-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Ground Zero Mosque (or cultural gathering centre for the politcally correct)
- Thread starter Empoleon Bonaparte
- Start date
randomspot555
Well-Known Member
It's not so much a correction as it is expanding on what Sharia is.
Sharia is man made law that is religiously inspired. This is different from Jewish law, which is actually found in the Torah and the Old Testament. You won't actually find Sharia laws in the Koran.
But similarly to Jewish law, Muslims practice Sharia in various ways, or not at all. Again, to bring up the Jewish faith, orthodox Jews might follow Jewish law to a T, whereas reform Jews barely do.
That...is an entirely different subject. Christianity does not preach child molestation, while Sharia and a radical Islamist agenda support murder and oppression.
Uh, no, I did not say that. What it does is prove that he is not a moderate Muslim. A moderate Muslim would denounce Hamas and the Sharia law we see in Saudi Arabia. He does not, and he believes in the law that the terrorists who attacked our country did. So, when someone with those religious beliefs wants to build a building to honor that, you can see why people would be angry and find it offensive.
I'll let randomspot deal with the whole law concept.
No, I am not. At all. That form of extremism needs to be contained. It's creeping its way into Europe, and it should never be allowed in America. It's a danger.
I'll concede that, but more or less it is close.
That's because it was mostly to say that Sharia is the sacred law of Islam, man-made or not.
I'm not really sure what this man's religion has to do with Hamas. Are Roman Catholics or Protestants Nazis because Hitler practiced aspects of those religions?
Also, I wasn't aware we were talking specifically about Sharia in Saudi Arabia, because religious views can vary greatly among countries.
I think my Hitler thing was enough to cover this as well. Honoring your religious beleifs isn't insulting. Acting like someone is a terrorist because they're a Muslim, however, is.
Well, unless you can provide facts that Islam as a whole is dangerous to America, which I highly doubt, we're done here, as the backbone of your argument is nothing but ad hominem. Extremism is dangerous, but for some reason nobody seems to be commenting on the neo-Nazism that is sweeping the globe, and for some reason nobody has proven that this man is in fact an extremist.
Last edited:
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
I can't really decide
at one point I would say no because it is like putting oil on fire, salt on the wound you know.
but on the other side yes it could actualy be better for the conections, that we have nothing against muslims only the extremist terorists
at one point I would say no because it is like putting oil on fire, salt on the wound you know.
but on the other side yes it could actualy be better for the conections, that we have nothing against muslims only the extremist terorists
Sure, but I don't think they'll build a giant mosque like that to begin with (main reason being the lack of space).
Porygandrew
Well-Known Member
I'm all in favor of that!
In all seriousness, Islam is as much a religion as Mormonism, or Catholocism, or Shinto, or Buddism....
The first amendment is for all, and not for some. You can't say, "You have freedom to build where you want! But you just can't build there..."
People can call it tasteless if they want, fine, whatever, but that's pretty much the extent.
And from what I've been told by my moderate Muslim friends, murder is only supported by the Quran when it's in self-defense. Your point?
And okay, extremist!Sharia law supports oppression. Guess what? Christianity isn't exactly angelic in that regard either. Fundamentalists and radicals exist in every religion, pal. We shouldn't prevent this guy from building a mosque any more than we should prevent a fundie Christian from building a church. And as has been pointed out, interpretations of Sharia law and the degree to which one follows it varies from person to person, just as it does for people of any religion. For example, do all Christians do as they're directed to in the Bible and "witness to all living creatures"?
So okay, new comparison - shall we prevent churches from being built in areas like, say, Oklahoma City, any city where there's been an abortion clinic bombing, or pretty much any part of Spain that was around during the Inquisition? Or how about building a church a few blocks away from Arthur Shelton's apartment? I doubt anyone would oppose that. (For the record, Arthur Shelton was a guy who brutally murdered his roommate because he was an atheist and he "saw the devil in his eyes". When he left the courtroom, the rest of his family went on record saying "the only good thing that came out of this is that there's one less atheist in the world" and "the only good atheist is a dead atheist".)
Yeah, and a true Scotsman would eat his porridge plain - no sugar or anything!
But okay, he doesn't denounce Hamas or Sharia law. So he's not an ideally moderate Muslim. So what? We don't prevent fundamentalist Christians from building churches, but as soon as it's a mosque someone's trying to build, everyone loses their minds. This is exactly the kind of Islamophobia that many in the U.S. need to get over.
Psst! Hamas didn't do 9/11.
Hm. So, let's say Christian A believes in some of the laws of the Old Testament. Let's also say Christian B kills a gay because of Leviticus 20:13. Your logic dictates that Christian A is as bad as Christian B, and Christian A should not be allowed to build a house of worship.
I'm really curious about your logic here. Why exactly do this guy's personal views on Islam matter when he's building a cultural center? If he was running for the presidency, then yeah, there'd be a problem, but he's not seeking a position of power above anyone. He can't institute his beliefs in regards to Sharia on New York just by building a mosque/cultural center, and I'm pretty sure he'd get caught if he started preaching "PRAISE HAMAS ALLAHU AKHBAR" or something. So, uh, why
Yeah, he must be building a mosque to honor Hamas and Sharia law. There's no way it could be because he's a Muslim and wants to build a mosque.
Okay, this? This crosses into paranoia. "Creeping its way into Europe"? Name one European country that is anywhere near passing Sharia law, and tell me why you think that (said reason better not boil down to "there's a lot of Muslims there lately"). And I'm fairly certain there's no chance in hell of Sharia law making its way into the U.S. any time soon, if ever. =
I'm not sure if you live in New York or know what the city block sizes are like, but I live in a Canadian city that only recently hit a population of one million. Our city blocks are nothing compared to New York, and even our city blocks aren't that small. Two New York blocks away, out of sight from the blast, when there's already another mosque four blocks from G0 and several halal carts even closer than that, is... not that bad.
I'd like to try and apply your logic to everything. No swimming pools should be allowed within three blocks of the residence of somebody who happened to die of drowning. No car lots within three blocks of a house that belonged to someone who died in a car crash. No candy stores within three blocks of where someone who died of diabetes lived. No cutlery stores within three blocks of someone who was stabbed to death. No convenience stores are allowed to stock cigarettes if someone who lived within three blocks of said store happened to die of lung cancer. Is this starting to sound ridiculous yet?
Do they have a Legal Right to build the Mosque? Of course as it has already been approved by the New York planning board. Is it morally right to build the mosque so close to Islam's greatest attack on America? NO. To put it in perspective it would be like opening a German Heritage Center in the vicinity of Auschwitz, or a Confederate War Shop or War Memorial within the vicinity of Martin Luther King Jr's death. It is as disgusting as it is ignorant of the feelings of the VAST majority of the populous who rightly oppose it and that is why the Governor of New York offered to help move it.
In other words
Legal: Yes
Moral: No
And just to pick on a idiot...
You mind telling me what motives qualify the mass murder of 3,000 innocent people? It is as ignorant as it is stupid to place any blame on the US for 9/11 unless you are going to blame us for not all converting to Islam and taking up Sharia law as Bin Laden commanded us do in 98.
In other words
Legal: Yes
Moral: No
And just to pick on a idiot...
Fused said:
You mind telling me what motives qualify the mass murder of 3,000 innocent people? It is as ignorant as it is stupid to place any blame on the US for 9/11 unless you are going to blame us for not all converting to Islam and taking up Sharia law as Bin Laden commanded us do in 98.
Empoleon Bonaparte
Well-Known Member
One group of fundamentalists does not speak for an entire religion.
No they do not, but the attack was in the name of Islam, and that is what is front of mind with this Mosque and the central reason why people have problems with it.
To use my argument before, Confederates did not kill MLK, but you do not want to put a Memorial to them within the vicinity of where he was shot. Or Post War Germany was not responsible for Auschwitz but it doesn't make it morally right to put a German Cultural Center in the vicinity of it ten years after WW2.
Last edited:
Empoleon Bonaparte
Well-Known Member
So if I were to blow up a hospital in name of Judaïsm, would that mean that all Jews are terrorists?
No.
Okay now you are twisting my words, I never said they were terrorists. Now if you and your friends decided to blow up numerous hospitals in a Medical Center area, as well as in other towns, in the name of Judiasm as a part of a Jewish Terror Sect, killing three thousand people. I would expect people to be pretty put off by the opening of a Synagogue in the vicinity of the deadly terror attack that took thousands of innocent lives. Especially a Synagogue that may or may not be funded by people who have some of the same beliefs that caused your own psychotic rampage.
By the way, I figured this should be pointed out the Mosque has a opening date: September 11th 2011.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/mosque_madness_at_ground_zero_OQ34EB0MWS0lXuAnQau5uLL
So on the 10th anniversary of Islam's greatest attack on America, on the morning in which thousands will gather for the ringing of the bell in memory of what happened 10 years before. They will be opening the Mosque just down the street. Yeah any type of tolerance or decency these people have for how close to hollowed ground that they are building the mosque, essentially has gone out the ****ing window.
Last edited:
It's not as close as you guys seem to think it is. Quit making it sound like it's right across the damn street. It's two blocks away, which is a good distance considering it's New York we're talking about, and it's not even visible from Ground Zero. Also, I'm fairly certain it's not easy to find another place to build a mosque in New York.
I don't see that as that bad. A Nazi heritage center within Auschwitz would be bad, but a German one doesn't seem like that big a deal. It's not like all of Germany before and after WWII supported what happened to Auschwitz.
Question: For all those same reasons, should swimming pools be banned from being built within a certain distance of a house that belonged to someone who drowned to death? How about banning used car lots from being built within X blocks of the location of a fatal car crash? Shall we also ban the building of churches in Spain because of the Inquisition?
Question two, and this applies to anybody who happens to oppose the mosque: What do you think is a fair distance from Ground Zero for it to be built? Three blocks away? Four (there's already a mosque four blocks away and I don't see anyone calling for it to be torn down)? Five? Ten? Different city? Different state? Give us something to work with. Because there are plenty of cities that have had protests and huge opposition to having mosques built in their cities, despite the cities being on the other damned side of the country from Ground Zero. There will be opposition to building mosques pretty much anywhere in the country.
News to me. Where did he offer to help move it to? Would such a spot be as ideal as the current planned spot? If whoever's planning to build the mosque has already refused, then did they give a reason?
Hmm, if only they had gone public and told us what they thought America had done wrong... maybe in the form of some sort of video tape, maybe even several of them...
Were they good reasons? Hell no. But they were reasons. Do you really think they just kinda decided "let's go ram some planes into buildings for shits n' giggles"?
Y'know, the Spanish Inquisition was done in the name of God. But I'm fairly certain there are still churches in Spain.
Do you mean this is what everyone's thinking about when considering the building of the mosque, or do you mean that you think this is what the guy building the mosque is keeping in mind? Because, uh, you'll have to prove the latter.
And what evidence do you have to support this?
I'm calling ********. Also, your source is a broken link.
... You really did think it was just across the street, huh?
Yes it is New York we are talking about, it is not that far away, seeing how I have been there and walked the difference. Also seeing how New York Government is helping them find a different site the pain it would cause to find a new site would be minimized.
No but a German Heritage Center would deal with nationalism which brought about the foundation that in the end created Auschwitz.
No because all of those deal with one person, we are talking about a national tragedy still in the fresh memory for all Americans. It is pathetically stupid on your part to try to compare the two.
As always the further you get away from Ground Zero the less of a problem it becomes. Finding a suitable spot would be done by the New York State Government as they have already offered. People do not have problems with Mosques in New York City or even New York State, they have problems with mosques in the vicinity of Ground Zero being built.
He offered to help them move that, details would be finalized after the people at the mosque accepted help, and then the ideal spot would be found. They how ever refused, and from the looks of when they plan to open it, it is because they want it to be linked with Ground Zero and 9/11.
They told us we must convert to Islam and get Islamic law, as well as give up support for our allies in the Middle East. Again that doesn't make the US in any way responsible for what happened as all of those are not going to happen. Or anything less than utterly innocent in the attacks, unlike what Fused claimed in his undying stupidity.
Last time I checked the Spanish Inquisition did not happen in the last 10 years, or even the last 100 years. Now if it was, and the Spanish were completely opposed to building a church on their land, they would be fully in their right to do so.
That the attacks in name of Islam are in front of mind when people see this mosque so close to Ground Zero.
That the mosque is being funded by possible Middle Eastern influence? Perdana is the biggest doner of the mosque. So far they not only have been involved with funding the Anti Israel Flotilla. But the most prominent member of Pedana is both a Jew Baiter and 9/11 truther. Is it possible he also supports some radical islamic beliefs? Odds say yes.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/06/...part-of-group-that-helped-fund-gaza-flotilla/
Delete the two spaces near the end, for some reason the board is screwing up the link.
It's a phrase, saying something is Just Down the Street means it is very close or near by.
Although Just Down the Street is a rather apt description of it as it is just down Church Street.
Last edited:
There's another mosque four blocks away. The place is littered with hilal carts. There is a mosque inside the Pentagon which was damaged when a plane was crashed into it.
Aww, and here I thought you were older than 7.
It's really a simple law of nature. For every cause, there is an effect, and every effect is a cause. If 9/11 was an effect, then what caused it?
Besides, the US was constantly in Saudi Arabia, we supported Israel, and we had a trade embargo on Iraq. None of these things were particularly malicious as you seem to think that I think, but nonetheless, they were a factor.
So the 1984 abortion clinic bombing in the name of Jesus Christ doesn't put any suspicion on Christians, but 9/11 puts suspicion on all Muslims? Good to know.
[IMG139]http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/5479/nycmap.png[/IMG139]
Come along, my anti-American Muslim congregation. We're going on a field trip. But don't tell nobody or the government will waterboard us.
Also: http://www.wherethelocalseat.com/Re...smiles=5&sselected=18&citytab=1&afilter=false
Scroll down a bit until you find the Gyotaku Japanese Restaurant. Care to explain why that wasn't in the news?
So because the radicals who destroyed the World Trade Center were Muslim, it is reasonable to cast suspicion on all other Muslims, especially one who wants to build a house of worship, not a house of conspiracy?
Uh-oh, page not found.
Not Islam's greatest attack; radical Muslim's greatest attack. You're ignorant to think it is Islam's.
Also, do you think that absolutely, without a doubt, that no innocent Muslims were killed or injured during 9/11?
Last edited:
The mosque four blocks away was created long before 9/11 so unless they had some kind of telepathy to guess it, you really cannot say they did it knowing 9/11 was going to happen and the magnitude the WTC site meant.
Well lets see Saudi Arabia asked us to be there, Israel is our ally thus we support them, and the UN had the trade embargo on Iraq. So far you show nothing that would mean that the US is anything but innocent.
Are they trying to build a Church right next to the Abortion Clinic and plan to open it on the anniversary of the bombing? If so you would have a apt comparison. If not you just come off looking like a idiot.
I actually have the map of where it is right here.
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=U...d=107401674761562689105.00048cb39147b003c354e
Any belief that it isn't very damn close is ignorant on your part.
Not at the WTC they did not, unless you are under the very ignorant belief that because a religion has committed a crime some where in the world they should not have a church open anywhere.
Japanese Restuarant =/= Japanese Embassy
Because those that killed thousands of people and brought down the WTC were Muslim and acting in the name of Islam, it is not morally right to build a islamic house of worship just down the street from it. Now if I wanted to cast suspicion on their motives I can as the timing of their opening is not only suspect but their funding is also suspect.
Already said the board is messing up the link, I tried fixing it twice to no avail, delete the two spaces near the end.
Was it in Islam that they were attacking in? Or is there a new Religion called "Radical Muslim" That I am unaware of.
No I do not, but your point would be?
There weren't any spaces at the end of the link. I said "screw it" and searched the site for the article myself. And I found it! The article you linked to was either an editorial or the single most biased news article I've ever seen. The person writing it gave no sources for the claim that it was opening on Sept. 11th, simply stating it as if it was a well-known fact. As such, pointing to this article as a source that it's planned to open on Sept. 11th is like me pointing at my buddy Keith as a source that 2012 is gonna kill the world.
Oh, and:
But couldn't it invoke the same sentiment? I could say this spits on the victims of Pearl Harbor just as easily as you could that the cultural center spits on the victims of 9/11.
I love this logic. "We can't stop being allies with Israel because Israel is our ally."
But in honor of the victims, don't you think it would be fair to ask them to move it? Find a new place to build it?
By the way good job ignoring everything else Fused said immediately following that.
Oh, and:
But couldn't it invoke the same sentiment? I could say this spits on the victims of Pearl Harbor just as easily as you could that the cultural center spits on the victims of 9/11.
I love this logic. "We can't stop being allies with Israel because Israel is our ally."
But in honor of the victims, don't you think it would be fair to ask them to move it? Find a new place to build it?
By the way good job ignoring everything else Fused said immediately following that.
Last edited:
But if it's built afterwards, it's a suspicious act?
And I never accused the US of being willfully or conciously and maliciously guilty either. You can be innocent, but all of your actions still have a response.
No they are not, because the majority of Chrisitans disagree with abortion. But the majority of American Muslims don't agree with the 9/11 attacks, so I fail to see why this mosque is a porblem.
All I'm saying is that it is not as close as everyone makes it sound. People seem to think that it is literally across the street or in the center of ground zero.
And it is also very ignorant to believe that if a small radical faction of a religion commits a crime, the rest of the religion's more moderate followers shouldn't have a church open where they are allowed to.
All Muslims =/= 9/11 perpetrators
So there should not be Christian churches in France or Poland because Christian extremists invaded them, correct? Or anything Japanese in Hawaii because their people bombed it?
I'm not seeing the two spaces to delete.
All I'm saying is that you can't blame an entire religion and all of its followers for something a radical portion of the followers did.
If innocent Muslims were also hurt during the attacks, then why are we suspicious of them when there is a mosque being built?
Last edited: