Retired General Slams NY 'Mosque' Critics

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Excuse me, opinion polls mean nothing, anyone can go to google and find a poll to support what they want it to.

Really?

Can you find one that says 70% of Americans support the building of the Ground Zero mosque then?

I'll put the kettle on.

Anyway just a pleasant reminder that the Topic of this Thread is about Retired General Slams Ny Mosque Critics as being harmful to the critical part of winning hearts and minds in the Middle East amongst the Muslim World.

It is a SINGLE important aspect of this issue, and while I realize the TEMPTATION is there for people to troll these threads, to turn them into broader ranging platforms it does impede quality debate on the specific aspect of the subject.

Having just placed a member who joined the site yesterday on Ignore for inflamatory off topic posting and tolling I am determined as always to avoid serious topical drift, and would encourage members prusuing broader agendas of their own, to open their own threads to promote them, rather than derail this one.

Please stay on topic.

Thanks.

[edit on 21/8/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


This is my personal overview of this subject, not that it means much of course as i am not someone with authority around here.

1. Under the law all people in the USA are equal in matters such as this and all religions are equal. This is one of the things the country was founded upon.

2. This is not a Mosque, it is a community centre with a place for worship, i suppose this is like a chapel inside a hospital, the hospital is not suddenly turned into a church because of the chapels presence.

3. Some may see this as betraying the memories of those who died on 9/11, however these people seem to forget that some of those who died were Muslim and so while the nut jobs who killed everyone were Muslim this should not be used to demonise the entire faith.

4. Extremists may see this as a great symbolic victory if it is built.

5. Those who are not extremists may be more easily radicalised if this community centre is not allowed to be built. The recruiters will further demonise the USA, saying that the prevention of the community centres construction proves the wests hatred of Islam.

6. If it is built it may very well foster an improved relationship between the average american and those of the Muslim faith.

7. A mosque already exists near ground zero, this community centre is for a different community and more importantly it will offer many other things, to all people, of all faiths. It could be a very positive thing for kids and adults in the area.

8. If you say this should be banned you basically betray the ideals your country was founded upon. That all men and all religions are equal. If it is prevented you are basically saying that Islam is not equal and that Muslims are not equal.

That will cause a great deal more hatred and that is one thing this world doesn't need more of.

I'm sure i've missed some things off but i did my best with the list.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


Actually everyone's oppinion matters as an oppinion.

Quality oppinions rely on quality information though.

One of the things I fear is leading people to make poor quality decisions is poor quality information.

When one starts the investigative process towards forming an oppinion, it is my own humble oppinion one not choose biased sources of information, false sources of information, or politically motivated sources of information.

That a person should consider all the salient and pertinent facts, including trying to try on the various perspectives by walking a mile in those people's moccassins and trying to see it from their singular and often biased point of view, to understand better their motivation.

Ultimately this matter would require a amendment to the Consitution of the United States to effect a different outcome.

Yet the people most inclined to ammend the Consitution to favor their position in this one particular incident, have the most to loose in the future from doing that.

Today it's Islam they want to abolish and regulate, tomorrow it will be Mormonism, and then Jehova Witnesses, and then Scientologists, and then Hare Krishnas, and then Lutherans, until they end up with what they fear the most, having their own religion dictated to them by the state and by others.

Most of this is little more than people emotionally venting and transferring other frustrations on to what really is a non-issue, the people who fear Islam the most are the religious extremists of other religions, and they are the ones who are going to suffer the most by abolishing first amendment protections for religion in the long run.

Make no mistake about it, if it were up to me, I would outlaw all religion, and simply rid the world of this divisive nonsense.

But it's not up to me.

So my opinion doesn't much matter.

People do though have remedies, ballot initiatives and lawsuits if they really want to try to make a properly conducted constitutional change that would make legal what they would like to do, which is now illegal.

Yet the truth is that while some might feel hurt or damaged by these events if they established a precedent of one religion's actions causing them mental anquish, then someone like me, now has an open door to sue all the religions.

See it backfires.

I am of only one oppinion and that is the one we are failing as a nation more and more at, the best time to uphold the consitution is when you don't want to be bound by it, that way you end up with no Nazi sounding Homeland Security Act, or intrusive Foreign Intelligence Secrets Act where Americans can be spied on with out warrant, jailed without warrant or trial, and denied due process.

So here we are again after having lost all those liberties because fear and emotion allowed people to abandon the Consitution, now wanting to abandon it again, to strike down freedom of religion.

It's pure insanity and the long range repercussions and costs are always going to far exceed the short term feel good victories of giving way to emotional impulse.

Further the very inflamatory rhetoric which is bound to continue for months and years as this huge construction project carries on, is the kind of highly divisive issue that could lead to Intenet Censorship and new laws, as people resort to personal attacks, unfounded claims, and slander of others with total anonymity but no accountablity.

So misusing the internet in this fashion to foster a kind of uncivil debate few would dare to do in person where they had to be accountable, is likely to give free interernet critics all the information to start regulating it, taking away annonymity and making everyone and anyone accountable for what they say on the Internet.

That will be the death knell of Conspiracy sites like ATS where most subjects on conspiracies are pure conjecture and partial research or no research to prove a position.

Government media will control the internet and I wouldn't put it past some of the more determined vile posters flocking to the site right now, pushing the bulk of this inflamatory and uncivil rhetoric to in part be working for and duped by organizations that ultimately have that in mind.

This is perhaps the most serious issue facing our constitution and our liberties and a free interent that we have yet to encounter in our lifetime and we have encountered some big ones already.

People really need to slow down and let their emotions and biases go and start thinking this through better, because the reality is far to many people are not speaking wisely, soundly or intelligently and that is going to open the door through that chaotic vaccum for repurcussions that they have yet to stop and truly think about.

Rest assured when the Powers that Be contrive to place public focus so intently and emotionally on one thing, they are planning and conspiring to do something far worse and to succeed at it, through that vaccum.

Thanks for posting my friend.



[edit on 21/8/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


You write a very intelligent and well thought out post.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
If you say this should be banned you basically betray the ideals your country was founded upon.

To be fair, I'm not sure that the writers of the constitution had Islam in mind when they wrote it.

The constitution writers clearly had Christianity in mind, not a distant middle East religion called Islam.

They certainly didn't have the impact of a Muslim Mosque being built in 2010 on the scene of a Islamic terrorist atrocity in mind when they wrote it in 1787.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
That all men and all religions are equal. If it is prevented you are basically saying that Islam is not equal and that Muslims are not equal.

This is the ironic thing. The Koran (the eternal word of Allah, may he be praised) makes it very clear that Muslims are superior to any 'unbeliever' (everyone else), and in fact, unbelievers are held to be perverted, guilty, evil, wicked, evil-livers, who have diseased hearts and are not to be trusted, according to eternal word of Allah.

I personally feel that the vast majority of Muslims in the world and in the USA are just like you and I. They just want a quiet life.

The problem however is the small minority of Muslims who follow Wahhabi hardline Islam. They read the Koran properly and the Koran makes it quite clear (I am more than happy to provide links and quotes) that Muslims should not be friends with non-Muslims and must carry out Jihad against non-Muslims.

I would be happy if only Wahhabi Mosques (almost all Muslim terrorists come out of Wahhabi/Salafi schools of Islam that demand everyone follows a 7th century version of islamic behaviour) were banned.

Perhaps the general's wishes could be accomodated if we ascertained that the Mosques funding was not coming from Saudi Wahabi sources?

This NY police department goes into how terrorists are created

www.nyc.gov...

Originally posted by ollncasino
To be fair, I'm not sure that the writers of the constitution had Islam in mind when they wrote it.

No they had all religions, beliefs, races and creeds in mind. As a document the constitution and bill of rights is a truly fantastic piece of legislation, along with the various ammendments. Of course a good portion of the document is lifted from the existing English laws of the time, which is understandable as the laws in England were around centuries before America was even discovered. However it was the founding fathers who put those laws into a more easily applied construct, along with various protections.

Originally posted by ollncasino
The constitution writers clearly had Christianity in mind, not a distant middle East religion called Islam.

Hey hang on a moment, several of the founding fathers appear to have been deists so i don't know where you get this Christian idea from. The founding fathers saw the plight of the Puritans and designed the legislation in such a way that protected all faiths.

Originally posted by ollncasino
They certainly didn't have the impact of a Muslim Mosque being built in 2010 on the scene of a Islamic terrorist atrocity in mind when they wrote it in 1787.

They didn't have in mind any number of things that happened in the future but the constitution is, I believe, a timeless document.

Originally posted by ollncasino
This is the ironic thing. The Koran (the eternal word of Allah, may he be praised) makes it very clear that Muslims are superior to any 'unbeliever' (everyone else), and in fact, unbelievers are held to be perverted, guilty, evil, wicked, evil-livers, who have diseased hearts and are not to be trusted, according to eternal word of Allah.

You might want to check the attitude of some Christians as many think that Christianity is superior. The fact many of them believe you will go to hell unless you accept Jesus shows that one and many Christians (usually american ones) think they are morally superior because they follow Christianity. So be careful how you apply this argument.

Originally posted by ollncasino
I personally feel that the vast majority of Muslims in the world and in the USA are just like you and I. They just want a quiet life.

And what does stopping them from building this do to these people who wish for a quiet life? It says "you are lesser citizens than us, that you are not afforded the same rights". I wonder how long they will live the quiet life when they realise that one.

Originally posted by ollncasino
The problem however is the small minority of Muslims who follow Wahhabi hardline Islam. They read the Koran properly and the Koran makes it quite clear (I am more than happy to provide links and quotes) that Muslims should not be friends with non-Muslims and must carry out Jihad against non-Muslims.

The Bible says some utterly horrific things also but people pick and choose. Those who follow the Bible at it's word believe the world to be a few thousand years old, would kill witches and kill abortion doctors.

Religion taken literally is often a bad thing and when taken to extremes is a deadly thing. It is wrong to judge a religion by it's most extreme followers.

Originally posted by ollncasino
I would be happy if only Wahhabi Mosques (almost all Muslim terrorists come out of Wahhabi/Salafi schools of Islam that demand everyone follows a 7th century version of islamic behaviour) were banned.

But of course if you ban one sect you can ban others. That is the problem with censorship, it starts at the edges and moves inward. You start banning the things that pretty much everyone agrees on and then you ban things that most people agree on, then things that half of people don't like and well, you see the problem here.

I would like people to consider the diversity and backgrounds of some of the people against the mosque, who speak out because of personal experiences, they are not bigots.

are they fearful?

Do they after considering their experiences a right to be fearful?
yes, but considering their stories they have every right to be fearful and concerned,

why should their voices be silenced?

Should we not listen to those who have lived it?

9/11 families were joined by immigrants from India, Russia, Egypt, Israel, Africa, Iran and Europe

www.newyorksocialdiary.com...

Simon Deng is an American citizen from southern Sudan. He is also an escaped slave. He is a leading human rights activist who speaks out on the genocide perpetrated against blacks by Arab moslems in Sudan. The history of Arab colonization of Africa is one of islamization, wholesale slave trading, and genocide.

Simon Deng, Former Sudanese Slave, Human Rights Activist

www.iheu.org...

Is is Simon Aban Deng a bigot, a racist?

My name is Simon Aban Deng. I am from Sudan. I am a Shiluk by tribe. I am a Christian by religion. I belong to a people who have been subjected to mass murder, slavery, systematic rape, religious persecution, enforced starvation, dislocation, exile. We are the victims of genocide, both physical and cultural. We have been targeted for annihilation as human beings and as members of a culture. These miseries did not fall upon us from the sky; we have been and remain the victims of the radical jihadist regime in Khartoum.

The general has his point of view based on his experiences, but how about Simon's experiences?

I am standing before you today, ladies and gentlemen, a victim of Sudanese Arab enslavement in Sudan. I was a slave. I am not ashamed to say it. When I was nine year's old, my village was raided by Arab troops in the pay of Khartoum. As we ran into the bush to escape I watched as childhood friends were shot dead and the old and the weak who were unable to run were burned alive in their huts. I was abducted and given to an Arab family as a "gift." A "gift,"

What about his opinion?

While the life of a slave is like hell, there is no shame in being a slave; it is not a choice. There is only shame in being a "master." If any one is to feel shame for the suffering of the people of the Sudan who have lost 3.5 million lives at the hands of a barbarous regime, it is the radical Muslims in Khartoum and their Islamist allies throughout Sudan and across the whole of the Islamic world.

[edit on 013131p://bSaturday2010 by Stormdancer777]

[edit on 013131p://bSaturday2010 by Stormdancer777]

Americans have nothing against muslims or truly American people of any religion or belief. The only problem that Americans have is with those radical groups that are not American and do not fit in with American values as stated by our founding fathers.

The American values were based on Christian values which for the most part are very compatible with almost every other religion or belief.

There are some beliefs (religious, political etc) that are not compatible with values in America. An example of one of these is Radical Islam.

The way I see things is that if you do not like America, if America is not compatible with your way of living, then there is one or more countries available to you where you will be happier.

I love this country and its values for the most part. Unfortunately our government, in trying to be PC and using the Mantra of separation of church and state, is ruining our country.

When the republic was created our founding fathers never wanted separation of church and state. They did not want a state sponsored religion dictating what a person will believe but they did want the Christian values and morals to permeate through government workers always. When christian values and morals seize to govern our government servants, that is the day that America begins its slow decay. From the look of things the decay started a while ago.

Just going by the name of the organization Cordoba Project you can see the intention of this group. Research Cordoba spain and you will know what is behind the name.

There are times that are appropriate to turn the other cheek but not when someone or a group is trying to conquer your nation.

Originally posted by Staben

The American values were based on Christian values which for the most part are very compatible with almost every other religion or belief.

Indeed ... as Thomas Paine said:

"Every religion is good that teaches man to be good; and I know of none that instructs him to be bad."

He further noted:

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit"

Common sense.

I think religions do instruct men to be bad, or we would not have had this problem.


Man-kinds interruptions of gods words.




[edit on 023131p://bSaturday2010 by Stormdancer777]

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
They didn't have in mind any number of things that happened in the future but the constitution is, I believe, a timeless document.

No offence, but all things change with time - even the constitution needs to be change. If that wasn't true, why are there amendments?

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
And what does stopping them from building this do to these people who wish for a quiet life? It says "you are lesser citizens than us, that you are not afforded the same rights". I wonder how long they will live the quiet life when they realise that one.

Antagonising the majority of Americans is a strange way to lead a quiet life surely?

The fact that a suggestion was made at all to build a mosque on Ground Zero suggests an ulterior motive and a lack of sensitivity on the part of Muslims in light of the fact that Muslim terrorists killed 3,000 people within 2 blocks.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
The Bible says some utterly horrific things also but people pick and choose. Those who follow the Bible at it's word believe the world to be a few thousand years old, would kill witches and kill abortion doctors.

The Bible (and the Koran) say many horrible things about what god has done and will do. It also talks about the day of judgement and the nasty fate for some.

The big difference is that the Koran actually instructs Muslims to carry out holy Jihad against non-Muslims in this life. It is a religious duty.

It repeats the instructions many times in many different ways. The Koran teaches Muslims to conquer non-Muslims. Muhammad was a great believer in Jihad and took part in, if my memory serves me correct, 28 military campaigns personally and was involved in planning 80. He also executed almost 1,000 prisoners of war and political opponents. He liked murdering poets as well.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Religion taken literally is often a bad thing and when taken to extremes is a deadly thing. It is wrong to judge a religion by it's most extreme followers.

True, but it isn't wrong to brand a religion's extremists as extremists. It is also not disingenuous to judge a religion on the basis of the words and actions of its founder.

Muhammad was a warlord who killed, conquered and murdered. He also extorted his followers to do the same. Its all in the Koran. Not an odd verse here and a there. Rather, the Koran contains a large number of verses inciting racial hatred and violence against non Muslims in this life.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
But of course if you ban one sect you can ban others. That is the problem with censorship, it starts at the edges and moves inward. You start banning the things that pretty much everyone agrees on and then you ban things that most people agree on, then things that half of people don't like and well, you see the problem here.

You don't really believe that surely?

If you ban child pornography then pretty soon all pornography will be banned?

if you cut out a cancerous tumour from your brain, pretty soon you will have to cut out the full brain?

If you ban mosques that serve as breading grounds of Islamic terrorists, pretty soon the moderate mosques will be banned too?

Has it ever occurred to you that moderate Muslims differentiate themself from Islamic extremists and will be quite happy to see a restriction on terrorist breeding grounds?

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
I think religions do instruct men to be bad, or we would not have had this problem.


Man-kinds interruptions of gods words.




[edit on 023131p://bSaturday2010 by Stormdancer777]

I think the General in the OP would give you a star stormdancer

reply to post by schrodingers dog


Thank you for quoting Thomas Paine, I have Common Sense Audio on my PC and listen to it from time to time. Here is link to download the audio free, worth listening to anytime.

www.learnoutloud.com...

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
I would like people to consider the diversity and backgrounds of some of the people against the mosque, who speak out because of personal experiences, they are not bigots.

The biggest bigots are the PC thought police who will broach no deviation from dogma.

Imagine if your average Muslim is even a quarter as aggressive, inflexible and dogmatic as our own 'liberals'.

If the they are, then people's wariness of an inflexible, aggressive Islam is perfectly justified.

Liberals don't only want to enforce how people behave to their liking, they want to force people to think to their liking.

Liberals should really have a good long, hard look in the mirror and recognise that they are the biggest bigots and danger to freedom of them all.


[edit on 21-8-2010 by ollncasino]

I am going to ask once again why it it we give Islam a pass when judging the atrocities perpetuated by fanatics within religions throughout history?

but,

Christianity is critically examined?

reply to post by ollncasino

Liberals should really have a good long, hard look in the mirror and recognise that they are the biggest bigots and danger to freedom of them all.

The strange twist is Islam is not liberal, they only use the liberal agenda and mindset to gain a foothold,

once that foot hold is achieved all the liberal right will be anathema to a staunch practicing Muslim,

Originally posted by ollncasino
No offence, but all things change with time - even the constitution needs to be change. If that wasn't true, why are there amendments?

In it's current form it serves this situation perfectly well and it protects these individuals rights to build the building. As for it being timeless, well i can think of a few additions regarding lobbyists, but for the most part it's hard to imagine changing the thing.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Antagonising the majority of Americans is a strange way to lead a quiet life surely?

The fact that a suggestion was made at all to build a mosque on Ground Zero suggests an ulterior motive and a lack of sensitivity on the part of Muslims in light of the fact that Muslim terrorists killed 3,000 people within 2 blocks.

In your opinion, in mine i think people are being over sensitive regarding the building and once again, it's not a Mosque.

Originally posted by ollncasino

The Bible (and the Koran) say many horrible things about what god has done and will do. It also talks about the day of judgement and the nasty fate for some.

The big difference is that the Koran actually instructs Muslims to carry out holy Jihad against non-Muslims in this life. It is a religious duty.

The Bible instructs numerous people to be put to death, witches, adulterers, it endorses slavery and rape. that's a pretty bad book if you take it literally.

Originally posted by ollncasino

True, but it isn't wrong to brand a religion's extremists as extremists. It is also not disingenuous to judge a religion on the basis of the words and actions of its founder.

Muhammad was a warlord who killed, conquered and murdered. He also extorted his followers to do the same. Its all in the Koran. Not an odd verse here and a there. Rather, the Koran contains a large number of verses inciting racial hatred and violence against non Muslims in this life.

Again Bible the same, seriously all religion when taken literally has these nasty parts. Well almost all, Buddhism i think doesn't include as many nasty parts.

Originally posted by ollncasino

You don't really believe that surely?

If you ban child pornography then pretty soon all pornography will be banned?

if you cut out a cancerous tumour from your brain, pretty soon you will have to cut out the full brain?

If you ban mosques that serve as breading grounds of Islamic terrorists, pretty soon the moderate mosques will be banned too?

Has it ever occurred to you that moderate Muslims differentiate themself from Islamic extremists and will be quite happy to see a restriction on terrorist breeding grounds?

I was obviously talking about behaviors that are not physically or psychologically damaging. Therefore you can't compare normal porn to child porn nor a brain tumour to brain removal.

What i thought i was clearly pointing out was that today you say a certain religion is not allowed to do something then tomorrow you can say other religions cannot, then you can expand those restrictions.

"First they came..."

An important poem which expresses more clearly what i was saying.

Originally posted by ollncasino

If the they are, then people's wariness of an inflexible, aggressive Islam is perfectly justified.

Liberals don't only want to enforce how people behave to their liking, they want to force people to think to their liking.

Liberals should really have a good long, hard look in the mirror and recognise that they are the biggest bigots and danger to freedom of them all.


[edit on 21-8-2010 by ollncasino]

Not all people who support the rights of the Muslims to build this community centre are liberals of course. I am not a liberal for example. I merely uphold the ideals of the constitution, even though i'm not american i understand the merits of the document and how it should be applied in this case.

If you don't want the community centre then please feel free to file an ammendment to restrict religious freedoms

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
/t/thomas_paine.html]Thomas Paine[/url] said:
"Every religion is good that teaches man to be good; and I know of none that instructs him to be bad."

I can tell you one thing. Thomas Paine clearly didn't read the Koran. In fact, it is possoible he couldn't.

He died in 1809 and good English translations were only available, if my memory serves me correct, about 40 years after he died.

He appears to have made the same mistake as Western Liberals - he has assumed the Koran is peaceful. But what does it really say?

These are verses on Jihad


Allah gave Muhammad the one true religion and sent him to conquer all other (false) religions. 61:9

The "Religion of Truth" (Islam) must prevail, by force if necessary, over all other religions. 9:33

Fight against Christians and Jews "until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low." 9:29

Don't obey disbelievers. But rather fight against them. 25:52

Those who refuse to fight for Allah will be treated (along with their children) as unbelievers. 9:85

Those who refuse to give their wealth and lives to Allah will face the fire of hell. 9:81-83

Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway. 9:73

Those who submit and convert to Islam will be treated well. (Those who don't submit will be killed. See previous verse.) 9:6

Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. 9:5

Those who refuse to fight for Allah (claiming they are unable) are liars who have destroyed their souls. 9:42

Fight for Allah with your wealth and whatever weapons are available to you. 9:41

Fight disbelievers who are near you, and let them see the harshness in you. 9:123

Treat converts to Islam well. (Kill those who refuse to convert. See 9:5) 9:11

Believers must fight for Allah. They must kill and be killed , and are bound to do so by the Torah, Gospel, and Quran. But Allah will reward them for it. 9:111

A prophet may not take captives until he has made a slaughter in the land. 8:67

Exhort the believers to fight. They will win easily, because disbelievers are without intelligence. 8:65

Don't let the disbelievers think they can escape. They are your enemy and the enemy of Allah. 8:59-60

Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. 4:89

If you die fighting for Allah, you'll be rewarded in heaven. 3:157

"Give us victory over the disbelieving folk." 2:286

War is ordained by Allah, and all Muslims must be willing to fight, whether they like it or not. 2:216

"Fight in the way of Allah." 2:190, 2:244

Those with Muhammad are ruthless toward disbelievers and merciful toward themselves. 48:29

If you refuse to fight for Allah, he will punish you with a painful doom. 48:16

You couldn't make this stuff up

reply to post by ollncasino


Do i really have to go through the Bible and quote some of it's more hateful verses? The verses about killing witches, adulterers, where it defends rape, child abuse, slavery and all of the other stuff?

Seriously man you need to take a step back and realise that many religious books contain some horrible things. It is the followers who make the religion and not the religion that makes the followers. This is evidenced simply in how some religious followers are peaceful and others are war mongering.