• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 911 Hard Hat Pledge

Agent Ferris said:
The property is Ground Zero it was hit by the landing gear of one of the planes. We are angry because an overt Islamist is attempting to build a victory Mosque.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity... when you say 'victory mosque', what 'victory' do you refer to?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
The "victory" of Islam over the United States on 9/11.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that wasn't a victory. As a direct result, Islam is now more vilified, less accepted, and a country under fundamentalist Islamic rule has had it's leaders deposed and replaced.

9/11 had no winners. If the mosque is in any way symbolic, it would be a 'memorial mosque'. Plus, y'know, it gets alliteration points that way :p.
 
Unfortunately, your definition of victory isn't the definition being used by those making reference to the "victory mosque," and it's probably not the definition used by the guys who flew themselves into the towers.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Unfortunately, your definition of victory isn't the definition being used by those making reference to the "victory mosque," and it's probably not the definition used by the guys who flew themselves into the towers.
Click to expand...
Indeed - but I'd just like to see them admit that they share the same notions of 'victory' as a bunch of dead terrorists rather than
with the majority of everyone else, US Muslims included.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Unfortunately, your definition of victory isn't the definition being used by those making reference to the "victory mosque," and it's probably not the definition used by the guys who flew themselves into the towers.
Click to expand...

I can't help but feel that this is exactly what the terrorists wanted, they wanted people to turn against Islam, to villify it, to be prejudiced against it. That way it turns Islam against all westerners.

I mean, if Islam is as radical as everyone keeps suggesting, why wasn't radical islamists attacking the United States since its inception? I mean surely since they

"Hate our rights and freedoms"

They'd have wanted to destroy them from the very beggining?
 
Jetboogieman said:
I can't help but feel that this is exactly what the terrorists wanted, they wanted people to turn against Islam, to villify it, to be prejudiced against it. That way it turns Islam against all westerners.

I mean, if Islam is as radical as everyone keeps suggesting, why wasn't radical islamists attacking the United States since its inception? I mean surely since they

"Hate our rights and freedoms"

They'd have wanted to destroy them from the very beggining?
Click to expand...
Indeed. Responding to irrational hatred with irrational hatred just adds to the hatred - and seeing as it wasn't you who started it with that aim in mind, you lose. Unless you joined with the aim of promoting hatred (possibly with political aims in mind...) in which case, shame on you.

Relevant quote:
Steve Aylett said:
Hate adds only to hate. Cross through the angel of death and you give it extra wings.
Click to expand...
 
iangb said:
Indeed. Responding to irrational hatred with irrational hatred just adds to the hatred - and seeing as it wasn't you who started it with that aim in mind, you lose. Unless you joined with the aim of promoting hatred (possibly with political aims in mind...) in which case, shame on you.

Relevant quote:
Click to expand...

Another Revelevant Quote:

"Too often sinister threats to the Bill of Rights, to freedom of the mind, are concealed under the patriotic cloak of Anti-communism.” - Adlai Stevenson

Today, it's the cloak of Anti Terrorism.
 
Jetboogieman said:
I can't help but feel that this is exactly what the terrorists wanted, they wanted people to turn against Islam, to villify it, to be prejudiced against it. That way it turns Islam against all westerners.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they figured the Great Satan was already against Islam.

Jetboogieman said:
I mean, if Islam is as radical as everyone keeps suggesting, why wasn't radical islamists attacking the United States since its inception? I mean surely since they

"Hate our rights and freedoms"

They'd have wanted to destroy them from the very beggining?
Click to expand...

Geography and the fact that they reserve most of their violence for another are the first two reasons that come to mind. Well, that and the fact that we weren't getting ourselves involved in their business. Also, oil was a long way off from being a central pillar of our foreign policy.

Oh, and I almost forgot -- because they don't actually hate our freedumbs. :lol:
 
Jetboogieman said:
I can't help but feel that this is exactly what the terrorists wanted, they wanted people to turn against Islam, to villify it, to be prejudiced against it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what they wanted. :roll:
 
This is such a complicated challenge.
Personally I think it may be too soon to build a mosque there but am not going to protest march.

There have been many who state the media only show us the negative parts of the middle east war and don't show what many soldiers have said are the muslims who appreciate them and like them.
Next these same Americans don't want the mosque because muslims are untrustworthy.
So one part we don't like muslims but in the next sentence we want to sacrifice our young men and women fighting and rebuilding their countries.
Do we or do we not like them?
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
Next they'll be telling us that everything beneath the flight path of the planes is Ground Zero, on account of the fact that everyone below was sucking the sacred fumes of the sacred planes. :lol:
Click to expand...

It was actually hit by the landing gear of one of the planes not a small little chunk of debris off one of the towers.
 
iangb said:
Yeah, but that wasn't a victory. As a direct result, Islam is now more vilified, less accepted, and a country under fundamentalist Islamic rule has had it's leaders deposed and replaced.

9/11 had no winners. If the mosque is in any way symbolic, it would be a 'memorial mosque'. Plus, y'know, it gets alliteration points that way :p.
Click to expand...

Radical Islamists see every dead American as a victory.
 
Agent Ferris said:
Radical Islamists see every dead American as a victory.
Click to expand...
Are these the same Islamists that you have yet to prove were dancing in the streets?

Given that most US Muslims aren't radical (to the extent that almost 40% of them don't think homosexuality should be discouraged by society; better than some mainstream churches), how should it matter to their mosque what Bin Laden thinks?
 
iangb said:
Are these the same Islamists that you have yet to prove were dancing in the streets?

Given that most US Muslims aren't radical (to the extent that almost 40% of them don't think homosexuality should be discouraged by society; better than some mainstream churches), how should it matter to their mosque what Bin Laden thinks?
Click to expand...

The Imam spearheading the initiative is an overt Islamist.
 
Firstly, that's still not been proven - certainly not to the degree by which you call people 'overt Islamists'.

Secondly - and as I said before - what evidence do you have that sharing the Imam's particular theological views will be compulsory in order to worship at the mosque, or to benefit from the community centre?
 
iangb said:
Firstly, that's still not been proven - certainly not to the degree by which you call people 'overt Islamists'.
Click to expand...

Yes it has been proven, this man supports a Sharia compliant U.S. in which secular laws do not contradict the Koran or the Hadiths. That is the very definition of an Islamist.

Secondly - and as I said before - what evidence do you have that sharing the Imam's particular theological views will be compulsory in order to worship at the mosque, or to benefit from the community centre?
Click to expand...

We don't have evidence for that. We are not protesting the Muslim community we are protesting this Imam and his actions. He is the one who thought of it, he is the one who has spearheaded it, and he will be the one running it. This is his Mosque.
 
Agent Ferris said:
The property is Ground Zero it was hit by the landing gear of one of the planes.
Click to expand...
So ****ing what? Runways around the world were touched by the landing gear of the planes, are THEY Ground Zero now?

We are angry because an overt Islamist is attempting to build a victory Mosque.
Click to expand...
Do you even know what "Islamist" even means? WITHOUT looking it up?

You have Muslims who want to build a mosque and community center, why is this such shocking news?
 
Agent Ferris said:
Yes it has been proven, this man supports a Sharia compliant U.S. in which secular laws do not contradict the Koran or the Hadiths. That is the very definition of an Islamist.
Click to expand...
No, the definition of an Islamist you've been using is one who sees "every dead American as a victory". I have no issue with people who simply want Sharia Law - I disagree with them, but that's no reason to take issue with them personally; after all, I disagree with a lot of people online all the time, a lot of whom I respect even while I'm disagree with them. I do have an issue with anyone who considers violence as a method of spreading their viewpoint, whatever that may be - be it Sharia Law or Veganism. But I have seen no evidence that this Iman meets that standard.

We don't have evidence for that. We are not protesting the Muslim community we are protesting this Imam and his actions. He is the one who thought of it, he is the one who has spearheaded it, and he will be the one running it. This is his Mosque.
Click to expand...
But more importantly, it's a community centre. It's not 'Iman Steve's Sharia-Spreading Shack', or 'Iman Tims Terrorist Training Terraces' (I can't remember his name off-hand, so I turned to alliteration again). Even not giving it silly names, it's not 'Iman X's mosque', for his personal use only, representing to the greater world nothing more than what he wishes (even if his stated wishes so far have been no more threatening that "to encourage peace between nations and religions").

The only people calling it a 'victory mosque' are those who oppose it. You're falling foul of your own propoganda, nothing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom