Anti_Islam protests victory for extremists?
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
Just like a pervert is partly to blame when he gets kicked in the nuts after grabbing a random girls ass. His urine wouldn't be red, or his nuts swollen and painful if he didn't grab her ass in the first place.
Bin Laden's network was in part funded by CIA money, correct?
I fail to see how this must be inconsistent. I can agree that kicking in the nuts is excessive for grabbing an ass, and also agree that the person who grabbed the ass shares int he responsibility for what happened.
Statements by the Imam who pretends to promote peace in New york
FOXNews.com - 'Ground Zero Mosque' Imam: America Killed More Innocents Than Al Qaeda
Then the real world.....
Islam: Making a True Difference in the World - One Body at a Time
FOXNews.com - 'Ground Zero Mosque' Imam: America Killed More Innocents Than Al Qaeda
Then the real world.....
Islam: Making a True Difference in the World - One Body at a Time
Careful Tonington, the meaning of your post could be twisted into a statement in support for 9/11....
Funny - Sad really how those that condemn the US forget how many people were murdered by fellow Muslims - Oppressed by fellow Muslims - Terrorized by fellow Muslims -
Yes we in the West cozy up to these Govts - But so do a lot of other countries - Why - Oil - trade- investment -
So we are accessories to people who cannot get the shinola together and bring in a Democratic Govt and resposible Govt - They are lead by their noses by their respective Religious Leaders - Told who to hate - who not to - - Why - because they are always fighting, killing, trying to be more powerful than the other.
I agree with the beginning of the clip, which explains how selective facts can be used to support any position. After that, I disagree with the most of conclusions it makes based on selective facts.
How many Muslim Countries would this happen in???????
Residents confront church group ‘praying’ outside gay couple’s home - The Globe and Mail
Residents confront church group ‘praying’ outside gay couple’s home - The Globe and Mail
Probably not that many. Do you think these people are leaving and coming here because they like 6 months of snow? :lol:
Actually, no it doesn't. That's one of the craftiest pieces of propaganda, actually. I'm pretty impressed! But no, here are some real concerns with some of the things posed in that video:
Firstly, the idea that previous peaceful passages are abrogated by later passages and that those later statements must be held as literal is not in any way shape or form the methodology by which all muslims live by. That video implies that it is, which is outrightly wrong.
If this was the case, there would not be so many different sects of the religion. The reason why there are so many sects is coincidentally what the author of that video says 'westerners' believe wrongly based on their own religions. It is due precisely by virtue of the fact that there are many varying interpretations of the Qur'an that all of those sects exist to begin with!
Blatant, blatant proganda. Wow.
Qur'anic Literalism said:
Qur'anic literalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Secondly, the assumption that all later contradicting passages are actually the violent and while the original, earlier ones are pacifist is also a huge assumption that is simply not true. The whole 'abrogation' issue is based on the idea that later passages which contradict earlier ones will be the passages used if they are 'better' or based on Allah's will.
This does not mean that they are necessarily violent by any means. That's absolutely ridiculous. In fact, many muslims actually oppose the idea of abrogation because Allah is supposed to be all-wise - and would never need to revise older passages.
The Problem of Abrogation in the Quran
Lastly, sharia law as a single, organized international conspiracy that all islamists enforced in order to infuse this 'creeping sharia' is unjustified, despite the existence of minor considerations like sharia courts, for instance. That they can operate above existing administrations is patently false, even in muslim nations.
That all muslims deliberately lie about being peaceful so that they can infiltrate western values as expressed by the video is equally ridiculous. The irony being that fundamental christianity has been a much worse influence impeding our progression in the realm of gay rights, racism and the like.
Essentially, the author of that video blatantly promotes the ideology that all muslims are fundamentalist conspirators without any supporting documentation to confirm such claims. Scared me so effectively though, that I actually 'informed myself' and found out otherwise.
Last edited:
I have had Reugees that worked and waited their way thru the system work for me for a number of years - All Muslims - We get along fine -
And I know exactly why they came
FREEDOM
Braveheart Freedom Speech#
The Speech of William Wallace at Falkirk in the Movie 'Braveheart' -- Gavagai.pl
I am William Wallace. And I see a whole army of my countrymen,
here in defiance of tyranny! You have come to fight as free men. And
free man you are! What will you do without freedom? Will you fight?"
"Two thousand against ten?" - the veteran shouted. "No! We will
run - and live!"
"Yes!" Wallace shouted back. "Fight and you may die. Run and you
will live at least awhile. And dying in your bed many years from now,
would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for
one chance, just one cahnce, to come back here as young men and tell
our enemies that they may take our lives but they will never take
our freedom!"
My point exactly. Then they get over here, and people try to limit their freedoms with scapegoating and hate mongering.
Not at all. It's a comment in general about the thread topic, along with other tangents like the Park 51 Cultural center.
Statements by media clown who pretends to care about the 9/11 families.
Glenn Beck=politically correct
Imam Rauf=politically incorrect
mentalfloss and earth_as_one: The author is anti Muslim in just about everything, he created a very good piece of anti Muslim propaganda backed up with mostly facts as he personally interprets them. I agree with what you both said. It is just put together so well. Then again garbage in garbage out.
Now i know you are a research freak - compliment by the way - i try to be the same - From all the differing opinions we have learned what this man stands for.
Now consider - If you were building bridges would you:
1 - Build a mosque so close to the 911 site?
2- Have a museum inside depicting the horror and stating how it was against Islamic beliefs?
3 - Include a Synagogue, a Christian Chapel and a prayer room for all to gather and learn and pray?
Myself - Numbers 2 7 3 are the qualifiers
No 1 shows a complete lack of emotion as to what happened, yes it is their right, but does that necessarily make it the right decision. No in my opinion, knowing what i do of this man it is a deliberate provocation. No more no less than a deliberate insult to the 911 tragedy.
It is not about religion - It is about what is the right thing to do. To many are drowned in religion that they do not see the forest for the trees.
One might even be able to draw a comparison to the Japanese wanting to build a memorial at Pearl Harbor. No this was not a attack by any Muslim nation against the U.S., but it did light up the problem in the world as to organized terrorist organizations and what they are capable of. Wanting to build a Mosque near or at Ground Zero is just plain bad taste with no regard to the feelings of the families who lost so many.
It's a community center. If we're being ingenuous we should start out by calling it what it is. Of the 13 floors, two are devoted to "prayer space".
I would, yes. If I was working with 9/11 groups, interfaith discussion groups, and helping Homeland security, I would have no problems proposing such a place. It wasn't even an issue until blowhards in the media and conservative pundits grabbed a whiff of controversy in the air.
Also, remember that this plan had the blessings of Jewish and Christian leaders, and of community leaders in the area.
And that guy from TYT is not a media clown????
Beck actually was a clown...the TYT guy uses shtick too.
Anyways, that's besides the point. The point is, well it should be obvious.
I think this would depend. What about a memorial to the Japanese internment victims:
Japanese American internment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
or to Japanese servicemen whose contribution to the US war effort was crucial:
Japanese American service in World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Certainly you're not lumping them all together with the Japanese Imperial Army now are you?
What would be wrong with a memorial near Pearl harbor of how the attack on Pearl Harbor led, indirectly, to the internment camps? Or a memorial to the Japanese-American servicemen who'd helped to ensure another Pearl Harbor did not occur again? Do we not appreciate the efforts of those servicemen because they are Japanese?
I think it's the same issue here. Just as we can't lump the Japanese Imperial Army and Japanese-American servicemen of the time together, so we can't lump Al-Qa'ida and American Muslims together either. Do we not recognize that innocent Muslims also died on 9/11 and that some American Muslims also helped fight the war on terror? Do we not appreciate the efforts of those compatriots?
It would seem to me that a memorial to the Japanese resistance to the Japanese Imperial Army, such as Japanese-American servicemen, would be more than appropriate, no?
Would a memorial to the 100th Infantry Battalion be inappropriate because it was a Japanese-American force in WWII?
100th Infantry Battalion (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Some of its members was part of the internment detainees, caused bythe attack on Pearl Harbor. Many of them were of Hawaiian descent. And most joined the US Army voluntarily. And many gave their lives to defend the US. So, it would be inappropriate to have a memorial for them near Pearl Harbor because it was an all-Japanese infantry battalion?
Would a museum near Pearl Harbor with this photo in it be inappropriate:
100th Infantry Battalion (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So what if all those soldiers are Japanese. They're American too, damn it.
And here's their crest, with the slogan:
Remember Pearl Harbor
File:100th infantry battalion.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And if we consider that over 6,000 Japanese Americans served in the Military Intelligence Service, we can't deny that they were the eyes and ears of the US military in the Pacific. Without them, the military wouldn't have had a clue half the time of what the Japanese were up to.
So, would it be inappropriate to have a memorial to them near Pearl Harbor? Do we associate them with the Japanese Imperial Army?
Here's a good quote from Wiki on the topic:
"Approximately 6,000 Japanese Americans served in the Military Intelligence Service (MIS) as linguists and in other non-combatant roles, interpreting captured enemy documents and interrogating prisoners of war. The initial training facility to prepare for their function was at Camp Savage in Savage, Minnesota. This decision was to locate them in a region where there was less racial prejudice towards the Japanese as compared to the West Coast.
MIS linguists translated Japanese documents known as the "Z Plan", which contained Japan's counterattack strategy in the Central Pacific. This information led to Allied victories at the Battle of the Philippine Sea, in which the Japanese lost most of their aircraft carrier planes, and the Battle of Leyte Gulf. An MIS radio operator intercepted a message describing Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto's flight plans, which led to P-38 Lightning fighter planes shooting down his plane over the Solomon Islands."
Looking at it that way, by being willing to accept Japanese Americans as equals, the US was able to save some lives on its side and win the war more quickly. Would it have been wiser to reject their help and skills and knowledge in the war?
The same applies here. In the war on terror, do we demonize all Muslims or welcome them among our ranks in the war on terror?