Anti Mosque Rally shows the true racist colors of these idiots

You are right. I will correct my statement now. Sometimes the brain is on autopilot, and with my brain that means it's going to come out wrong every time.

 

What I don't understand is why and how there is such an impactful group of "fringe" muslim radicals (i.e. the iranians, iraqis, afghanis, British muslims already legally practicing sharia law in the land of britain, hezbollah (a proxy of Iran), Somalia) yet, the peace and god loving muslim is no where to be heard. Look, I don't want to get into a ridiculous conspiracy talk about why the muslims are protected in the media, I think the Saudis know very well what they are doing. But why is it that these peace loving muslims don't stand up to these guys (which the iranians tried and god bless them, they were brutally decimated by their theocratic govt which viewed them as dissidents), if they truly believe that their "fringe" leaders are wrong and represent a skewed and inaccurate view of islam. Why has there not been a muslim grass roots organization whose sole purpose is to take down radical islam, denounce its bigot leaders, and campaign against them and spread the true good word of islam, assuming there is one? I'm asking all muslims here, do you denounce radical islam in church. Before you answer with "Do you denounce radical televangilist and KKK and racist christians on your Sundays?" I will say fundamentally yes, because what is taught now in my christian church is good, its just good man and I don't even like religion and I don't agree with organization of the catholic church, as I will never allow myself to agree to methods of control, but do I say that to the people i see there with their families, do I and the other families fight amongst ourselves over religous thought differences, why are we there? Why the hell am I there if I don't even like it much less believe in the nonsensical B.C. jargon? I don't like the pope. So why am I there? To be honest with all you aholes, I don't know, but it feels good, call it the club scene of christianity, but I see the good in people there and also the evil in them. I think herein lies my dislike for muslims and islam, why are you there and practicing what you do, because let me tell you, you guys practice it and abide by it with wreckless abandon to its literal word.....

 

They are there to be heard. But the media and others aren't really there to listen.

I posted a huge list of Moderate Muslim leaders condeming terrorists in another thread. It wouldn't even fit in one post. But these statements and activities don't get publicity.

The question shouldn't be "Why aren't moderates speaking out?" but "Why isn't everyone else bothering to listen?"

 

I think the whole discussion turns on eliminating the emotional element by clearly defining the length of a city block and factoring in the presence of other mitigating religious centers.

Do we measure the acceptable distance using one of the short north-south city blocks that are only about 250+ feet such as Catherine Street? Or one of those longer east-west city blocks that run 750+ feet like Madison?

If it's the former, an acceptable distance could be no closer than 10+ blocks away, while if it is the latter, then the acceptable distance could be reduced to as little as 5+ blocks away. I favor using the former definition as it would appease many of those who oppose the proximity factor. Actual distance be damned.

This is assuming, of course, we are talking about perfectly straight city blocks. If we factor in curved roads, the debate changes dramatically. This is clearly a troubling complication that bears more discussion. Do we measure the length of the block including the curve or based upon direct distance via the hypotenuse? I favor the curve line approach measuring along the curve to derive the longest distance. Again, this measurement would appease those opposing the close proximity factor by lengthening the distance measured. Actual distance be damned.

Now, if we introduce the mitigating factor of the presence of other religious centers on the same city block, we can probably reduce the distance by a factor of 1 block for a Jewish center, 1.5 blocks for a Catholic center, and a full 2 blocks for a fundamentalist Christian center. Other religions and cults would require a case by case decision, otherwise, where would you draw the line? For example, I would be vehemently opposed to an Order of the Solar Temple.

Factor in another 1/2 block reduction in distance if the centers include a massage parlor or peep show.

I'm sincerely hoping we can change the direction of this debate and bring it to a more rational level.

 

I am for the idea of a mosque and interfaith center to represent our place and I am even ok with it being near ground zero to show that islam and the mosque and the prayer hall has nothing to do with the acts but its just those specific extremist and they are enemies of everyone including muslims.

I do know the imam rauf is not an extremist, I have heard his memorial speech at daniel pearls memorial and he has some good ideas and mindset.

I however don't agree with their presentation and lack of pr and presenting what this mosque, I think they focus on the wrong points, so now I am not entirely backing the way they have gone about things and have represented things.

 

And I submit that if one would be built, that would be good. And that point is irrelevant.

 

1:30 - "Yo, we're against the moslems, not each other, man!"

Nice..

 

very great read with some interesting points :

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/if-mosque-isnt-built-no-longer-america

 

May I suggest that you use paragraphs? Your posts are difficult to read.

Srs request.

Thanks.

 

so the anti-mosque protesters claim that one should not build a mosque on hollowed ground in respect to those that died.


But yet it's ok for them to chant and yell and demonstrate on the very day these people died while their families try to pay their respects.

Interesting hypocrisy.

 

It's not that no one is listening, it's that they're not being loud enough where we can hear. Why can't a moderate, America loving muslim speak with a level of ferocity and conviction that the "fringe" psychos exhibit and get headlines for. I absolutely guarantee you, with my life, that if I ever heard even and inkling of a sincere and true moderate uprising from a pro America muslim grass roots group, it would be the most influential political movement since the tea party, most likely even greater.

However, that will never happen. My contention is that the muslim puts religion before country.

 

Clearly it's because the big network executives don't want to put them on air.

Why spread peaceful messages when you can get more ratings by fueling the fire?

 

Of course that's it, that's exactly what I'm saying. The muslim who puts country first should rise up and knock down the walls. I want to make this very clear, I use the tea party as an example, not tyring to endorse. I'm simply looking at history over the last couple of years. They were ignored, then ridiculed, and now are taking GOP primaries. What would stop a pro america muslim movement from doing the same?

 

I think you should blame the media outlets you get your 'news' from instead of the moderate Muslims for not speaking 'loudly' enough.

And you call the Tea Party the most influential political movement, rofl.

 

I said the Tea Party was the most influential political movement in recent history, not in all history. I don't understand how you can't objectively see that, ignore your political tendencies, I'm speaking objectively, there has not been another political party to take to down establishmnet candidates in some time.

 

Enlighten me, where do you get your news from?

 

Usually the Breaking News section of DebatePolitics.com

 

Rashmon, you're a dick

 

Even then, that is a stretch. Astroturfing can hardly be called a political movement. Let alone influential.

 

If that's the way you see it dude, they're not even affecting your dems, what do you care?