Muslims Against NYC Mosque Location

[Bhaktajan II]

anything associated with Islam is inherently

anything associated with Islam is inherently . . . the source of sympathetic collaborators ---that's the whole story stripped down to its essence. Pretty stark news.

"sympathetic collaborators" is what is known as the 'fearfull factor', besides this fear non-other is feared.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

anything associated with Islam is inherently . . . the source of sympathetic collaborators ---that's the whole story stripped down to its essence. Pretty stark news.

I'm sorry, bhaktajan, but I'm not at all sure what trying to convey.

 

[Bhaktajan II]

In regards to your postings, the objective accessment of people's re-actions/the motivation of mass-phobia is:

"the subtext of all opposition ... is that anything associated with "sympathetic collaborators" will cause a "validating of fundamentally bigoted attitudes"


I am using the word 'collaborators' in the way it was utilised in Europe during the 40's.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Oy veh ...

 

[Quahom1]

Being sensitive to others is valuable unless and until it entails validating a fundamentally bigoted attitude. As far as I can tell, the subtext of all opposition to Park51 is that anything associated with Islam is inherently a desecration and, in my opinion, such an attitude deserves to be exposed and repudiated, not condoned.

Just because one is a Southern Baptist, or member of an Assembly of God, or a Calvery Baptist, doesn't make them members of the KKK. But if a person who is known or strongly suspected of being involved with or supporting the KKK, suddenly decided to put a Mega church in the heart of New York City, or Detroit, or Atlanta, or any other multi ethnic/religious/credo city, you bet there would be protests and determination to stop such a church being built.

It isn't the faith that is being questioned or looked at with jaundiced eye, but the people (read that as specific individuals), behind the intentions of placing the establisment.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Just because one is a Southern Baptist, or member of an Assembly of God, or a Calvery Baptist, doesn't make them members of the KKK. But if a person who is known or strongly suspected of being involved with or supporting the KKK, suddenly decided ...

Known? Suspected? Suddenly? Such tainted ignorance is disingenuous and irresponsible at best. The reaction against the deceitfully labeled "Ground Zero Mosque" preceded the pathetic ad hominem attacks against the imam, and the agenda-driven suspicions of bigots and those easily swayed by them is little more than demonization and fear-mongering. There is, indeed, a legitimate analog to KKK mentality here, and it is to be found among those who rail against Park51 rather than those who promote it.

 

[Quahom1]

Known? Suspected? Suddenly? Such tainted ignorance is disingenuous and irresponsible at best. The reaction against the deceitfully labeled "Ground Zero Mosque" preceded the pathetic ad hominem attacks against the imam, and the agenda-driven suspicions of bigots and those easily swayed by them is little more than demonization and fear-mongering. There is, indeed, a legitimate analog to KKK mentality here, and it is to be found among those who rail against Park51 rather than those who promote it.

Hmm, apparently you do not know much about the history of the "Imam". You might think differently about that particular "individual" and the driving force/intent behind his determination to place this "mega complex" in the location he wishes to place it.

Second, it is absolutely rude to speak down to someone, simply because one does not agree with another's view of things.

I never once "attacked" your character or intelligence. Please return the courtesy.

Q

 

[bob x]

Q, he is and has been for a decade the most famous and prominent American Muslim denouncer of Islamic extremism, often travelling to the Mideast at the Bush Administration's request to speak against the groups he is now being accused of sympathizing with. This is precisely like a staunch opponent of the KKK being accused of being a KKK member for no other reason than coming from a Southern state.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I never once "attacked" your character or intelligence. Please return the courtesy

I've never given you reason. Please reciprocate and drop the bigoted ad hominem.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Q, he is and has been for a decade the most famous and prominent American Muslim denouncer of Islamic extremism, often travelling to the Mideast at the Bush Administration's request to speak against the groups he is now being accused of sympathizing with. This is precisely like a staunch opponent of the KKK being accused of being a KKK member for no other reason than coming from a Southern state.

Don't confuse him with facts. Islamophobia does not respond well to reason ...

 

[Quahom1]

Don't confuse him with facts. Islamophobia does not respond well to reason ...

Considering the 'fact', that I grew up in the middle of an Islamic neighborhood for the first third of my life, I think I can speak about Islam and those who follow it a bit more accurately then those who only read about it. And, I am not an Islamaphobe, as Professor Bob already understands...

It would be...misplaced to write off someone, simply because another thinks they are nobody, and ignorant for failing to see a particular point of view...

 

[Quahom1]

I've never given you reason. Please reciprocate and drop the bigoted ad hominem.

Knock it off. You are a rude person who thinks everyone else is less than and dumber than you. That simply makes for a fool.

 

[Quahom1]

Q, he is and has been for a decade the most famous and prominent American Muslim denouncer of Islamic extremism, often travelling to the Mideast at the Bush Administration's request to speak against the groups he is now being accused of sympathizing with. This is precisely like a staunch opponent of the KKK being accused of being a KKK member for no other reason than coming from a Southern state.

Professor Bob,

Show me the company you keep and I'll show you the kind of person you are perceived to be...ergo: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2462

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Considering the 'fact', that I grew up in the middle of an Islamic neighborhood for the first third of my life, I think I can speak about Islam and those who follow it a bit more accurately then those who only read about it.

You presume too much.

 

[Quahom1]

You presume too much.

Ah, the pot calling the kettle black...

 

[c0de]

.
this almost flew under my radar:

Actually in 1099, Fatimid Caliphate expelled all Christians and Jews from Jerusalem, which started the Crusades.

The crusades were launched in 1095 by Urban II.

So the reality is The middle-east (Muslims) attacked the west Judeo/Christians, a long time ago, and hasn't stopped trying, according to historical records.

Which "historical records" are you talking about?

 

[Bhaktajan II]

"Islamophobia does not respond well to reason ..."

1] Says who?
[Does this seem like a rhetorical question? . . .
as Cosmo Kramer said, "Not bloody likely"]


2] Islamophobia(ists)* does not respond well to reason ... because they fear the "Known". According to "what they know".

3] Islamophobia(ists)* does not respond well to reason ... because they fear the only known scource of collaborative sympathisers.
This is what Islamophobia fear. They fear "sympathetic collaborators".

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
'Islamophobia'
'Islamophobia', a new entry in the 2011 dictionarys, refers to those who practice 'Islamophobia', aka 'Islamophobists'. It has been announced [in my mind's eye] that Chemists and Scientists are now working on new advances to develop pharmaceuticals that promise to rid the world of this scourge.
Dr Nossitteallwell of Crock-Bowl University Research Labs said, with a very hybred, undiscernable accent,

"At the minimum, we will soon be able to eradicate all traces of Islamophobia, at least mentally, that is to say, within the mind's intellectual capacity to fret about such things. A sort of Islamophobia sedative for the rat-racers & footballer stock alike, it's a means to democracise phobias too."

 

[Bhaktajan II]

Which "historical records" are you talking about?

I think it should read:
Who's "historical records" are you talking about?

And the qualifiying question would then be:
'Before or after' Alexandrias reference department was annexed?

 

[Quahom1]

.
this almost flew under my radar:



The crusades were launched in 1095 by Urban II.

Well Code, you are correct that Urbain II launched an expedition to retake the "Levant" in 1095. However, that was to retake the Levant which had previously been taken beginning in 634 by Rashidun Caliphs Abu Bakr, and Umar ibn Khattab, with Khalid ibn al-Walid.

1099 was when it was decided to halt the "expansion" when the campaigners had decided to include retaking Jerusalem, the holy land, freeing Christians from Muslim rule, etc..

The deeper we dig, the thicker the mud gets...

 

[c0de]

Well Code, you are correct that Urbain II launched an expedition to retake the "Levant" in 1095. However, that was to retake the Levant which had previously been taken beginning in 634 by Rashidun Caliphs Abu Bakr, and Umar ibn Khattab, with Khalid ibn al-Walid.

1099 was when it was decided to halt the "expansion" when the campaigners had decided to include retaking Jerusalem, the holy land, freeing Christians from Muslim rule, etc..

The deeper we dig, the thicker the mud gets...

You're not gonna get far with this approach. Think about this: what was the Levant doing in Western hands in the first place? Is the Levant part of Europe? Obviously not, so why did the Romans conquer it?

There are two ways you can approach this.

#1: You can apply the good guy/bad guy approach. In which case, you will lose. Because I can just point out that the East only retook what the West took from it. The Levant is geographically, culturally and religiously Eastern territory. Don't forget that Judaism + Christianity (in its original form) are Eastern religions. Is it any wonder the Jews and Muslims of these areas welcomed the Muslims as liberators in the 7th century?

#2: Or you can apply a different paradigm. You can realize that this has nothing to do with anything other than simple geography. Any Mediterranean empire requires the Levant to secure its Eastern Flank. And whoever controls the Mediterranean, rules the region. This is why the East and West have always been forced to fight over this area. If the Asia loses this area to Europe, then Europe can project power deep inside Asia. But if Europe allows Asia to hold the Levant, Asia threatens threaten Europe. That's what it all comes down to.

Think about what happened when the West lost the Levant. Southern Europe was no longer able to hold on to North Africa. This meant they lost the revenues from Egypt + they lost trade options with the Asia + plus they lost naval supremacy in the Mediterranean. The result being that the domination of Europe once again came to an effective end.

But this time, a new development was brewing. All of this set the stage for the rise of Northern Europe. If you are of North European ancestry (especially if you are protestant) you should be thanking the Muslims for retaking the Levant. Historians have gone as far as to state that Charlemagne was a product of Muhammad (pbuh). This is all because of geography.