• 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!

Landmark commission hearing may determine future of ground zero mosque

I have to confess that even I did initially cringe at the idea. I thought "Oh, this is not good. A Mosque that close to Ground Zero, do they not see how inappropriate that is?". It was honestly my first gut reaction. But then I of course felt guilty for thinking this way.

What a perfect description of political correctness. Your gut instinct told you the truth, but then all the training took over and you went with what you were supposed to feel instead of what you felt.

You couldn't ask for a more obvious in-your-face gesture than this, but you folks have been conditioned to beat up each other lest any of you actually recognize it and so you fall back into your familiar European denial, instead.
 
Well, since your sources are a:

A Rabbi
A Republican running for governor
And some random NYPOST Article, which none of them give a source or any indication of how they know that the date is September 11th 2011.

Until you can give me a concrete source for that claim, it doesn't stand.

The Imam is on record Jet saying we brought 9.11 on ourselves. If that date isn't accurate, why aren't we seeing him running around and claiming it isn't true?
 
But, but, but, that's exactly what happens! Seriously! I'm not joking!



You're full of ****!

**** I tell you!

:lol:

Europe will be conquered by children, not by guns

 
The Imam is on record Jet saying we brought 9.11 on ourselves. If that date isn't accurate, why aren't we seeing him running around and claiming it isn't true?

I have not seen this claim in mainstream media. Perhaps he is not aware of these claims. But I am very curious as to his response. If you read my post carefully. You will see no actual refute of the possibility of this being the date.

If it is. It proves that the organizers behind this Mosque have little tact. But I need to see solid proof before I make that assumption.



As for you Ric. You have not responded to my last post. And have continued to post your usual hateful rhetoric. I gave you a chance to moderate your position, to the point of reality. You have refused to do so. My respect for you is all but gone.
 
But I need to see solid proof before I make that assumption.

Josh McDowell wrote a book titled "Evidence that demands a verdict, Historical evidence for the Christian Faith" or something along those lines and in his forward, he relates an incident in which he was speaking before a college class. The prof was a declared atheist. After putting out all of the facts, he asked the prof if he could disprove any of them. The professor answered, "No." So McDowell asked him if he now believed and again, the professor answered, "No." When asked why, he said he chose not to.

Facts don't matter when the argument is emotion based, and vice versa.
 
Josh McDowell wrote a book titled "Evidence that demands a verdict, Historical evidence for the Christian Faith" or something along those lines and in his forward, he relates an incident in which he was speaking before a college class. The prof was a declared atheist. After putting out all of the facts, he asked the prof if he could disprove any of them. The professor answered, "No." So McDowell asked him if he now believed and again, the professor answered, "No." When asked why, he said he chose not to.

Facts don't matter when the argument is emotion based, and vice versa.

Nice dodging.

This is a cute story. Truly. But you have not responded to the question at hand.

This has nothing to do with semantics. If you read my post properly you would see what my response would be if that date was confirmed. It would be a negative response.

I merely try to bring the conservation to a point where we could possibly agree. If this means bringing it away from the ridiculous, then so be it.

Fact of the matter is, you have yet to reply to my post on page 55. And no one can confirm beyond a reasonable doubt that date.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Need to talk less about each other in this thread. Thank you
 
Well, since your sources are a:

A Rabbi
A Republican running for governor
And some random NYPOST Article, which none of them give a source or any indication of how they know that the date is September 11th 2011.

Until you can give me a concrete source for that claim, it doesn't stand.

So CNN which is the longest running 24 hour new network and the New York Post which is the countries longest continually running daily newspaper doesn't count as legitimate sources? Yes the article from CNN was from a Republican running for Governor but do you think CNN just publishes **** without fact checking it?
 
So CNN which is the longest running 24 hour new network and the New York Post which is the countries longest continually running daily newspaper doesn't count as legitimate sources? Yes the article from CNN was from a Republican running for Governor but do you think CNN just publishes **** without fact checking it?

They don't have to check it. CNN provided a disclaimer which I posted...

Until you're willing to provide concrete evidence of this date. It does not exist. I have looked around, and I can't find concrete evidence either.

Yet another attempt to subvert the conservation, not through fact and logic, but through emotions and lies.
 
They don't have to check it. CNN provided a disclaimer which I posted...

Until you're willing to provide concrete evidence of this date. It does not exist. I have looked around, and I can't find concrete evidence either.

Yet another attempt to subvert the conservation, not through fact and logic, but through emotions and lies.

The CNN disclaimer was in relation to the opinions of the author, he did not state the date of the groundbreaking as opinion, that was a statement of fact.
 
The CNN disclaimer was in relation to the opinions of the author, he did not state the date of the groundbreaking as opinion, that was a statement of fact.

Well then how come YOU and I can't find any other references of it. Besides opinionated articles.

Until I see hard proof. That argument does not stand.
 
Well then how come YOU and I can't find any other references of it. Besides opinionated articles.

Until I see hard proof. That argument does not stand.

I provided three articles one from the left, one from the right, and one from the center. WTF do you want from me?
 
I provided three articles one from the left, one from the right, and one from the center. WTF do you want from me?

I did my own research on this matter. If I could find proof, i'd believe it.

But no such proof exists.

I don't care what "lean" website it comes from. These are opinion articles and not matters of fact.
 
What a perfect description of political correctness. Your gut instinct told you the truth, but then all the training took over and you went with what you were supposed to feel instead of what you felt.

You couldn't ask for a more obvious in-your-face gesture than this, but you folks have been conditioned to beat up each other lest any of you actually recognize it and so you fall back into your familiar European denial, instead.

You're so wrong, Gardener. And once again, you're not going far enough in your line of thought. Never mind the fact that the European label doesn't really apply to me, since I didn't really grow up on this continent. I'm an ex-pat brat, the product of a North-American father and a European mother. I grew up all over the world.

If you knew just how many times my very human gut instinct tells me things that you would find utterly revolting, you'd probably despise me even more than you already do. The fact that I have a brain that tends to immediately kick in to question and overcome some natural prejudices that I can't seem to have any control over is my saving grace.

Now, I'm very sorry if my rational conclusion in this particular matter differs from yours, but I know for a fact that you would be the very first to praise my ability to go beyond my instinctual reactions when it comes to other subject matters.

I'm going to need more than my first impression of impropriety in this matter to agree with the people who want this project stopped. Primal gut instinct is simply not enough.
 
You're so wrong, Gardener. And once again, you're not going far enough in your line of thought. Never mind the fact that the European label doesn't really apply to me, since I didn't really grow up on this continent. I'm an ex-pat brat, the product of a North-American father and a European mother. I grew up all over the world.

If you knew just how many times my very human gut instinct tells me things that you would find utterly revolting, you'd probably despise me even more than you already do. The fact that I have a brain that tends to immediately kick in to question and overcome some natural prejudices that I can't seem to have any control over is my saving grace.

Now, I'm very sorry if my rational conclusion in this particular matter differs from yours, but I know for a fact that you would be the very first to praise my ability to go beyond my instinctual reactions when it comes to other subject matters.

I'm going to need more than my first impression of impropriety in this matter to agree with the people who want this project stopped. Primal gut instinct is simply not enough.

I don't despise you at all. I think you are quite nice, in fact.


I do not think it is at all rational, however, to deny this symbolism which is so very consistant with a pattern established over 1500 years of Muslim conquest and subjugation. It is the fact that choosing such symbolic sites to erect their monuments to victory is such a part of this pattern that belies all the blather they are offering as far as their intent. This is a provocative, in your face gesture which will be used to help propel the Ummah, especially since we are failing this audacious act calculated to test our mettle by showing cowardice, lack of resolve and especially a lack of understanding as to what it symbolizes to the Islamists.
 
Rational conclusions? More like trembling subservience.

In this thread we have heard over and over the PC line with everything concerning pure denial that this mosque in intent, and purpose is not some slap in the face of America. We have sat through some sort of fairy tale picture of Switzerland's problem with its own Muslim population made into some kind of Euro citizen class, accepting of others. When the truth is, and has been written on since at least 2006.

As they have elsewhere in Europe, Islamic radicals are making inroads in Switzerland. Last month, Swiss officials announced the arrests of a dozen suspects who allegedly conspired to shoot down an Israeli airliner flying from Geneva to Tel Aviv. In a related case, a North African man has been charged with organizing a plot from Swiss soil to blow up the Spanish supreme court in Madrid.

For years, even after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, Swiss officials assumed that their country was one of the last places Islamic radicals would look to attack. Long considered a slice of neutral territory in a world full of conflicts, Switzerland trades on its status as home to the International Committee of the Red Cross and other diplomatic institutions.

As the global jihad movement becomes more decentralized and fragmented, however, Swiss security officials are warning that their country could become a target.

In an intelligence report completed in May, the Swiss Federal Police reversed previous assessments that the domestic risk of terrorism was nearly nonexistent. The report concluded that Switzerland had become "a jihadi field of operation" and predicted that terrorist attacks were "an increasing possibility."

In Neutral Switzerland, A Rising Radicalism - washingtonpost.com

Then there is the Telegraph article:

"We're enormously happy. It is a victory for this people, this Switzerland, this freedom and those who want a democratic society," Walter Wobmann, president of the initiative committee, said in a victory speech. "We just want to stop further Islamisation in Switzerland."
As recently as two weeks ago, opinion polls showed 53 per cent would reject the ban and just 37 per cent would support it. But yesterday's results showed a swing to 57.5 per cent in favour (1.534 million people), 42.5 per cent against (1.135 million people) and 22 of the 26 cantons also in support of the initiative.
Switzerland uses direct democracy for single-issue politics, meaning citizens have the last word on many important political decisions.
The backing from both cantons and voters means the words "the construction of minarets is forbidden" will be added to article 72 of the country's constitution.

Switzerland risks Muslim backlash after minarets vote - Telegraph


Bottom line is that you said earlier that Muslims in Switzerland voted for the ban to show that they were in solidarity with the people of Switzerland, the articles talking about this seem to suggest the opposite.

Can you explain?


j-mac
 
I don't despise you at all. I think you are quite nice, in fact.


I do not think it is at all rational, however, to deny this symbolism which is so very consistant with a pattern established over 1500 years of Muslim conquest and subjugation. It is the fact that choosing such symbolic sites to erect their monuments to victory is such a part of this pattern that belies all the blather they are offering as far as their intent. This is a provocative, in your face gesture which will be used to help propel the Ummah, especially since we are failing this audacious act calculated to test our mettle by showing cowardice, lack of resolve and especially a lack of understanding as to what it symbolizes to the Islamists.

I've seen you bring up this argument before. I understand your concerns with the symbolism angle and the historical precedent. One of my countries, Spain, still harbors the (quite magnificent, actually) evidence of past Muslim conquest. I'm just not really convinced that this is what this project is all about. I've chosen to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Mind you, I'm perfectly able to radically change my mind on this if actual proof is presented on the nefarious intentions of the project leaders. Another thing that doesn't sit well with me, even though I've kept out of that part of the debate, is the planned groundbreaking date. I'm still waiting for an official confirmation on that.
I'd also have zero problems with the future community center being shut down if it turns out to be anything other than what they claim it will be. I don't see how they're gonna pull anything even remotely dodgy off, though, what with all the scrutiny they'll be under and everything.
 
Can you explain?


j-mac

Absolutely and gladly. If you think this is the first time someone has pulled that old article on me, you're quite mistaken.

The people referred to by the Swiss police in the article are not residents, nor citizens of this country. They are using our country as a platform for terrorism, like they use other European countries like the UK or Spain. Up until recently, given the peaceful nature and the ethnicity of our Muslim population, we thought we were immune to this sort of activity. It turns out that no country is immune to the presence of international terrorists on their soil. Not even our neutral little country.

These people are ethnically and culturally different from the majority of actual Swiss Muslims. As I pointed out previously, our Muslim population is primarily comprised of people from the Balkans. They are well integrated, hard working people who have been making great efforts to become citizens of this country. Anyone who's tried to gain citizenship here knows what a long, expensive and demanding process it is. Is everything roses and fairy tales? Of course not! Like all immigrant populations, they bring with them their share of issues. The problems we have with this particular group of people have absolutely nothing to do with Islamic terrorism and everything to do with the deep psychological scars some of them still harbor because of what happened to them in Kosovo. Some turn to a life of petty crime. Nothing really major.

Please, understand the difference between international terrorist groups and actual legal residents and citizens. The latter has next to nothing to do with the former.
 
Mind you, I'm perfectly able to radically change my mind on this if actual proof is presented on the nefarious intentions of the project leaders. Another thing that doesn't sit well with me, even though I've kept out of that part of the debate, is the planned groundbreaking date. I'm still waiting for an official confirmation on that.


Well, here are some direct statements regarding Sharia right from the horses mouth.:

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: What Shariah Law Is All About


whereing he insists that Sharia is "God's Law", actually compares it to the Declaration of independence, and offers some b.s. as to its effect upon women.

Since sharia is his goal, why should we believe him?
 
Mind you, I'm perfectly able to radically change my mind on this if actual proof is presented on the nefarious intentions of the project leaders.

The head of the project has stated that Bin Laden was made in the U.S.A., that the U.S. was partially responsible for 9-11, and he refused to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization:

Bradley: Are you in any way suggesting that we in the United States deserved what happened?

Faisal: I wouldn't say that the United States deserved what happened, but united states policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.

Bradley: You say that we're an accessory? How?

Faisal: Because we have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.

Prominent American Muslims denounce terror committed in the name of Islam

According to the State Department's assessment, "Hamas terrorists, especially those in the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, have conducted many attacks, including large-scale suicide bombings, against Israeli civilian and military targets."

Asked if he agreed with the State Department's assessment, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf told WABC radio, "Look, I'm not a politician.

"The issue of terrorism is a very complex question," he told interviewer Aaron Klein.

"There was an attempt in the '90s to have the UN define what terrorism is and say who was a terrorist. There was no ability to get agreement on that."

Asked again for his opinion on Hamas, an exasperated Rauf wouldn't budge.

"I am a peace builder. I will not allow anybody to put me in a position where I am seen by any party in the world as an adversary or as an enemy," Rauf said, insisting that he wants to see peace in Israel between Jews and Arabs.

Rauf also would not answer a question about Egypt's outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

"I have nothing to do with the Muslim Brotherhood. My father was never a member of the Muslim Brotherhood," he said, disputing a rumor.

Muslim Imam leading push to build a mosque near Ground Zero wavers on questions about Hamas as a terror group - NYPOST.com
 
Well, here are some direct statements regarding Sharia right from the horses mouth.:

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf: What Shariah Law Is All About


whereing he insists that Sharia is "God's Law", actually compares it to the Declaration of independence, and offers some b.s. as to its effect upon women.

Since sharia is his goal, why should we believe him?

His odd comparison to a secular document aside, I don't see anything particularly threatening in his statements. He's trying to do what the whole of Islam should be doing all over the world and that is to modernize and reinterpret the old laws. Isn't that what we all hope will happen soon on a global scale? Of course he thinks it's his god's law. He's a religious man, what else do you expect him to think? But you can't deny his effort to try and find ways to adapt this law to secular American law.

When he pulls a Tariq Ramadan and actually tries to justify the stoning of women and the cutting of hands, then I'll start worrying about this guy. He seems to be against all of that from what I can gather. He sounds quite moderate to me.
 
The head of the project has stated that Bin Laden was made in the U.S.A., that the U.S. was partially responsible for 9-11, and he refused to denounce Hamas as a terrorist organization:

I don't fault him for his political opinions regarding the reasons for 9/11. Other prominent people who aren't Muslim, nor truthers have come to similar conclusions. That said I do find his reluctance to admit that Hamas engages in terrorist activities quite worrisome.
 
His odd comparison to a secular document aside, I don't see anything particularly threatening in his statements. He's trying to do what the whole of Islam should be doing all over the world and that is to modernize and reinterpret the old laws. Isn't that what we all hope will happen soon on a global scale? Of course he thinks it's his god's law. He's a religious man, what else do you expect him to think? But you can't deny his effort to try and find ways to adapt this law to secular American law.

When he pulls a Tariq Ramadan and actually tries to justify the stoning of women and the cutting of hands, then I'll start worrying about this guy. He seems to be against all of that from what I can gather. He sounds quite moderate to me.

The Ijma of the Ulama in all five major schools of Islamic Fiqh is that apostasy, adultery, sodomy, and/or premarital sex are to punished with death and/or beatings. Those are the only accepted views in mainstream Islam.
 
I don't fault him for his political opinions regarding the reasons for 9/11. Other prominent people who aren't Muslim, nor truthers have come to similar conclusions.

Yes radicals have come to similar conclusions, moderates see the 9-11 attacks as exactly what they were, 3,000 cold blooded unprovoked acts of murder.
 
Back
Top Bottom