Burn the Koran on 9-11

[Toro]

No, I seen 9/11 as an attack on the US by Islamic nutt jobs. That is exactly what it was. If you can't admit that, we can't have a legitimate discussion.

It may not be a religious war to YOU ,but it certainly is to THEM.

9/11 was an attack on America by Islamic "nutt jobs." There are barbarians in Islam that want to take us back to the 7th century. It is our duty to fight these people, preferably in the intellectual arena, but if they are going to bomb us, then on the battlefield.

But they do not represent mainstream Islam. I have no problem with people of peace wanting to build a center of worship where they wish to build it.

 

[Tank]

I think the koran should be burned just to see how much the Muslims will freak out.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm not going to just let you walk away from your hypocrisy RW, why are you not against the mosque?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Poetic isn't it?

Sure is. People like you have used that poetry to ensure that a Manger scene cannot be erected in the public square. But then again, that is Christian and therefore bad.

The Mosque is being built on private property and not a public square...

Try to keep up with the rest of us NOLA

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So, calling somebody a redneck is your way of professing your tolerance?

See it as an attack? Islam stated it was an attack on the west by Islam.

Islam is not at war with Christianity anymore than Christianity is at war with Islam.

Radical Islam is at war with everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are barbarians. But they do not represent mainstream Islam any more than Fred Phelps or Pastor Hagee represent mainstream Christians.

What? Are you serious? Islam is at war, and has been since its inception, with humanity in general. Islam invaded the west centuries ago, and is in the midst of establishing the next Caliphate as we speak.

 

[Political Junky]

But it was burned in the minds of the terroist that killed over 3000 people on 9/11

We were attacked on 9/11 because Bin Laden et al wanted the US 'invaders' out of their homeland/holy land. That is far more than a mere religious motive.

Say what? who's holy land are you talking about?

The post makes it obvious.

 

[ConHog]

RW, I'm still waiting for a reasonable explanation for your hypocrisy. I contend it's becasue you hate Christianity but are too big of a pussy to actually admit it.

Pussy

 

[Sherry]

So, calling somebody a redneck is your way of professing your tolerance?

See it as an attack? Islam stated it was an attack on the west by Islam.

Islam is not at war with Christianity anymore than Christianity is at war with Islam.

Radical Islam is at war with everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are barbarians. But they do not represent mainstream Islam any more than Fred Phelps or Pastor Hagee represent mainstream Christians.

So you believe it is mainstream Islamists, rather than radical Islamists, who are behind wanting the mosque built...even after they have witnessed the public response??

 

[Toro]

What? Are you serious? Islam is at war, and has been since its inception, with humanity in general. Islam invaded the west centuries ago, and is in the midst of establishing the next Caliphate as we speak.

You have zero understanding of the Middle East and Muslims in general.

If the Caliphate is now being established, please name me two Muslim states that have become one. I'll wait. Thanks.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

The very same Islam that call for the murder of people over cartoons? That Islam?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Way to miss the point. If you're going to generalize all Muslims are the same along the lines of their radical wankers, you might as well be fair and do the same for Christians.

I don't think anyone in this thread is condoning or approving of what theocratic dictatorships like Saudi Arabia do.

How many of the MODERATE muslims speak out against the extremeist Muslims. can you give a number?

Nope, but these people do exist, even if you're not hearing them.

Your first link
9 Prominent American Muslim Scholars Speaking Against Violence in the Name of Islam
9is a hugh number

Second link came from fox I wonder why you didn't use CNN or ABC? COULD IT BE POSSIBLY THAT YOU WOULDN'T FIND SUCH INFORMATION THERE?
From you 3rd link
A handful of people versus how may muslim?
From your 4th link not sure about it but I read this part.
Study of Islam Section

Nelly Van Doorn-Harder, Department of Theology, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN 46383-7493, USA; pieternella.hardervandoorn@valpo.edu. Omid Safi, Department of Philosophy & Religion, Colgate University, 13 Oak DR, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA; osafi@mail.colgate.edu.
The Study of Islam Section encourages paper proposals in all areas of Islamic studies, but successful proposals will reflect theoretical and methodological sophistication and self-awareness, as well as innovative examination of Islamic societies and texts. As in all years, we welcome submissions dealing with the Qur'an, Islamic law, Sufism, gender and sexuality constructions, engagement with modernity, and other areas of general interest.

When submitting your proposals online to the OP3 system, prearranged paper sessions (with separate abstracts for each individual paper) are generally preferable to prearranged panels. All prearranged sessions should take gender and seniority diversity into account when organizing presenters; respondents are essential. Innovative, interactive formats and multimedia presentations are welcome. Although we look forward to prearranged paper sessions in the areas outlined below, individual scholars are also encouraged to submit their proposals. This year we are especially interested in papers or panels on the following: moving beyond the "Clash of Civilizations" theory; comparisons between Judaism and Islam, especially law; the pedagogy of teaching the Qur'an (this can include topics from the classical tradition, educational approaches, teaching of the Qur'an in a specific geographical area, or trends of learning); African-American Islam; the prophet Muhammad (historical approaches, textual sources, poetry, Sufi expressions, modern developments); the creation of Muslim identity through learning processes; religions in South Asia.

Note: the distinction between "paper" sessions and panel sessions:

In general, organizers should use the paper session option; this allows you to enter separate proposals and abstracts for every individual paper, and also has a separate space to introduce the panel as a whole. Because our review process is blind, however, we especially ask that organizers pay attention to issues of diversity (ethnic, gender, age, discipline, etc.).

The "panel" option should be used much more sparingly. Examples of two successful panels in the past were our "Teaching Islam after 9/11" panel in 2002 year and the panel on W.C. Smith. In the pre-organized panel, there is only a single proposal for the whole panel, and no space for individual paper proposals or abstracts.


Your 5th link directed me to your 4th link

Your 6th link some of the same people used were also used on 2nd link
Your 7th link

5. We reject any attempt to link Islam and Muslims to terrorism as terrorism has no association with any religion, civilization or nationality;

11. We reject any attempt to associate Islamic states or Palestinian and Lebanese resistance with terrorism, which constitutes an impediment to the global struggle against terrorism;



So they reject the teachings of the Quran?

They condem Israel for defending themself?
12. We condemn Israel for its escalating military campaign against the Palestinian people, including the daily brutalization and humiliation of its civilians, resulting in mounting casualties, strangulation of the Palestinian economy, systematic and indiscriminate destruction of houses and residential facilities as well as infrastructure, institutions and structures of the Palestinian National Authority;

After number 12 there was no need to read any further I see where they stand.

Do you have anything further to add?

 

[rightwinger]

So, calling somebody a redneck is your way of professing your tolerance?

See it as an attack? Islam stated it was an attack on the west by Islam.

Islam is not at war with Christianity anymore than Christianity is at war with Islam.

Radical Islam is at war with everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are barbarians. But they do not represent mainstream Islam any more than Fred Phelps or Pastor Hagee represent mainstream Christians.

In addition to that, we are talking about American Muslims and not AlQaida. American Muslims were not involved in the attack, American Muslims are peaceful and have lower crime rates than Christians, American Muslims have a right to worship where they please.

 

[ConHog]

No, I seen 9/11 as an attack on the US by Islamic nutt jobs. That is exactly what it was. If you can't admit that, we can't have a legitimate discussion.

It may not be a religious war to YOU ,but it certainly is to THEM.

9/11 was an attack on America by Islamic "nutt jobs." There are barbarians in Islam that want to take us back to the 7th century. It is our duty to fight these people, preferably in the intellectual arena, but if they are going to bomb us, then on the battlefield.

But they do not represent mainstream Islam. I have no problem with people of peace wanting to build a center of worship where they wish to build it.

I don't believe they are people of peace. People of peace CHOOSE not to do something that offends the vast majority of people with whom they claim to want peace.

Can you for one moment drop the facade of "they h ave a right" and join us in a discussion of "should they?" If not I'm done with this thread as there is not a single person who disagrees with me being honest, and I urge all my fellow posters who have brains to do the same. It is time to start discouraging this type of dishonesty.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So, let's see.... the attackers state publically that we are being attacked in the name of Allah in order to eliminate the Infidels...

Nah, no religion involved here. Just a fad.

 

[Toro]

I don't believe they are people of peace. People of peace CHOOSE not to do something that offends the vast majority of people with whom they claim to want peace..

Blacks weren't a people of peace 50 years either, I guess.

 

[Woyzeck]

So, calling somebody a redneck is your way of professing your tolerance?

See it as an attack? Islam stated it was an attack on the west by Islam.

All of Islam? All, what, one billion followers in unity?

Because I provided links to various condemnations by Muslims for the acts of 9/11 and terrorism.

Have some honesty for dinner tonight, NO ONE is saying that all Muslims were responsible for 9/11. That doesn't change the fact that a mosque is a symbol of the religeon which was used to justify 9/11 and as such is insensitive to those who died on that horrible day.

Conhog, Soggy is. I can understand why the mosque is insensitive to people, but we're not arguing over the mosque at this point. We're arguing over Soggy's gross generalizations over all Muslims.

Let's say a black church member was killed by a few KKK members and some other KKK members bought the property 1/2 mile from the church and build a giant KKK center. Would that be insensitive? I mean those KKK members aren't the ones who killed the black church member, and in fact most KKK members have never and will never assaulted anyone.

The Klan is a hate group. A better analogy would be if a Protestant Church opened up a community center, but the Protestant church was the same (but unaffiliated with) as the Klanners. I'm not entirely sure if the Cordoba House is the same branch of Islam as the terrorists were, no one ever really seems to specify it. So, my fixing on the analogy still leaves it a bit off.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

So, calling somebody a redneck is your way of professing your tolerance?

See it as an attack? Islam stated it was an attack on the west by Islam.

Islam is not at war with Christianity anymore than Christianity is at war with Islam.

Radical Islam is at war with everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are barbarians. But they do not represent mainstream Islam any more than Fred Phelps or Pastor Hagee represent mainstream Christians.

In addition to that, we are talking about American Muslims and not AlQaida. American Muslims were not involved in the attack, American Muslims are peaceful and have lower crime rates than Christians, American Muslims have a right to worship where they please.

Wow, so now the Muslims are more peaceful than the Christians.

 

[Toro]

So, let's see.... the attackers state publically that we are being attacked in the name of Allah in order to eliminate the Infidels...

Nah, no religion involved here. Just a fad.

Yes. The attackers were crazy. The attackers were barbarians.

And they don't represent mainstream Islam.

 

[rightwinger]

RW, I'm still waiting for a reasonable explanation for your hypocrisy. I contend it's becasue you hate Christianity but are too big of a pussy to actually admit it.

Pussy

Asked and answered in post 150.....

Pussy? Getting a bit personal in your attacks aren't you? I guess you have been hanging out with NOLA for too long. His hatred is starting to rub off in your posts

 

[Modbert]

Blacks weren't a people of peace 50 years either, I guess.

Wait. Logical response? Papers please!

 

[Woyzeck]

How many of the MODERATE muslims speak out against the extremeist Muslims. can you give a number?

Nope, but these people do exist, even if you're not hearing them.

Your first link
9 Prominent American Muslim Scholars Speaking Against Violence in the Name of Islam
9is a hugh number

Second link came from fox I wonder why you didn't use CNN or ABC? COULD IT BE POSSIBLY THAT YOU WOULDN'T FIND SUCH INFORMATION THERE?
From you 3rd link
A handful of people versus how may muslim?
From your 4th link not sure about it but I read this part.
Study of Islam Section

Nelly Van Doorn-Harder, Department of Theology, Valparaiso University, Valparaiso, IN 46383-7493, USA; pieternella.hardervandoorn@valpo.edu. Omid Safi, Department of Philosophy & Religion, Colgate University, 13 Oak DR, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA; osafi@mail.colgate.edu.
The Study of Islam Section encourages paper proposals in all areas of Islamic studies, but successful proposals will reflect theoretical and methodological sophistication and self-awareness, as well as innovative examination of Islamic societies and texts. As in all years, we welcome submissions dealing with the Qur'an, Islamic law, Sufism, gender and sexuality constructions, engagement with modernity, and other areas of general interest.

When submitting your proposals online to the OP3 system, prearranged paper sessions (with separate abstracts for each individual paper) are generally preferable to prearranged panels. All prearranged sessions should take gender and seniority diversity into account when organizing presenters; respondents are essential. Innovative, interactive formats and multimedia presentations are welcome. Although we look forward to prearranged paper sessions in the areas outlined below, individual scholars are also encouraged to submit their proposals. This year we are especially interested in papers or panels on the following: moving beyond the "Clash of Civilizations" theory; comparisons between Judaism and Islam, especially law; the pedagogy of teaching the Qur'an (this can include topics from the classical tradition, educational approaches, teaching of the Qur'an in a specific geographical area, or trends of learning); African-American Islam; the prophet Muhammad (historical approaches, textual sources, poetry, Sufi expressions, modern developments); the creation of Muslim identity through learning processes; religions in South Asia.

Note: the distinction between "paper" sessions and panel sessions:

In general, organizers should use the paper session option; this allows you to enter separate proposals and abstracts for every individual paper, and also has a separate space to introduce the panel as a whole. Because our review process is blind, however, we especially ask that organizers pay attention to issues of diversity (ethnic, gender, age, discipline, etc.).

The "panel" option should be used much more sparingly. Examples of two successful panels in the past were our "Teaching Islam after 9/11" panel in 2002 year and the panel on W.C. Smith. In the pre-organized panel, there is only a single proposal for the whole panel, and no space for individual paper proposals or abstracts.


Your 5th link directed me to your 4th link

Your 6th link some of the same people used were also used on 2nd link
Your 7th link

5. We reject any attempt to link Islam and Muslims to terrorism as terrorism has no association with any religion, civilization or nationality;

11. We reject any attempt to associate Islamic states or Palestinian and Lebanese resistance with terrorism, which constitutes an impediment to the global struggle against terrorism;



So they reject the teachings of the Quran?

They condem Israel for defending themself?
12. We condemn Israel for its escalating military campaign against the Palestinian people, including the daily brutalization and humiliation of its civilians, resulting in mounting casualties, strangulation of the Palestinian economy, systematic and indiscriminate destruction of houses and residential facilities as well as infrastructure, institutions and structures of the Palestinian National Authority;

After number 12 there was no need to read any further I see where they stand.

Do you have anything further to add?

Do you have a point? I answered your question, which asking for a specific number is unfair since no one really bothers to count them.

Israel is a valid controversial point, even in the West. Not everyone believes it's in the right. As for the Koran, well, try asking an actual Muslim if they're really rejecting its teachings.