• 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!

Shocking Anti-Islam Ad Campaign Coming To New York City Buses And Subways

apdst said:
Violate our civil rights to appease the terrorists?
Click to expand...

Free speech isn't absolute, nor is any other right.

By your definition, beheadings should be shown in schools. Otherwise you're infringing on islamists right to speak.

And I never really said they shouldn't place the ads, just that it is unforgivably stupid to do so.

My old dog was anti free speech. If you took him close to one of those horrible abortion pics at the park he would pee on them. (Good boy!)
 
Fearandloathing said:
No one said "ban".

And it is a perfect example.....unless you have reliable statistics showing that more than 1% of the world's Muslims are fanatics.

This is more than "highlighting" dangers, this tells people Islam is dangerous....where it leads is "internment camps" like you did to the Japanese in WWII
Click to expand...

Afternoon F&L. I think the evidence is very clear the number of Islamofascists are growing and the moderates of Islam have allowed it because they have not found a voice to stand up against it. That does make it dangerous in the sense these Imams and clerics spreading a message of hate and intolerance of anyone different than them are allowed to continue building up their numbers. Last I read there are 33,000 of these hatemongers globally. Many are nationalists/citizens of countries in the West. Australia just thwarted a planned spree of beheadings from a group of ISIS members last week. It is a Britain national that has beheaded two American citizens. It is estimated the U.S. has approx. 400 Muslim citizens who have left this country to fight with ISIS in Syria/Iraq. The Boston Marathon bombers were nationalized Muslims from the former USSR. The officer in our military, a Muslim who had close ties to one of these radical Imams went on a shooting rampage killing three and wounding a dozen at Ft. Hood. And he recently was in the news because he wrote a letter asking to join ISIS.
Fort Hood shooter writes to ISIS leader, asks to join - CNN.com
So until the moderates of Islam find a pair and start pushing back against these hatemongers,...... when the Saudi's, the Jordanians, the Turks and other Muslim countries start sending in their own damn militaries to fight these groups that THEY have allowed to take hold with their digusting, deplorable behavior in the name of God to be tolerated, then the "religion" itself has become a danger.
 
matchlight said:
The First Amendment says that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise [of religion]. The Supreme Court extended that ban to the states not long before World War II. What law is involved here?

Almost anyone can make almost any legal argument--the question is whether it would get anywhere in court. I don't see how this even comes close to fitting anything in the Supreme Court's free exercise jurisprudence. No one is firing a Muslim for following a practice his religion demands, and then denying him unemployment insurance. No zoning board is denying a mosque a building permit just like the ones it issues for other religious buildings.

And I strongly disagree that anything in those ads promotes "hatred of a religion." Since when is pointing out evils done in the name of Islam promoting hatred of Islam? HAMAS and CAIR are part of the same Islamic supremacist effort--both are creations of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Mufti of Jerusalem did hate Jews and did directly help Hitler during WWII. The yellow SOB in those photos did gruesomely murder the man he posed with.

If Muslims don't like getting called out for the atrocities some of them are committing, then let them do more to stop those things. And let people in the West realize that by being so determined to accommodate the exquisitely sensitive feelings of Muslims, they are serving as the Islamists' helpmates. Every time we change the way we do something to suit their liking, we are helping them impose their will and their way of life on us.

If they can make us trip over ourselves trying to keep them happy, they get their way without ever having to fire a shot. "Ha! The unbelievers are so decadent and weak that all we have to do, these days, is make a few angry scowls, raise our voices, and they start to grin and ask how they can please us!" If some cartoon offends them, or if they're peeved that we don't all just jump for joy at their plan to erect an enormous mosque near the site of the attack on the World Trade Center, that's just too damn bad. To hell with them.
Click to expand...

My argument is not that terrorists aren't bad and not that most terrorists today are Muslims. My argument is with the placement of the ads in a government facility.

Do you agree that the NYC transit system is a government entity, owned and operated by NYC and funded partially by NYC and the State of NY?

Do you agree that a regulation established by a government entity fits the definition of a "law" as provided in the Constitution?

Do you agree that the degradation of a religion is the equivalent of the promotion of a religion, when the government is the one degrading/promoting?

If you don't agree, then we have no need to further discuss the matter. If, however, you do agree, I would argue that a "law" that enables the degradation of a religion is against the provisions of the first amendment related to "impeding the free exercise of religion".

All of what you post is fine, from my perspective, just not when using a government service/facility.

Seems to me, the Supreme Court determined that simply having a stone in front of a courthouse that contained the 10 commandments was against the first amendment rights of those who do not believe in the Christian faith. Seems to me, this action in NYC transit vehicles is similar in reverse.
 
Grant said:
How do you go about denigrating a terrorist? These are violent people within the Muslim community and yet we seem to shy away from pointing that out, but this shyness is seldom exhibited when it comes to Jews. The original poster demontrated that and few outside the Jewish community protested.

Jews (and now Christians) are being beaten, murdered and forced to flee from their traditional neighborhoods with little fuss being made. But put up a sign about Muslims, the aggressors in most of these cases, and people get very upset and, once again, the 'not all Muslims are terrorists" argument is raised, as though the public wasn't already aware.

These are serious community problems but the hypotheticals only move the debate away from what we have at hand.

I doubt it's the only way but what other suggestions would you have?
Click to expand...

See my response above - it expresses my view on your post as well.
 
CanadaJohn said:
My argument is not that terrorists aren't bad and not that most terrorists today are Muslims. My argument is with the placement of the ads in a government facility.

Do you agree that the NYC transit system is a government entity, owned and operated by NYC and funded partially by NYC and the State of NY?

Do you agree that a regulation established by a government entity fits the definition of a "law" as provided in the Constitution?

Do you agree that the degradation of a religion is the equivalent of the promotion of a religion, when the government is the one degrading/promoting?

If you don't agree, then we have no need to further discuss the matter. If, however, you do agree, I would argue that a "law" that enables the degradation of a religion is against the provisions of the first amendment related to "impeding the free exercise of religion".

All of what you post is fine, from my perspective, just not when using a government service/facility.

Seems to me, the Supreme Court determined that simply having a stone in front of a courthouse that contained the 10 commandments was against the first amendment rights of those who do not believe in the Christian faith. Seems to me, this action in NYC transit vehicles is similar in reverse.
Click to expand...

If someone has a problem with it, let them take it to court. But until then, if I lived in NYC with the daily reminder that it was a few Muslim religious radicals that took over three thousand innocent lives in an act of terror with the knowledge they live among us and their numbers are growing, it's time to stop walking on eggshells and stop letting evil hide behind a religion.
 
Fearandloathing said:
"Radical Islam.." as defined by whom? A bunch of paranoid right wing zealots who see a terrorist under ever rock? This is worse than the "commie hunts" of my childhood...
Click to expand...

OK so you don't see radical islam as an enemy. I understand.
 
Given the large numbers of American Muslims who live in New York City, I don't see this going over very well. And, of course, it is a stupid thing to alienate people like this. American Muslims aren't the problem. They're regular secular people, just like the rest of us. This campaign is no different than suggesting that every American Christian is a KKK member in the making. It'll do no good, and make a lot of regular people bitter.
 
fmw said:
OK so you don't see radical islam as an enemy. I understand.
Click to expand...

That is not what he's saying.

What he's saying is the definition of Radical Islam has grown so wide among many extreme right wingers that it includes many innocent people.

And in that way I absolutely agree with that from FearandLoathing
 
vesper said:
Afternoon F&L. I think the evidence is very clear the number of Islamofascists are growing and the moderates of Islam have allowed it because they have not found a voice to stand up against it. That does make it dangerous in the sense these Imams and clerics spreading a message of hate and intolerance of anyone different than them are allowed to continue building up their numbers. Last I read there are 33,000 of these hatemongers globally. Many are nationalists/citizens of countries in the West. Australia just thwarted a planned spree of beheadings from a group of ISIS members last week. It is a Britain national that has beheaded two American citizens. It is estimated the U.S. has approx. 400 Muslim citizens who have left this country to fight with ISIS in Syria/Iraq. The Boston Marathon bombers were nationalized Muslims from the former USSR. The officer in our military, a Muslim who had close ties to one of these radical Imams went on a shooting rampage killing three and wounding a dozen at Ft. Hood. And he recently was in the news because he wrote a letter asking to join ISIS.
Fort Hood shooter writes to ISIS leader, asks to join - CNN.com
So until the moderates of Islam find a pair and start pushing back against these hatemongers,...... when the Saudi's, the Jordanians, the Turks and other Muslim countries start sending in their own damn militaries to fight these groups that THEY have allowed to take hold with their digusting, deplorable behavior in the name of God to be tolerated, then the "religion" itself has become a danger.
Click to expand...



And a good afternoon to you too Ves...



If there is "clear evidence" of a growth in terrorists then post it.

Having said that I do know that Islam is a very individualized religion, there is no pope and no leadership structure. Each Mosque like Sikh Temples are autonomous, so a non Muslim's opinion on what is happening in a large and diverse community spanning several races is not reliable. The assistant manager of my credit union is a Muslim and I know she's not a terrorist and the other I know is a cop so I can assume we can rule him out.


If the issue is terrorism, fight terror. But launching a clear hate campaign because some Muslims pulled off some bombings is not on. and while you point out the Islamic based terror incidents I like to point to Tim McVeigh and some other white Americans as well.
 
What if...? said:
Free speech isn't absolute, nor is any other right.

By your definition, beheadings should be shown in schools. Otherwise you're infringing on islamists right to speak.

And I never really said they shouldn't place the ads, just that it is unforgivably stupid to do so.

My old dog was anti free speech. If you took him close to one of those horrible abortion pics at the park he would pee on them. (Good boy!)
Click to expand...

It's a good thing MLK didn't like that.
 
fmw said:
OK so you don't see radical islam as an enemy. I understand.
Click to expand...

You draw that conclusion from my post?

I never said "radical Islam" was not an enemy but asked what IS radical Islam?

You can't even define it. You aren't even aware of what terrifies you.

I was wrong. I thought the left had the market on drawing asinine conclusions from thin air.....
 
Paschendale said:
Given the large numbers of American Muslims who live in New York City, I don't see this going over very well. And, of course, it is a stupid thing to alienate people like this. American Muslims aren't the problem. They're regular secular people, just like the rest of us. This campaign is no different than suggesting that every American Christian is a KKK member in the making. It'll do no good, and make a lot of regular people bitter.
Click to expand...

Those bitter people will have to just get over it. This is still a free country.
 
Fearandloathing said:
And a good afternoon to you too Ves...



If there is "clear evidence" of a growth in terrorists then post it.

Having said that I do know that Islam is a very individualized religion, there is no pope and no leadership structure. Each Mosque like Sikh Temples are autonomous, so a non Muslim's opinion on what is happening in a large and diverse community spanning several races is not reliable. The assistant manager of my credit union is a Muslim and I know she's not a terrorist and the other I know is a cop so I can assume we can rule him out.


If the issue is terrorism, fight terror. But launching a clear hate campaign because some Muslims pulled off some bombings is not on. and while you point out the Islamic based terror incidents I like to point to Tim McVeigh and some other white Americans as well.
Click to expand...

Tim Mcveigh fried for his crimes and no one defended white supremacists.
 
Paschendale said:
Given the large numbers of American Muslims who live in New York City, I don't see this going over very well. And, of course, it is a stupid thing to alienate people like this. American Muslims aren't the problem. They're regular secular people, just like the rest of us. This campaign is no different than suggesting that every American Christian is a KKK member in the making. It'll do no good, and make a lot of regular people bitter.
Click to expand...

Where are the American Muslim voices denouncing these clerics and Imams that spread messages of such vile hatred in the name of their God? All I hear are "crickets". Here in Ohio, and North in Michigan, these Muslim congregations have been caught aiding and abetting those who were planning terrorist attacks and just recently here in the Columbus a group of Muslims from the local congregation were involved in a ring kidnapping young girls and selling them as sex slaves that crossed state lines into Minnesota. Seems Britain has had a real problem with that one too. So spare me with the KKK analogy. The KKK is not growing in numbers but has diminished because people of the Christian faith would not tolerate it. Same with the Westboro Baptist bozos.
 
Grand Mal said:
Conservatives advocate government control. They want laws to control the behaviour of citizens, a nanny state that makes drugs illegal because they're bad, makes gay rights illegal because they're offended by gays, makes abortion illegal because they want control of women, etc.
Conservatives have always been on the side of authoritative government, on the side of more power for police, on the side of more laws, more control, against individual rights and liberties. They talk liberal values of personal freedom but they walk conservative values of government control.
Click to expand...

Actually liberals are just as control happy as conservatives. The only real difference between the two sides is what each side wants to control. Otherwise they the same. Statist prick control freaks.
 
vesper said:
Where are the American Muslim voices denouncing these clerics and Imams that spread messages of such vile hatred in the name of their God? All I hear are "crickets". Here in Ohio, and North in Michigan, these Muslim congregations have been caught aiding and abetting those who were planning terrorist attacks and just recently here in the Columbus a group of Muslims from the local congregation were involved in a ring kidnapping young girls and selling them as sex slaves that crossed state lines into Minnesota. Seems Britain has had a real problem with that one too. So spare me with the KKK analogy. The KKK is not growing in numbers but has diminished because people of the Christian faith would not tolerate it. Same with the Westboro Baptist bozos.
Click to expand...

They're living their lives, the same as you and I. How often do you denounce Christian violence in other countries, or even this one? How often do you feel like it's your responsibility to do so? This "why aren't they denouncing it" nonsense assumes that somehow people have a responsibility to prove to you that they don't support people half a world away. They don't have to prove it any more than you do.
 
Fearandloathing said:
And a good afternoon to you too Ves...



If there is "clear evidence" of a growth in terrorists then post it.

Having said that I do know that Islam is a very individualized religion, there is no pope and no leadership structure. Each Mosque like Sikh Temples are autonomous, so a non Muslim's opinion on what is happening in a large and diverse community spanning several races is not reliable. The assistant manager of my credit union is a Muslim and I know she's not a terrorist and the other I know is a cop so I can assume we can rule him out.


If the issue is terrorism, fight terror. But launching a clear hate campaign because some Muslims pulled off some bombings is not on. and while you point out the Islamic based terror incidents I like to point to Tim McVeigh and some other white Americans as well.
Click to expand...

And my point sugah is in order to fight terrorism we are finding ourselves having to go directly to the mosques to do it because the message some of their leaders give to their congregations are at the very heart of the acts of terrorism. There are evil people in all walks of life. Tim McVeigh was one of many. However, he didn't use a religion to hide behind to justify his wrongdoing. He was an agnostic. His perverted insane thinking was against the government where he justified killing many innocent lives.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Paschendale said:
They're living their lives, the same as you and I. How often do you denounce Christian violence in other countries, or even this one? How often do you feel like it's your responsibility to do so? This "why aren't they denouncing it" nonsense assumes that somehow people have a responsibility to prove to you that they don't support people half a world away. They don't have to prove it any more than you do.
Click to expand...
Excuse me all to heck, but as a Christian I have often found myself standing up for what I found was being done in the name of Christ to be deplorable. In all the three major religions, Jewish, Christian and Muslim.....only one refuses to stand up and fight radicalism and that is Islam. When the people of that faith refuse to stand up against the things they claim are evil and allow radicalism to become the norm then you have a religion that has lost all credibility as they allow the evil to hide behind them.
 
matchlight said:
Everything those ads claim is accurate, and I agree with them completely. The city is apparently trying to claim this is speech that falls outside the First Amendment protection under the "clear and present danger" exception--i.e, that it is calculated to and likely to create an imminent threat of lawless action. I doubt it can make that fly. Good luck to Ms. Geller and her organization. It's high time Americans started calling these lousy SOB's out for what they are. They like the idea of using violence against other people--let's see how they like wondering if some of those people may use it on them first.
Click to expand...

one of the ads compares the actions of Hamas, a terrorist organization in palestine, to the actions of CAIR, which is the acronym for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which is an organization dedicated to the advocacy and civil rights of american muslims.

comparing CAIR to Hamas is factually untrue.
 
vesper said:
And my point sugah is in order to fight terrorism we are finding ourselves having to go directly to the mosques to do it because the message some of their leaders give to their congregations are at the very heart of the acts of terrorism. There are evil people in all walks of life. Tim McVeigh was one of many. However, he didn't use a religion to hide behind to justify his wrongdoing. He was an agnostic. His perverted insane thinking was against the government where he justified killing many innocent lives.

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Ah, dear...this is kinda tough...

Then, if these Mosque leaders are harboring or furthering terrorists, as proscribed by the constitution, obtain the evidence and prosecute.

Look, we had this same crap here in the early 80's. Americans it seems forget WE were the first North American country to be hit by international terrorism. We had bombs going off and two airliners were blown up after bombs were planted on planes here at my very airport. Sikh terrorism was very much a threat, and it claimed several hundred Canadian lives when Air India Flight 182 blew up over the Atlantic killing 329 people. It was the first bombing of a 747 jumbo jet.

Do you think there wasn't some panicked reaction here, where the Sikh population is 20%? We had a Sikh reporter who had threats made on here life as she reported on the reaction of the over all Sikh community. And the word "extremist" took on a broader, less specific meaning; it seemed in some corners wearing a turban was "extremist."

In the end we got the bombers. They will die in prison, we do not kill people here. It may seem too little to some, but what we also got was a more harmonized country, one where white are kinda proud our Sikh brothers tout their turbans and how-the-****-do-they-do-that beards. What we have also is a Sikh community that identifies as Canadian as opposed to "indo-Canadian" who live in peace knowing we won't over-react and put them in concentration camps like the British.

Sometimes democracy sucks. Sometimes bad guys get away with it. Most of the time, though, the innocent don't pay.

I would give some, a bit, of consideration of an ad campaign, different than this, if the US had gone after the spontaneous demonstrator terrorists who killed ambassador Stephens and remain free. That, more than anything else fueled extremism as a whole new generation see that yes, you can attack US soil, kill Americans and get away with it.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Ah, dear...this is kinda tough...

Then, if these Mosque leaders are harboring or furthering terrorists, as proscribed by the constitution, obtain the evidence and prosecute.

Look, we had this same crap here in the early 80's. Americans it seems forget WE were the first North American country to be hit by international terrorism. We had bombs going off and two airliners were blown up after bombs were planted on planes here at my very airport. Sikh terrorism was very much a threat, and it claimed several hundred Canadian lives when Air India Flight 182 blew up over the Atlantic killing 329 people. It was the first bombing of a 747 jumbo jet.

Do you think there wasn't some panicked reaction here, where the Sikh population is 20%? We had a Sikh reporter who had threats made on here life as she reported on the reaction of the over all Sikh community. And the word "extremist" took on a broader, less specific meaning; it seemed in some corners wearing a turban was "extremist."

In the end we got the bombers. They will die in prison, we do not kill people here. It may seem too little to some, but what we also got was a more harmonized country, one where white are kinda proud our Sikh brothers tout their turbans and how-the-****-do-they-do-that beards. What we have also is a Sikh community that identifies as Canadian as opposed to "indo-Canadian" who live in peace knowing we won't over-react and put them in concentration camps like the British.

Sometimes democracy sucks. Sometimes bad guys get away with it. Most of the time, though, the innocent don't pay.

I would give some, a bit, of consideration of an ad campaign, different than this, if the US had gone after the spontaneous demonstrator terrorists who killed ambassador Stephens and remain free. That, more than anything else fueled extremism as a whole new generation see that yes, you can attack US soil, kill Americans and get away with it.
Click to expand...
So you don't care for the ads. Alright. But I am afraid you will see more and more of the same in the days to come because people are tired of walking on political correct eggshells while the threat of terrorism grows.
Yes, we are prosecuting and sending them to jail but not until after hundreds of man hours of those preparing for a prosecution and those who are in the trenches thwarting another terrorist attack at the taxpayers' expense. Look I have lost all tolerance for any "religious" person who wants to claim a religion of peace yet who will allow themselves to be used to hide a faction of those who are anything but what they claim. They need to start standing up and denouncing this crap and throw the Imams out are their asses that promote it and any member of their congregations involved in such things removed from their memberships. Until then they are allowing themselves to be enablers and more and more Americans will see them as a threat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom