?
Apparently, you haven’t tried to preach the Word of God in the Middle East.
Give it a try…
Never mind.
Who fucking CARES what they do in “the Middle East” (as if the whole region were a homogeneous cultural enclave)? This is AMERICA! Frankly, Saudi Arabia is the last nation I want to try to emulate in the arena of human rights. But it’s got a mighty attractive pull for our home-grown religious nuts, as long as the focus gets shifted from Islam to Christianity.
Even though you claim it is a false argument, how about you tell us how far from Ground Zero that a mosque would have to be in order not to twist your panties?
Yes, I would. And for the sake of your analogy we’ll ignore the fact that the land belonged to the government (the Port Authority) which would never have leased it for that purpose.
The problem is this: these people are proposing something like an Islamic equivalent to a YMCA (the plan has been compared to the 92nd Street Y). Despite that, many people have responded as if they are planning something like what you’ve described. It is a problem that the people who have reacted most strongly to this proposed building can’t tell the difference between a highly provocative statement about a war of civilizations, and a fairly middle-of-the-road proposal by a moderate religious group. To make the situation even more ridiculous, people who often demand that moderate Muslims reject extremism are responding in an accusatory and negative way to Muslims who are doing that.
This group has been in lower Manhattan for decades and there is already a mosque four blocks away from the WTC site. And we’ve also seen protests against mosques in regions nowhere near the World Trade Center. The location of this building has inflamed passions but it’s not just a question of taste.
[quote=“tomndebb, post:328, topic:539432”]
Well, probably the most “offensive” action by the US is its support for Israel, the only functioning, liberal democracy in the area. Hamas (with whom the ground-zero Imam apparently has links, btw) and many other Muslims want to wipe Israel off the map, but cannot because of US support to the tiny state.
What you must understand is that NOTHING Israel could do would justify its right to exist in the eyes of most Muslims, because land once conquered for Islam can never be given back. Certain Muslims have even sworn in blood that Spain (as in Cordoba) must be taken back.
So let’s at least throw Israel to their tender mercies and see if they like us better, shall we?
[quote=“Marley23, post:334, topic:539432”]
So what if the group had been in lower manhattan for only a few weeks? How long is long enough, Tom? What if they just called it the Victory Islamic Centre but did not have the plaque with that quote on it? Where exactly do you draw the lines, Tom? And do you believe Muslim Americans of good will should take the opinions of the vast majority of Americans into account (including those of President Obama)?
So the people with the signs can’t express an opinion? I can’t stand next to a Fred Phelps church and express my displeasure? This Imam made statements that were insensitive to people in NY. If you lived in a small town and all of a sudden a huge religious complex (of any denomination) sprouted up out of nowhere from a small group of people wouldn’t you wonder where the money is coming from?
The Imam’s words make people question his intentions and an unknown money trail adds fuel to those questions. It’s not a court of law, it’s a court of public opinion.
You miss the point.
I used the term Middle East, when I should have said Muslim Countries, but AFAIAC, the two terms are synonymous.
You cannot open a church in most Muslim countries. In fact, as one poster pointed out, you cannot even possess a Bible.
So for all of its “peace loving” claims, Islam is the most intolerant religion on the planet.
I see what you did there. I also see what you didn’t do there, which was to actually establish any direct or indirect connection between these mysterious “certain Muslims” and the Cordoba Institute people.
In the spirit of fair play, however, I swear that if you can manage to somehow tie in Ricardo Montalban to your opposition to the mosque without too many convolutions, I will let you rant in peace. Bonus points if you can work in the phrase “rich Corinthian leather”.
Just out of curiosity, Marley, since we both agree that the Muslims would have the LEGAL RIGHT to build a Victory Mosque with that quote in front of it; and since you admit you would find it tasteless and provocative: How would you react when people called you a racist and an anti-Islamic bigot for opposing this provocative mosque?