this whole thing is now comic gold. You have illiterate boobs in the middle east buring american flags in protest over something they heard about and hasnt happened. meanwhile, the fbi and the president of the united states is concerned about a hillbilly pastor that might burn some books. our own millitary burned some bibles last year headed to afghanistan. i remember something about the government not passing any laws establishing a religion but i guess that is just a silly rumor or something...
Pretty amazing how this all went down. So we have the Pastor and Imam meeting up. There will be no burning of qurans and Cordoba Group accepted a 25% premium on the purchase price of their site from Trump and will probably build on a site that will allow them to actually achieve their mission of interfaith dialogue and outreach. Sounds like everyone got something good out of it without causing WWIII and without any rights being violated. Winner -> sensible reasonable people everywhere and the Constitution.
Let's reward bad behavior. It's should be an interesting conversation.. backwood rube discussing religion with an ivy league educated man with a degree in physics. SNL were are you?!!
I said it would be interesting. Get over it. You can't see the comedic juxtaposition there? Now true, despite their differences they do have a lot in common. They are both authors. Abdul Rauf wrote: "What's Right with Islam: A New Vision for Muslims and the West" Jones wrote: "Islam Is Of The Devil"
"It is just not a Christian thing for them to do. " But killing people, or threatening to, for burning books apparently is the Islamic thing to do.
Ironic to me that the typical libs defend the RIGHT for the mosque at ground zero and refuse to concede that it is a bad idea. Their argument tends to focus on the rights of the islamics behind this proposal - regardless of the intended provocation. On the other hand, the same libs rail against the proposed koran burning as a bad and harmful act. They shift their focus to the insensitivity and narrow mindedness of the pastor. In other words, they take the propiatary angle in one case and ignore it in the other. Know why? I do. It's because they take delight in defending anything that opposes traditional American values while, at the same time, defending anything that is potentially detrimental to America. That's the way they think. They view themselves as intellectual elites. They are mostly a joke. Am I the only one tired of wimpy leftists(Sorry if I offend, but I really don't see any other type these days) who constantly take the side of those willing to destroy us? Enough is enough. While typing this I'm watching the imam lecturing us on the potential violence that may result is the mosque is not built. So now, we debate on whether or not we should cower to this mesenger of a radical, discriminatory, thirteenth century political system disguised as a religion. One day we Americans will unashamedly begin to look out for our own interests and quit worrying about what others think. If we don't we are doomed. So libs, which view should we take on these two matters - the legal argument or the propietary agrument. Can't have it both ways. By the way, I'm not in favor of the koran burning. But I'm also opposed to the mosque. I recognize the right of both parties involved. At the same time I think both are a bad idea. However, in light of the violence perpertrated upon us in the name of islam, I cannot view the actions of the pastor with the same degree of hostility as those of the imam and his followers. I know this is not a popular stance on WM but it is what it is.
"What happens when the next crackpot comes along and wants to burn Koran's." Used one tonight to get my smoker going. It's just paper. f**k em.
^^^^^ YoLaDu, I just wanted to give you kudos for your consistency and your even-handedness on this issue. Unfortunately, most of your ideological brethren have not been so fair and balanced in their response to these two issues. But you have, and for that you deserve credit.
Reading between the lines, it sounds like the Pastor has decided not to do it, regardless of the scheduled meeting, and regardless of his comments suggesting he is leaving his options open.
Ireland? Can you count the number of Northern Ireland or Republic of Ireland deaths over the last five years? Would they even fit into one day of car-bombings as mentioned below? He was making a very specific point that commentators here engage in a combination of moral relativism and one-size-fits-all comparisons. Because of that, we are not able to call a spade a spade when discussing the current state of radical islamic terrorism. You proved his point by lurching to some strange conclusion that he was denying violence ever being committed by Christian militia groups.
To Borna's point here is a partial list of things that have outraged muslims . most to the point they rioted. -kashmir muslims rioted over what they thought was a islamic image on underwear. turned out to be an image of St Paul's in London ( a Christian church) - In 94 muslims in Germany threatened model Claudia Schiffer after she wore a designer dress with a saying from the Koran -in 97 enraged muslims forced Nike to destroy 800,00 pair of shoes because they felt the nike Air logo looked like arabic for allah -in 2002 muslims called for a jihad to destroy a Bologna Italy church because a 15th century fresco depicted Mohammed in the 9th circle of Hell - muslims weree outraged over a Unileverice cream logo when muslims said if you looked at it upside down and backward it looked lke it said allah -02 Muslims stabbed or burned death 200 people in Nigeria over a Miss World pageant. After a female journalist joked that Muhammed would approve and probably pick a new wife from the contestants, even though the newpapers printed 3 aologies muslims torched the offices and issued a fatwa to kill the female journalist. she had to flee the country 04- Director Theo Van Gogh killed by muslim over a film depicting some muslims struggle with faith. the msulim woman who wrote the screenplay is under death threats from muslims"The Link I am not sure if Salmon Rushie is still under death threats by fellow muslims. So this newest round of muslim outrage looks like all the others. -07 Muslims in Uk got all wee wee'd up over a Burger King over an ice cream container that muslims said mocked the araboc script for allah -07in sudan a teacher was threatened with being lashed for naming a teddy bear muhammed. she was subsequently fired 06 the muslim outrage over the danish cartoons, the outrage erupted all over the muslims world and hundreds died
Just to clarify, while Catholicsm is definitley a cornerstone of the IRA culture, they weren't bombing folks in the name of the Church or because Jesus said to bomb them becuase they are wicked and you get to deflower virgins in heaven or something. It was a nationalistic conflict.
And my point on this whole thread is that we are applying different rules to Muslims because we are afraid of their terrorism. Most think appeasement is the way to go. Don't do anything to enflame them further. I guess I am in the minority. I think appeasing them only makes them stronger.
True. If anything, the radical Islamic terror movement is trans-national and highly coordinated. Its targets are in North America, Asia, Europe, Africa, you name it. It features a global financing network and propoganda machine. To be sure, this global movement is a patchwork of regional terror groups but they have similar motivations, similar manifestos, and interact often. It is ignorant to compare this issue with the Troubles.
