Sharia Law Bans Tight Pants In Indonesia

Explain to me where you see the difference between Islam and Islamism.

 

"Incidentally, a major segment of this money is coming from Arab nations, especially Saudis."

http://www.hudsonny.org/2010/05/mosque-at-ground-zero-muslim-view.php

"I'd like to know who the hell is funding it," said Bill Doyle, a leading advocate for families of those killed on 9/11. "There's no question in my mind that somehow the rich Saudis are going to be approached."
Zuhdi Jasser, president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy in Phoenix, called a mosque by Ground Zero poor judgment and said he worried about overseas funding..
"I don't believe that there are any foreign interests that would be helpful," he said

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/short_on_3UhQftAjXfFZq1fNURK3BM

 

Apparently in contrast to you, I have lived in many places around the world and have traveled a lot. I can assure you that racism is (fortunately) not more of an issue in Germany nowadays than it is anywhere in the world.

But if it makes you feel better to justify your defensiveness about all things Islam by calling me a racist, so be it.

 

So you admit that you are unable to explain where you would draw the line between Islam and Islamism? Or are you unwilling because you are scared that you would unveil where you truly stand?

 

Hydhypedplaya and CometsWin: Would you wish that the same sharia law as reported in the article in the opening post of this thread would apply as well in the United States and everywhere else?

 

Hilarious - you asked for a source, you get a source and then you say it's not credible. So where do you think the money comes from?

A few things are clear: The guy who is championing the mosque doesn't have the money. There are bookkeeping issues. It is not even clear how he got the roughly $ 5 million. Where do you think the money comes from, if not from the Saudis?

Here is a jewish take on the issue (note that he is complimentary of how the Germans have handled the issue of the holocaust after WWII):

The issues at stake affect the very heart of American democracy. On the one hand it would be the height of insensitivity, not to say an outright provocation, for the Islamic community to build a giant Islamic shrine at the resting place of 3000 innocent Americans who were murdered by Islamic terrorists. On the other hand, America is a tolerant country that allows for the free worship of all its citizens and one bridles against the idea of preventing any mosque from being built.

I have a simple, elegant, and deeply moral solution. Let the Islamic Cultural Center be built. Let the mosque be included. But, the Muslim organizations building it should commit right now to making the principal focus of the building a museum depicting the rise of Islamic extremism, its hate-based agenda, and how it is an abomination to Islam. The museum would feature exhibits showing the major fomenters of Islamic hatred worldwide and the cultural and religious factors that have gained them so wide a following. It would have exhibitions on some of the terrible atrocities committed by these Islamic fundamentalists, focusing specifically on the slaughter at Ground Zero on 9/11. The Islamic Center would have a major exhibition on the evil of Osama bin Laden, detailing his crimes against humanity and the number of innocent people he has killed. Most importantly, the museum would repudiate these haters by showing how their actions are an abomination to authentic Islamic teaching and how every G-d-fearing Muslim has a responsibility to spit them out.

Who could possibly object to Muslims coming together to create a museum condemning growing Islamic intolerance and call Osama bin Laden, Hamas, and Hezbollah what they are - perversions of Islam that are defiling and destroying a great world religion.

If the groups building the Cultural Center and mosque are prepared to make this its focus they will have proven that they are not only enormously sensitive to the families of the victims who lost loved ones there, but that they are courageous voices who wish to take back their religion from the fiends who purport to represent it.

This is something that the German government has done extremely well since the holocaust. They have built memorials and museums that depict the rise of Nazism and how state organs such as the political establishment, the media, and business all facilitated and contributed to Hitler's rise. Many of these government-sponsored exhibits go even further, exploring a German national character that was so subservient to and respectful of authority - and so dependent on strongmen to lead it - that it eagerly embraced the anti-Semitism of Hitler and became, in Daniel Goldhagen's memorable phrase, 'Hitler's willing executioners.'

Without a similar degree of introspection, on the one hand, and widespread condemnation of Islamic terrorism on the other, Islam risks being taken over by fanatics who disgrace their faith by murdering in the name of Allah. Communities that are not self-critical always risk going off the deep end. They have no internal mechanism to weed out corruption. And an Islamic Center at Ground Zero dedicated to that deeply necessary and currently absent introspection would repudiate the terrorists who perpetrated the atrocity, honor the victims who died there, and serve as a powerful step toward G-d fearing and decent Muslims taking back their faith from the fanatics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-shmuley-boteach/is-a-giant-mosque-at-grou_b_578195.html

And what's wrong with the name of that person?

 

By your insults, it is clear that you are very defensive and insecure about the issue.

Maybe you have not worked it out for yourself where one starts and the other one ends. You are talking about a comparison in historical perspective. My question is about what defines the differences - are you a regular muslim when you pray, believe in the Koran etc., and an islamist once you are ready to use force to make others submit to your beliefs?

 

1) The dress is not traditional. You should read up on that.
2) This is already legislated against, but impossible to enforce as you will never be able to prove it. Basically, the government will only be able to enforce laws against domestic violence once a woman goes to the authorities or once someone sees her in public with a beaten-up face. The women who are forced to wear the veil don't dare to go to the authorities in most cases - but seeing them with the veil or the burkha in public creates a strong assumption that is analogous to the beaten-up face.

Plus, aside from the aspect of wanting to protect the women, a country can expect that immigrants respect the laws and rules and customs of the country. By completely covering yourself, you basically clearly state that you are not willing to integrate yourself into society at all. A country is well within its rights to outlaw that behavior.

 

As a sidenote, I find it interesting that two of the islamist-leaning activists here in this forum come into this thread with no intention of commenting on the actual subject matter of the thread, but only to derail it by posting stuff about supposed German racism and/or personal insults against me.

Again: CometsWin and Hydhypedplaya: Do you agree with the sharia law ban on tight pants in Indonesia? Do you wish that the same would be introduced in the USA and everywhere in the world? This is the topic of this thread - you ignored it and only came in to derail the thread by posting personal attacks. Interesting.

 

There are various articles stating that there is a strong suspicion that the money comes from the Saudis. But why are you even derailing this thread with the mosque discussion? There are a couple of other threads for that.

What do you think about the ban on pants in Indonesia?

I don't know who Daniel Pipes is. But it's interesting that just because another Muslim doesn't agree with your islamist-leaning ways, he suddenly becomes "not reputable". Sounds similar to tactics used by other Islamists.