Merged Two Mosques to be built near Ground Zero

Thunder said:
lets get real...this is about bigots who think that all Muslims are terrorists, not wanting a new mosque near GZ, in NYC, or anywhere in the USA.
Click to expand...
You wouldn't know what this is about if you took a class. With 18,000 posts, are you really this stupid? I would suggest that with 18,000 posts already you need go find something else to do now, you must be all tuckered out here. It's like you've diarrhea of the mouth but in your fingers.

Thunder said:
Community Board is voting whether or not to approve the construction of a 13 story Muslim community center, with a Mosque included, near the World Trade Center.

One man, when intereviewed said: "not only should a Mosque NOT be built near the WTC, but I personally think they should only build Mosques in Saudi Arabia. Muslims have abdicated any right to be called a religion".

Not exactly sure what this old fool was talking about, but it does sadden me that he was indeed Jewish.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course, it's so sad. Apparently this 'old fool' is the first case of one religion hating another. <GASP> I wish the rest of us were as phony as, I mean as tolerant as Thunder is in wanting Islam to be the new Christianity. If Thunder sees nothing wrong with it then it must be good. Let the transformation begin.

I'll bet you drive a Jeep™ huh Thunder. All ******bags drive Jeeps™.
 
HarryHenderson said:
It's like you've diarrhea of the mouth but in your fingers.

I'll bet you drive a Jeep™ huh Thunder. All ******bags drive Jeeps™.
Click to expand...

let me guess: Dunkin Donuts ran out of coffee this morning?

what is the problem with a new Muslim cultural center, with a mosque inside, being 2.5 blocks away from Ground Zero? would 5 blocks be enough? how about 10?

maybe 15?

what makes you think such a restriction would EVER pass the Supreme Court?
 
Last edited:
rwguinn said:
It does have a bit of "in your face" appearance to it, howeveer.
Click to expand...

Only thanks to the media spin.
It is surely less 'in your face' to have a building that can house - and close the doors on - the people who already utilise that same space in the city, than having those same people that already use that space spilling out into the streets during lunch/prayer hours as currently happens?
 
So has anybody addressed the issue of where the funding is coming for this 15-story mosque? I wouldn't think it to be such an issue if the funding wasn't coming from wahabbist Saudi Arabia...

And does anybody agree with the line of reasoning, which is also being employed in Europe, that builidng more mosques = increased ability to moderate/teach Muslims and keep them from becoming Islamists?
 
Last edited:
bigjelmapro said:
So has anybody addressed the issue of where the funding is coming for this 15-story mosque? I wouldn't think it to be such an issue if the funding wasn't coming from wahabbist Saudi Arabia...

And does anybody agree with the line of reasoning, which is also being employed in Europe, that builidng more mosques = increased ability to moderate/teach Muslims and keep them from becoming Islamists?
Click to expand...

mmmh the Saudis funding it? didnt hear of that. source?
 
HarryHenderson said:
You wouldn't know what this is about if you took a class. With 18,000 posts, are you really this stupid? I would suggest that with 18,000 posts already you need go find something else to do now, you must be all tuckered out here. It's like you've diarrhea of the mouth but in your fingers.
Click to expand...

Did you actually add any intelligent arguments to counter Thunder's claim or just insult Thunder?

Yes, of course, it's so sad. Apparently this 'old fool' is the first case of one religion hating another. <GASP> I wish the rest of us were as phony as, I mean as tolerant as Thunder is in wanting Islam to be the new Christianity. If Thunder sees nothing wrong with it then it must be good. Let the transformation begin.

I'll bet you drive a Jeep™ huh Thunder. All ******bags drive Jeeps™.
Click to expand...

Still void of any reasonable argument, just chock full of personal attacks.
 
Pardalis said:
And what is my fiction?
Click to expand...

Already explained - twice. The fact that you refuse to give it up is really not my problem. It merely communicates the fact that you have no intention of treating the subject in an honest or informed manner.
 
Cleon said:
Already explained - twice.
Click to expand...

And as I said, I took my translation from a Saudi site

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5944069&postcount=44

If you're not happy with it, contact them and tell them to change it.

The fact that you refuse to give it up is really not my problem. It merely communicates the fact that you have no intention of treating the subject in an honest or informed manner.
Click to expand...
You just said I had a "fiction". Could you tell me what it is please?

I only asked if you thought politics and Islam were intimately related.
 
Last edited:
Pardalis said:
And as I said, I took my translation from an Saudi site
Click to expand...

No, I don't think you did. I think you got it from some anti-Islam site, and didn't bother to check it because it backed up your preconceived biases. Then when you were called on it, you googled like hell for any site that contained the words you wanted to insert.

But, despite your attempt to shift the blame onto somebody else, the fact remains that "La ilaha ila allah" does not mean what you claimed it means.

And, as I said, the fact that you refuse to acknowledge this - despite being corrected from a number of people, not just myself - reflects more on yourself than the facts at hand. This is clearly not a subject you are informed about in the least, and unless you want to continue making a DOC of yourself I suggest you stop trying to pretend otherwise.
 
Last edited:
lâ = no, not, none, neither
ilâha = a god, deity, object of worship
illâ = but, except (illâ is a contraction of in-lâ, literally if not)
allâh = allâh

is that correct?
 
Cleon said:
No, I don't think you did. I think you got it from some anti-Islam site
Click to expand...

And what makes you say that?

I googled the sentence and that was my first result.

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&source=...=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=195dea51d74d6b42

and didn't bother to check it because it backed up your preconceived biases.
Click to expand...
And what are my preconceived biases?

Gee, you seem to know a heck of a lot about me.

Then when you were called on it, you googled like hell for any site that contained the words you wanted to insert.
Click to expand...
And what evidence do you have that this is what actually occured?

But, despite your attempt to shift the blame onto somebody else, the fact remains that "La ilaha ila allah" does not mean what you claimed it means.
Click to expand...
Then by all means, contact them and tell them they got it wrong:

http://www.al-islam.com/contactUs.asp?l=eng

And, as I said, the fact that you refuse to acknowledge this - despite being corrected from a number of people, not just myself - reflects more on yourself than the facts at hand.
Click to expand...
I accept that there could be more than one translation, and that the one I found might be the least accurate.

Now, you don't want to answer my previous question about Islam and politics?
 
Last edited:
and even if Pardalis translation is also correct, whats the problem with that?
thats monotheism, thats what they belive. i feel in no way thretened by that. there are far more troubling messages in the koran.
 
The odd thing is, Yaweh/Allah are different names of the same god. Jews and Muslims agree that Christ is a prophet not a savior; Christians and Jews agree that Mohammed is not the savior, and Christians and Muslims agree that the Jews are incorrect in not believing a savior has come. Mohammed claimed not to present a new god, but re-establish the practices of the OT god (sounds a lot like Christ if you ask me). In fact, according to the Qur'an Christians and Jews should be considered brothers in faith. All three doctrines are litered with intolerant, misogynistic hatred of anything that does not resemble the righteousness of their own man-promoted faith. All three present women as objects of ownership, all three find homosexuality to be an abomination, all three treat pagans and polytheists to be condemned, and all three say that their god is to be put above all else. All three also have small extremist subgroups that act out in violent ways and at the very least, call for the painful death of those who do not practice. If you are correct in equating all Muslims to the act of a small subgroup of extremists than I can accurately depict all Christians as Neo-Nazi's, KKK since they work under the guise of Africans are cursed, according to the bible; or say that all Christians are Pat Robertson-sheep (for the record, anytime people die a violent death from natural disasters, Robertson gets away with publicly announcing that they deserved it for their ungodly behavior.
Sorry, went off on a bit of a rant. My point is, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity all worship the same god. If you can rightfully say that no mosque should be built near ground zero, then you have to agree that no church or Temple should be built, either.
 
The real question: can you accept that most Muslims are good people and they have the right to assemble?

Because we got attacked by a small group of zealots, must we be suspicious of the whole faith?

We've become such sensitive pansies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom