It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Attention: There Is Already a Mosque Near the WTC Site

page: 16
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I think we all would gain substantially from better understanding the community that is erecting this center.

The Sufi spiritual path is known as Dervish, here is its definition:


A Dervish or Darvesh (from Persian درویش, Darvīsh via Turkish) is someone treading a Sufi Muslim ascetic path or "Tariqah", known for their extreme poverty and austerity, similar to mendicant friars in Christianity or Hindu/Buddhist/Jain sadhus. As Sufi practitioners, Dervishes have been known as sources of wisdom, medicine, poetry, enlightenment, and witticisms. For example, Nasreddin became a legend in the Near East and South Asia, and not only among the Muslims.


As NBC would say: Diing.. Ding.. Diing.. ~ The more you know ~

Simply understanding the community that is responsible for this establishment would probably quiet a lot of the naysayers.

EDIT to add:

Here's the non-Islamic view of the sect from Wikipedia:


Sufi mysticism has long exercised a fascination upon the Western world, and especially its orientalist scholars. Figures like Rumi have become household names in the United States, where Sufism is perceived as quietest and less political.

The Islamic Institute in Mannheim, Germany, which works towards the integration of Europe and Muslims, sees Sufism as particularly suited for inter-religious dialogue and intercultural harmonization in democratic and pluralist societies; it has described Sufism as a symbol of tolerance and humanism – undogmatic, flexible and non-violent.


The Sufi even influenced Jewish ethical writings.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by misinformational]




posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


And what does that matter? You could found a community center for the flying spaghetti monster. The person who leads it has to take stances on obviously big issues that relate to his faith and claim to be a man of peace. Don't deflect the point.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91


I would agree. And I'm going to admit it. I would feel safer near an average Muslim than a Mormon. I can admit when I have a prejudiced and I very much so do have one against Mormons and their wacky faith. It's basically 19th century Scientology. Islam wins flat out over Mormonism for actually making sense.



Sometimes ya just have to go straight for the "nail head" and skip over the rehashed babble that's been addressed and responded to multiple times in previous posts.

You obviously know Jack Splat about the Mormon belief. I doubt you are as informed of Islam as you claim.

I would suspect as in Mormonism - - you see only what you select to see.

Thanks for admitting you have religious prejudice.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


What does that matter!?!?

It completely matters. It's about understanding the views, beliefs, and way-of-life of the people that you are outraged about building a center to promote their beliefs.

If you understand the people and their ways, you can easily understand their intentions.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


Mormonism, Scientology. Same silliness. I like Islam actually. And I have studied it. It's a cool faith. I do not follow it because I am Christian. But it's a lot better than Mormonism.

How it all relates is very very simple. If you are asked a question which obvious affects your claim to your personality, and you refuse to answer, this is suspicious. That's the final word on it.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by misinformational
The dude was standing there with a Jewish community leader, whom he thanked for support.




Something tells me "the dude" has already been labeled a traitor by his ilk.
Hope he doesn't plan a trip to the Middle East anytime soon.

I've a Churchill quote just for you, Winston that is.
An appeaser is one who feeds the crocodile hoping it will eat him last



[edit on 18-8-2010 by Alxandro]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


And like I said, I'm sure Pat Robertson's followers have good intentions for the things they do. That doesn't change the fact that Pat Robertson is a crazed evil man who should be stringed up.

The same is true with the Imam. He has a responsibility to call out evil as it is. To not say anything because its political is both erroneous to Islam and his position.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


This is laughable. The only so-called proof that you've presented that the Imam has less than honorable intentions is that he didn't comment on the Hamas.

Yet I've given you the definition of his sect of Islam that states that they are not political and live an aesthetic and mystical life - which explains why he doesn't comment on political happenings.

The only question I've got for you now is - what's your next fallacious justification?

[edit - grammar]

[edit on 18-8-2010 by misinformational]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


That is irregardless of the simple facts here. He was asked. He refused to answer. Why? Because it's politics?

Do explain. How is genocide political? Humanist you say? Then why not support their fellow man?

They either betray Islam by not following its rules, or they betray their sect by not respecting the right to life of man.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Replied as expected.

The Palestine/Isreal conflict is extremely political in nature. The Hamas and Israel are rival and warring political entities that oppose each other.

And he did respond by stating the he denounces and wishes to eradicate all violence.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


He said that for another issue. Not this one.

And genocide is past politics. Genocide is wrong. period. If he cannot speak about the matter, he has failed as a humanist.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


The U.S. Government hasn't vocally opposed numerous genocides.. Same stands for most governments, religious sects, politicians, and people in general.

Do we all have shady intentions then?

Rationally speaking, when one denounces all forms of violence, that would include any and all genocides.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by misinformational]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


I'm not an expert but I know enough about it and have experienced the tolerance of Muslims first hand in my life.

So we are on the same page, I have generalized all Muslims with my statements. To combat this you have posted a wiki page (we wont go into that) to ONE particular "sect" in Islam.... as your rebuttal to say I'm wrong.... Rather engage in than a thoughtful debate you decided to insult my intelligence.

How does one page or sect disprove my statements? Are you not using the same mind set that you are accusing me of? Basically, actions of few is not representative of the whole.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by misinformational
 


You twisted it! They would not be shady to denounce genocide. They would be shady if they refused to comment.

In addition to this, if that's the way you want to define him, then his very act of wanting the center there is against his religion as it has obviously been interpreted to many as a violent act. Thereby making him a contradiction.

This is getting stupid now. He knew he would cause violence in doing what he did. If he is not allowed to do violence, then this whole issue together makes him a contradiction to his faith.

And if he didn't know this would happen, I have to question is credentials for his job.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   
During call to prayer at muslim mosques which can be heard a block away, 5 times a day, they say allah akbar, which is the same last words heard by those people on the planes that went into the twin towers, same words shouted by Milik Hassan at the army base in Texas when he killed 12. same words yelled by every suicide bomber before he takes out as many as he possibly can, etc..this cannot be a bridge to tolerance but a slap in the face of every American 5 times a day.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Infinityobserver
 



How does one page or sect disprove my statements? Are you not using the same mind set that you are accusing me of? Basically, actions of few is not representative of the whole.


Because we're discussing a specific religious establishment that belongs to a specific religious sect. It's then necessary to frame this discussions to the facts at hand. And that's that this particular religious sect is a peaceful and tolerant one.

Your point of contention is akin to erecting a Catholic church and condemning based on the principles of the Westboro Baptist.

There was no intent to comment on intelligence, other than to say we all gain from mutual understanding.

[edit on 18-8-2010 by misinformational]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Mmm you would like this to be about a "particular religious establishment" and not the agenda of the Islamic faith. That makes perfect sense to me. While you did not say YOU'RE A RETARD you questioned my knowledge of the subject because I do not agree with you. You even went as far as to post a link so I could mm how did you put it....

"you may then speak intelligently about it."



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Infinityobserver
 


No offense was meant.

Questioning your knowledge on a particular subject (through which one then speaks intelligently about the subject), doesn't indicate questioning your overall intelligence - at least on my part.

By my statement, I simply meant what I posted in reply: Understanding a people and their ways will yield an understanding of their intent and also of their behavior.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
While I have not studied them too deeply...Id have to disagree with your statement about Westboro.

If all the Muslims did was protest and not actually execute people, that I could see. Instead they are ACTUALLY executing people for homosexuality, rejecting Islam and things of that nature. If that's a fair comparison in your mind...ok.



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
In addition to this, if that's the way you want to define him, then his very act of wanting the center there is against his religion as it has obviously been interpreted to many as a violent act. Thereby making him a contradiction.


Many have interpreted it as an offensive action, but has anyone really interpreted it as a violent act?


This is getting stupid now. He knew he would cause violence in doing what he did. If he is not allowed to do violence, then this whole issue together makes him a contradiction to his faith.

And if he didn't know this would happen, I have to question is credentials for his job.


Sadly, I think that the leaders behind the Park51/Cordoba House project genuinely didn't expect the national outcry they've faced.

After all, they are building a community center and mosque in Lower Manhattan, with the support of the local community and of NYC Christian, Jewish, and interfaith groups. The proposed site is not on Ground Zero, which New Yorkers have come to recognize the rest of the country feels a claim on; it is blocks away. While there have been protests against other mosques in New York City, to the best of my knowledge there has never been one against a mosque in Manhattan.

I read a very interesting article a couple days ago about a meeting that Daisy Khan (wife of the imam) had early this spring with a leader of a JCC uptown, asking for her help in anticipating problems.

They talked about stuff like how to handle all the strollers that will come through the doors, and where street cart vendors will be able to park their carts. In other words, the New York version of conversations that go on all over the country when a new project is trying to get zoning approval.

They were planning a project in a neighborhood that has a long history of tolerance, with at least two mosques (the one the imam involved with this project has led since 1983 and another nearby which is unaffiliated) having been there peacefully for decades, along with synagogues and churches of several denominations.

I really wish that they had been able to foresee all this and try to counteract it and assuage people's concerns before the issue was blown so far out of proportion, but they were basing their decisions on their experience in New York City development and politics, not in national politics and media.

[edit on 8/18/2010 by americandingbat]




top topics



 
48
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join