it was low hanging fruit... i couldn't help myself.

8/24/2010 10:45:59 PM

Quote :

"And hooksaw is rambling about Miss USA."

yeah, I'm surprised about his Miss USA fixation, as if it is some kind of valid argument against our country's rampant anti-Islam bias.

it's quite obvious that her selection was a calculated political move by Donald Trump's hand picked elite board. Just so we can trot her out any time someone accuses us of being anti-Islam -- as if this woman even remotely resembles any sort of observant Muslim.

i guess he's trying to say that we're innocent of bias because we picked an Arab-American who pretends to be a Muslim (until she's backed in a corner) as one of our national beauty queens, while the "bad guys" don't ever pick Jewish or Christian women.

well, you cant make that comparison because (aside from Egypt and Lebanon) no Islamic countries ever even enter such contests. Yeah, it's no wonder they don't choose Jews or Christians their Miss Universe beauty queens, when they don't even let their own Muslim women participate.

Everyone knows that the USA is a melting pot of ethnicities and religions. It has been for a long time. It's par for the course that we would pick someone of _____ ethnicity and _____ religion, because we have a history of doing so. It's this freedom to associate that strikes fear in the radical jihadists. Both the Christian and Muslim varieties.

So don't tell us that we're all of a sudden special because we've refrained from discriminating against some group. On the contrary, to parade this particular choice as being especially noteworthy of our innocence is disingenuous and calculating.





[Edited on August 24, 2010 at 11:19 PM. Reason : ]

8/24/2010 10:52:24 PM

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/20/real-americans-please-stand-up/
Real Americans, Please Stand Up

8/24/2010 11:04:14 PM

^^^

Quote :

"His viagra [sic] must be kicking in."

moron

I've never needed it. And I'd appreciate it if you'd stop thinking about the workings of my plumbing.

^^ But I'm not surprised that some of you have latched onto the Miss USA thing and simply ignored all the other points I posted.

A BARELY MUSLIM BEAUTY PAGEANT CONTESTANT?! GUFFAW!!!1

Some of you have no problem questioning and even dismissing her claim of Muslim faith because it fits your narrative. But if anyone dares question that Obama is a practicing Christian, you go bananas. And please note well that I posted "practicing"; not whether Obama is a Christian. But we all know that he's not in church on many Sundays--hell, he's usually on vacation playing golf!

And the following points stand on their own merits:

How can a country that hates Muslims, as much as some here and elsewhere claim, have so many mosques; overwhelmingly support the right to build more mosques--even the one near Ground Zero; and elect a president whose father was a Muslim?

And how do you explain the position of these people who also want the mosque near Ground Zero to be built elsewhere?

David Paterson
Harry Reid
Howard Dean
54 percent of Democrats polled
70 percent of independents polled
70 percent of Americans polled

If some of you want to join McDanger in calling the former head of the DNC, the governor of New York, and the Senate majority leader--al Democrats--bigots, then please sign here right now. . . .

8/25/2010 1:47:44 AM

Quote :

"Some of you have no problem questioning and even dismissing her claim of Muslim faith because it fits your narrative. But if anyone dares question that Obama is a practicing Christian, you go bananas. And please note well that I posted "practicing"; not whether Obama is a Christian. But we all know that he's not in church on many Sundays--hell, he's usually on vacation playing golf! "

well, that's almost coherent.

she dismissed being a Muslim, when she was cornered.. she said her family wasn't observant, that they celebrated all religious holidays, and they were really just "spiritual"

and nobody cares whether or not Obama goes to church on any given Sunday. It's well established that he was a member of a Christian church and attended services on a semi-regular basis for some 20 years before becoming president. Who here goes to church every goddamned sunday, anyhow? Personally, I'd rather my president not waste too much time on superstitious rituals of any flavor. (i'm not a fan of golf, either, but whatev.)

furthermore, the point about Obama's religion -- a point which contradicts this imaginary claim of Americans' widespread tolerance of Muslims -- is that we spent a ridiculous amount of time in 2008 primaries proving to the majority of the population that he was DEFINITELY NOT a Muslim, before people were able to vote for him.







[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:15 AM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 2:13:11 AM

Quote :

"independents [sic]"

Quote :

"al [sic]"

Look, you fuck up too.

Putting [sic] after capitalization errors on a message board makes you a pedantic loser.

8/25/2010 2:46:45 AM

Quote :

"i mean people are always accusing him of making personal attacks."

Who gives a fuck? People in this section practically demand invective behavior and are unwilling to stop. Why give a fuck and respect those people? Hooksaw is the king of low blows, why give a fuck at insulting him for being a pathetic washed up partisan hack?

Quote :

"How can a country that hates Muslims, as much as some here and elsewhere claim, have so many mosques; overwhelmingly support the right to build more mosques--even the one near Ground Zero; and elect a president whose father was a Muslim? "

Look around you, you fucking dummy. Did America also stop being racist when Obama was elected? I'm trying to figure out what the fuck your point is. The answer is: the entire country does not hold the same opinion on everything. Plenty of people want Obama out of office (because "he's a Muslim") and plenty of people are turning out to protests mosques (NOT the "Ground Zero mosque"). There's been plenty of anti-Muslim/anti-Arab/anti-Kinda-Looks-Arab violence in this country post-9/11 predicated solely on racism and xenophobia. Do you really think the second Obama was inaugurated that the country lost its Islamophobia and its racism? Hell, these two things more than anything else are the reason why the public sat by as we invaded Iraq, and voted Bush in for more.

Quote :

"And how do you explain the position of these people who also want the mosque near Ground Zero to be built elsewhere?"

So suddenly "not in my backyard" is a nuanced position that's somehow not bigoted and assholish?

Quote :

"If some of you want to join McDanger in calling the former head of the DNC, the governor of New York, and the Senate majority leader--al Democrats--bigots, then please sign here right now. . . ."

It's so obvious that you fantasize speaking to a radio or TV audience when you say this stuff. You're pathetic as shit. Do you practice your O'Reilly and Hannity moves in front of the mirror?

"BLAH BLAH BLAH PROCLAMATION DO YOU, SIRS, CHOOSE TO ENDORSE THIS POSITION!?" *turns to the empty room. crickets.*

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 8:42 AM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 8:40:26 AM

Quote :

"Did America also stop being racist when Obama was elected?"

I worked a joint service job in Qatar for a few months earlier this summer. 7 Americans, a Brit, and an Aussie. I'll give you one guess as to which two routinely said racist stuff.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 8:53 AM. Reason : ^ I disagree with them, but it's not exactly a NIMBY thing]

8/25/2010 8:53:02 AM

Quote :

"I worked a joint service job in Qatar for a few months earlier this summer. 7 Americans, a Brit, and an Aussie. I'll give you one guess as to which two routinely said racist stuff."

Are we really going to trade anecdotes now?

Quote :

"I disagree with them, but it's not exactly a NIMBY thing"

Depends on who "they" are. People oppose this for all sorts of reasons. I listed the categories above.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 9:08 AM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 9:07:26 AM

Quote :

"And please note well that I posted "practicing"; not whether Obama is a Christian."

I have serious doubts that Obama believes in God at all. We know that the overwhelming (like, 99%) of all elected politicians claim to be Christian or some other religion. Statistically, that's very unlikely. You can't be an "out of the closet" atheist and get elected in this country.

8/25/2010 10:23:37 AM

Quote :

"But I'm not surprised that some of you have latched onto the Miss USA thing and simply ignored all the other points I posted."

Dude that's the one you asked us to address, you bolded it and everything.

8/25/2010 10:28:26 AM

Quote :

"Who gives a fuck? Why give a fuck and respect those people? why give a fuck at insulting him pathetic washed up partisan hack? you fucking dummy. 'm trying to figure out what the fuck your point is. It's so obvious that you fantasize You're pathetic as shit. "

jesus, dude, you're becoming worse than he ever was. and that's just one post! do you think you're going to shout him out of the soap box? how is that valid? his positions, while typically the opposite of mine (for instance), aren't out of the realm of the mainstream political spectrum as it currently exists in this country. he's not some racist extremist or nutjob conspiracy theorist. yeah, maybe he's arrogant and annoying, maybe he's dead wrong, but it's obvious he's trying to debate "x" in a calm manner. isn't that the point of this place?

look, McD, you're a smart guy. i like your opinions when you express them coherently. I've seen you destroy someone's argument and make them look foolish, plenty of times, without making yourself look like you've become unhinged. so, try to come back to that.

8/25/2010 11:05:29 AM

I just see no incentive in being thoughtful here. Sometimes I do it because I'm in the mood. But honestly, how am I supposed to react to a crowd of people who think logic is "the liberal's word game" and who think casual (and even dangerous) racism is okay?

I mean a political scientist (a guy with a 4-year degree, at least) in this very thread said that economics, sociology, and politics can't be formalized or quantified. His own field's bread and butter is multivariate linear regression and structural equation modeling. How the fuck am I supposed to deal with such outrageous (and intentional, at this point) ignorance? This "political scientist" can't be bothered to open a single academic journal ever (obviously), but he can spend countless hours pontificating on this website on the basis of nothing?

Sorry if my patience doesn't hold up, but by the time I get around to looking at this shit it's enough to blow my mind and then some.

Quote :

"it's obvious he's trying to debate "x" in a calm manner"

No, it's not. He's never put forth a serious attempt at this, because it's clear he views logic as a "liberal word game". Hooksaw has never displayed an understanding of how debate/discussion works that transcends the typical American political argument (which resembles sports chat more than anything else).

He frames his threads as if he were putting together a shitty power-point presentation for a FOX News pundit-thon. This isn't how somebody starts a "discussion".

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 11:26 AM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 11:20:49 AM

Quote :

"I just see no incentive in being thoughtful here. Sometimes I do it because I'm in the mood."

And you're curious why people call you out for being an arrogant prick? Just let us know when you're in the mood for thoughtful discussion and feel like you have time for the plebeians.

8/25/2010 11:25:01 AM

If this board is the honest attempt of the posters here to have a serious, thoughtful discussion, then god damn.

Expecting people to know something or be willing to learn something about the topics they spend hundreds of hours typing about isn't "arrogant". It's "basic".

8/25/2010 11:27:27 AM

(1) people make fun of TSB for being a bunch of Aspergers kids arguing about the color of the sky.

(2) TSB continues arguing about the color of the sky, anyhow


yes, thats what we do here. No one wins, i don't know why people keep coming back. Either for the circle jerk, or to sharpen their argumentation skills.

But I mean, if you dont think its worthwhile, why do you care enough to argue?




[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 11:46 AM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 11:38:53 AM

Quote :

"Expecting people to know something or be willing to learn something about the topics they spend hundreds of hours typing about isn't "arrogant". It's "basic"."

Fair enough. But then, I think it's also fair to expect a person who clearly has the time and motivation to rack up over 16,000 posts to once in a while offer a thoughtful argument of his own, especially if he's going to insist on calling everyone an uneducated bigot all the time.

8/25/2010 11:39:46 AM

Quote :

"But I mean, if you dont think its worthwhile, why do you care enough to argue?"

Often I'm not arguing, but flinging poo. I'm pretty honest about when I'm doing it. It's fun.

Quote :

"Fair enough. But then, I think it's also fair to expect a person who clearly has the time and motivation to rack up over 16,000 posts to once in a while offer a thoughtful argument of his own, especially if he's going to insist on calling everyone an uneducated bigot all the time."

16,000 posts over the course of 7+ years is pretty modest, especially when most of it is stupid "pee pee doo doo" chit chat posts.

I mostly duck into TSB quick these days when I have a few minutes to kill. Then again, I don't need to explain my behavior to you. People have said they don't want TSB to be civil. Fine. So stop crying.

8/25/2010 11:44:03 AM

No, by all means, if that's what you're about, then have at it. It doesn't bother me at all. In fact, it's helpful to know, for future reference, that you're just here to be a troll.

8/25/2010 11:51:44 AM

one possibility I consider is that you may wind up convincing or otherwise informing others who are not actively arguing, who perhaps haven't had time or inclination to fully consider the issue. you'll only do that if you make your argument accessible. if you just yell and shout, you wind up putting people off.

that is what hooksaw's main problem was, for a long time. even though now he's trying to become more calm, his historical persona is why he generates hostility towards himself still.

look, most people are not going to have the same level of knowledge about "x" just because you do. you may not ever convince the person you're arguing against, but if you have any hope of being able to convince some bystanders who are peripherally following, then you need to calmly lay out some of the background context.







but yeah.... sometimes, i too like to fling poo







[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 11:53 AM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 11:52:46 AM

Not always. Sometimes, yes. If you want to use that as an excuse to dismiss whatever I say, then fine. You didn't understand or care about what I had to say to begin with, so fuck it. Let it rattle. ^^

Quote :

"look, most people are not going to have the same level of knowledge about "x" just because you do. you may not ever convince the person you're arguing against, but if you have any hope of being able to convince some bystanders who are peripherally following, then you need to calmly lay out some of the background context."

And when people are wholly unwilling to read, comprehend, or understand anything?

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 11:52:54 AM

Quote :

"You didn't understand or care about what I had to say to begin with"

What did I not understand?

Don't answer that. It's a boring question. I don't think either of us really care.

What I originally took issue with was your assertion that "Americans who oppose this Mosque are disgraceful cowards." Now, I've said from page 1 (literally) that I think the developers have every right to build the mosque. Furthermore, I, too, think the argument about the supposed sanctity of the site is an insidious one, even if it's understandable in some cases.

However, there are other reasons to object to the mosque, or at least certain aspects of it. The imam's penchant for making ambiguous and troubling statements about various terrorist groups and theocratic dictatorships, for example. Or the growing threat of homegrown radicalization, fueled in no small part by so-called moderate Islamic institutions in the United States, which are often funded by dubious international sources. As a matter of fact, I happen to live right down the street from a mosque that has served as a veritable breeding ground for radical Islamists.

But even with those objections, my only request was that the Imam Rauf be "constantly pressured to denounce terrorism, and to voice his support for the rights of women and minorities, for freedom of expression and freedom of religion, and for secular governance."

Does that make me a disgraceful coward? If so, how?

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 12:23 PM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 11:58:55 AM

Quote :

"And when people are wholly unwilling to read, comprehend, or understand anything?"

i dunno. it's frustrating. and why i say hooksaw is trying, i italicise "trying"... because he still has a way to go. but i have noticed a change in a positive direction.

sometimes you just got to make your point and let it go

sometimes you can fly off and call them names.

i'm just saying, if you rage against one person too intensely and too often, it winds up defeating anything you hoped to gain.

8/25/2010 12:03:21 PM

Quote :

"How can a country that hates Muslims, as much as some here and elsewhere claim, have so many mosques; overwhelmingly support the right to build more mosques--even the one near Ground Zero; and elect a president whose father was a Muslim?"

I hate to break it to you, but we don't act in unison as a nation. Yes, we have a lot of mosques, but a lot of mosques being built all over the nation right now are going through hell because of anti-Muslim sentiment. And have you missed the whole "secret Muslim" thing surrounding Barack Obama to this day? Surely you're aware of it. He was indeed elected president of the United States, but there is a sizable portion of this country who thinks that 1)he is a Muslim, and 2)he's hiding that, because 3)Muslims are evil. Let me introduce you to my extended family some time. They'll tell you aaaaaalllll about it.

Quote :

"And how do you explain the position of these people who also want the mosque near Ground Zero to be built elsewhere? David Paterson Harry Reid Howard Dean 54 percent of Democrats polled 70 percent of independents polled 70 percent of Americans polled"

They're either bigots, pandering to bigots, or acting out of sympathy for people whose positions are based in bigotry. If you know of other reasons, let me know. I don't care if they're Democrats, Republicans, or Miss USA. It's saying that one group of people deserve less than the rest of us because of something they have nothing to do with. That's wrong.

8/25/2010 12:05:39 PM

Quote :

"But even with those objections, my only request was that the Imam Rauf be "constantly pressured to denounce terrorism, and to voice his support for the rights of women and minorities, for freedom of expression and freedom of religion, and for secular governance." Does that make me a disgraceful coward? If so, how?"

Because there's no credible reason to believe this man might have "terrorist ties", except for equivocation based on his religious affiliation / race.

You're basically saying that he should be held to a standard no Christian in this country is held to (voice his support for the rights of women and minorities, for freedom of expression and freedom of religion, and for secular governance). It's almost like you haven't looked into what the man has actually said or written in the past and have relied on the mainstream media to form your opinions on this case. It's not like his opinions aren't written down for everybody to read.

Quote :

"The imam's penchant for making ambiguous and troubling statements about various terrorist groups and theocratic dictatorships, for example."

Care to explain what's "troubling" about his statements? Refusing to adopt the neo-conservative narrative hook, line, and sinker is not making an "ambiguous statement". It's just denying the right the ability to craft and guide the narrative, something they do quite effectively.

Quote :

"i'm just saying, if you rage against one person too intensely and too often, it winds up defeating anything you hoped to gain."

This isn't some after-school special. Hooksaw's a grown man. If he refuses to educate himself, how am I going to get through to him?

Quote :

"They're either bigots, pandering to bigots, or acting out of sympathy for people whose positions are based in bigotry. If you know of other reasons, let me know. I don't care if they're Democrats, Republicans, or Miss USA. It's saying that one group of people deserve less than the rest of us because of something they have nothing to do with. That's wrong."

Couldn't have said this better myself.

8/25/2010 12:29:06 PM

Quote :

" From an Actual Moderate Muslim, a Memo to the MSM on Imam Rauf As an African American Muslim convert for nearly a quarter century, I believe I’ve earned the right to weigh in on the bitter controversy surrounding the proposed mosque at Ground Zero. August 24, 2010 - by Abdur-Rahman Muhammad As I write, nearly two thousand protesters are gathered outside the location of the future mosque — some having stood in the rain for hours — providing a clear indication that the campaign to stop this project is intensifying. The pollsters tell us that nearly 70 percent of all Americans oppose the structure, yet its sponsors say the edifice will somehow promote “interfaith dialogue” and “mutual understanding.” They must certainly realize at this stage in the process that the mosque will do no such thing, but will instead act as a permanent provocation to a huge segment of Americans who deem it completely inappropriate — if not outright sacrilege. Let us remember that the project organizers themselves created this controversy by announcing that the groundbreaking would take place on the ten-year anniversary of the attack, and that the exact site was selected because of its proximity to Ground Zero. Given that fact, the current media meme that this is not a “Ground Zero mosque” is dishonest spin. Even more dishonest — and dangerous to this country — is the outrageously biased work in Time, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and Newsweek, and on NPR, PBS, MSNBC and CNN that has consistently portrayed popular opposition to this mosque and several other mosques around the country as evidence of bigotry and so-called “Islamophobia.” This is mass libel by these media institutions. The mainstream media has deliberately ignored the fact that there is legitimate basis for fear of mosques — as it is a demonstrable fact that mosques and Muslims have been disproportionately connected to terrorism in this country and around the world, a fact that the media won’t report. Moreover, in the examples of opposition to specific mosques chosen by the media as evidence of popular “bigotry,” the media has selectively ignored the openly available evidence showing unambiguously that these mosques or their officials are connected to or supportive of the radical Muslim Brotherhood (the parent of al-Qaeda), Hamas, and other radical Islamic fundamentalist organizations. Why have these media institutions not investigated these ties? Why does the media investigate American charities that support settlements in the West Bank, but refuse to investigate the militant and terrorist ties to mosques and Islamic groups here at home? The imam heading up this $100 million project, Faisal Abdul Rauf, enjoys the full support of the sympathizing left-leaning media, and together they have attempted to frame this fight as a First Amendment issue. They’ve worked to cast the opponents of the project — including the 9/11 families — as bigots bent on denying “peaceful Muslims” the “right” to build a facility on their own property. All of this is sheer nonsense, because as many commentators already noted this week, the right to build the mosque was never in question — only the appropriateness of putting it near Ground Zero. It is simply not possible, and indeed quite dishonest, to characterize 70 percent of the population as bigots and “Islamophobes,” despite what the media would have us believe. As an American Muslim, I can say with confidence that most folks have no desire to trample our First Amendment rights, and have said so repeatedly. It is not even entirely clear to me that, were the Muslim developers of the mosque genuinely moderate, it would be so bitterly opposed. But then again, they probably would never have proposed such a thing in the first place. But how can anyone believe that Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf and his followers are moderates when they very deliberately refuse to condemn Hamas, a sworn enemy of this country and a major center of terror in the world? When asked directly to repudiate the group, all he could say was: “I am not a politician.” This is typical of the double-speak and evasive tactics employed by the prominent Muslim groups in America, an unmistakable red flag that something is wrong here. He’s also called this country an “accessory” to the 9/11 attacks, and has written that America is shariah (Muslim law) compliant. Forget all the rubbish about “interfaith dialogue” and “mutual understanding.” The ongoing battle over this site has already belied that charade. Abdul Rauf and his Islamic supporters — most of whom are affiliated with Muslim Brotherhood front groups — will never give this project up because there is too much at stake for him. If he manages to get the thing built, he will be one of the most powerful personalities in the Muslim world — radical, moderate, or otherwise. More importantly, the mosque will come to symbolize in the radical Muslim world the triumph of Bin Laden’s attack, and provide a kind of heavenly validation for his approach to spreading radical ideology. For what other reason could the tenth anniversary have been chosen for the groundbreaking?. It is not hard to see that this will only inspire more attacks. The logic will be: “If Allah gave us one miracle, maybe He’ll give us more.” If some Americans are suspicious and fearful of Muslims, it’s not without good reason, and nothing their self-appointed leadership has done or said in the nine years following 9/11 has allayed those fears. Non-Muslim Americans have yet to see any clean line of demarcation between radical and moderate Muslims. Everywhere around the globe Muslims are the cause of so much bloodshed and turmoil, making life on this planet a living hell. What are people to think when they see a group of World Cup fans blown up in Uganda by Somali Muslim psychopaths? Closer to home, a U.S. Army Major shoots his fellow soldiers! What are they to make of a Pakistani national given U.S. citizenship just last year attempting to set off a car bomb in Times Square? And the self-taught “American” sheikh, Anwar al-Awlaki, who from his cave somewhere in Yemen calls on Muslims to murder Americans, and they listen? The underlying problem in this bitter controversy is that Muslims in America suffer a deserved trust deficit, wherein they are seen as a foreign and dangerous element. Perhaps if the $100 million being spent on this mosque were used to build, say, a hospital, this perception would begin to change. Abdur-Rahman Muhammad is a Washington, D.C.-based writer who was once the Imam of a mosque where he taught radical Muslim ideology. He has since renounced those views and works to combat Islamic extremism in the American Muslim community. He is a senior writer for the Association for the Study of African American Life and History (ASALH) and his work has appeared in numerous publications such as the Washington Afro American, the Philadelphia New Observer, and others. His work can be read at his popular blog A Singular Voice. He holds a BA degree in Philosophy from Howard University."

8/25/2010 12:39:49 PM

^^^, I am against the building of any religious building anywhere on this planet, therefore I am against the "mosque" aspect of this proposed cultural center. But obviously I don't think our government should prevent the building of this or any other religious building on private property.

Am I a bigot?

V, to be fair, *most* people who are against this mosque aren't in the same boat. I'd be just as against it were it a Christian church, but hey.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 12:47 PM. Reason : V]

8/25/2010 12:42:22 PM

Nope. You've got me there.

8/25/2010 12:45:28 PM

Quote :

"Because there's no credible reason to believe this man might have "terrorist ties", except for equivocation based on his religious affiliation / race. You're basically saying that he should be held to a standard no Christian in this country is held to (voice his support for the rights of women and minorities, for freedom of expression and freedom of religion, and for secular governance)."

I never accused him of having terrorist ties, so I don't know why you put that in quotation marks.

And I do, in fact, think that the preachments of all ideological institutions - be they Muslim, Christian, or Neoconservative - should be openly scrutinized. All I would ask - and perhaps this is where we disagree - is that no special exemption be carved out for Islam.

Quote :

"It's almost like you haven't looked into what the man has actually said or written in the past and have relied on the mainstream media to form your opinions on this case. It's not like his opinions aren't written down for everybody to read. ... Care to explain what's "troubling" about his statements? Refusing to adopt the neo-conservative narrative hook, line, and sinker is not making an "ambiguous statement". It's just denying the right the ability to craft and guide the narrative, something they do quite effectively."

Well, I'll admit that I haven't done extensive research into his speeches or writings. However, I have read his comments on 9/11, Hamas, and Iran's theocratic regime, among others, in context. I find them disturbing, if not surprising, given that this sort of equivocation - as you say - is somewhat typical of moderate Muslims. But that doesn't mean I can't criticize it, does it? I mean, you don't have to be a neoconservative crackpot to recognize that 9/11 wasn't our fault, or that Hamas is indeed a terrorist organization, or that Iran's Guardian Council is not democratic and, therefore, not legitimate, do you?

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 1:09 PM. Reason : ]

8/25/2010 12:57:44 PM

Quote :

"Am I a bigot?"

Obviously you don't fit into the normal category of anti-mosque protesting/sentiment in this case, which I pointed out earlier in this thread. We're all so thrilled you're such a principled young chap, but shut the fuck up. Your blanket anti-religious stance has nothing to do with this debate, as it's people who are not anti-religion (on the whole) against a particular religious group.

Quote :

"And I do, in fact, think that the preachments of all ideological institutions - be they Muslim, Christian, or Neoconservative - should be openly scrutinized. All I would ask - and perhaps this is where we disagree - is that no special exemption be carved out for Islam."

So long as equal and reasonable treatment is afforded across the board, I'm fine with it. What I'm not fine with is people going out of their way to harass Muslims, or anybody else, for simply exercising their first amendment rights.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 1:58 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 1:57:39 PM

Just pointing out that you and others are prone to false dichotomies and blanket statments. "The only reason you could be against this mosque is you're a bigot or you support a bigot!" There are plenty of reasons to be against this mosque that don't involve "islamophobia" or bigotry. Sure, the prevailing rhetoric is probably bigoted, but bold statements about how everyone must be a bigot are ultimately damaging to your message. (as if you care really)

"You're either with us or you're a terrorist."

8/25/2010 2:02:26 PM

Quote :

"But how can anyone believe that Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf and his followers are moderates when they very deliberately refuse to condemn Hamas, a sworn enemy of this country and a major center of terror in the world? When asked directly to repudiate the group, all he could say was: “I am not a politician.”"

Quote :

"MR. BRADLEY: What would you say to — to people in this country, who, looking at what happens in the Middle East, would associate Islam with fanaticism, with terrorism? MR. ABDUL RAUF: Fanaticism and terrorism have no place in Islam. That’s — that’s just as absurd as associating Hitler with Christianity or — or David Koresh with Christianity. There are always people who will — who will do peculiar things and think that they are doing things in the name of their religion. But — but the Koran — you know, God says in the Koran that they think that they’re doing right, but they’re doing wrong. ... "

Quote :

"Mr. Abdul Rauf is often described as having refused to call Hamas — the Palestinian group that pioneered suicide bombings in Israel, prevailed in Palestinian elections in 2006 and now controls the Gaza Strip — a terrorist organization. On 77 WABC radio on June 18, the talk radio host Aaron Klein asked him, “Do you believe that the State Department is correct in designating Hamas as a terrorist organization?” There ensued a long conversation with many interruptions, in which Mr. Abdul Rauf said: “Well, I’m not a politician. ... The issue of terrorism is a very complex question. ... I am a bridge builder. My work is ... I do not want to be placed nor will I accept a position where I am the target of one side or another. My attempt is to see a peace in Israel. ... Targeting of civilians is wrong. It’s a sin in our religion, whoever does it. ... I am a supporter of the State of Israel.” "

Quote :

"The Cordoba Initiative’s Web site elaborates: “Imam Feisal has always condemned terrorism (see his ... hundreds of speeches). Hamas is both a political movement and a terrorist organization. Hamas commits atrocious acts of terror. Imam Feisal has forcefully and consistently condemned all forms of terrorism, including those committed by Hamas, as un-Islamic.” "

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/nyregion/22imamfacts.html

Also:

Quote :

"Opponents have claimed that Mr. Abdul Rauf or his father, Muhammad Abdul Rauf, had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist group that pioneered religious militancy in Egypt starting in the 1930s, attacking government officials and influencing the founders of Hamas. In recent decades, the group has renounced violence. "

Unless you guys are willing to call all Likud members terrorists due to its origination in Irgun, then I'd suggest you get your head straight.

Again, people oppose this, Muslim or not, due to either sympathy with bigots or simple misinformation.

Quote :

"Just pointing out that you and others are prone to false dichotomies and blanket statments. "The only reason you could be against this mosque is you're a bigot or you support a bigot!" There are plenty of reasons to be against this mosque that don't involve "islamophobia" or bigotry. Sure, the prevailing rhetoric is probably bigoted, but bold statements about how everyone must be a bigot are ultimately damaging to your message. (as if you care really) "You're either with us or you're a terrorist.""

BASED

ON

WHAT

I have found no "evidence" that isn't easily dismissed. People have been repeating misinformation and publishing/broadcasting misinformation about this man from day one. None of it holds up. So again. Based on what do people oppose this?

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 2:07 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 2:04:14 PM

Quote :

"So long as equal and reasonable treatment is afforded across the board, I'm fine with it. What I'm not fine with is people going out of their way to harass Muslims, or anybody else, for simply exercising their first amendment rights. "

signed.

i can't for the life of me, understand people who think that its okay to violate this property owner's first amendment rights.... both the "free expression" and the "non-interference" clauses are clearly being subverted here.

the people who are attempting to block this building are about as anti-American as you can get. the most frustrating thing is they think they are working for some noble patriotic cause, and wrap themselves in the flag to "prove" it.

i'm disgusted by what my country has become, due to the actions of what often seems to be a majority of my countrymen.

8/25/2010 2:10:50 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/24/florida.burn.quran.day/

Quote :

"Pastor says armed militia to protect church during Quran-burning event (CNN) -- An armed Christian organization, Right Wing Extreme, will protect a church that is planning to host an "International Burn a Quran Day" on September 11, the church's pastor said Tuesday. The Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, says it is hosting the event to remember 9/11 victims and to take a stand against Islam. ... Dove World Outreach Center Pastor Terry Jones has accepted the support of Right Wing Extreme, which he said offered to come to the church with between 500 and 2,000 men on September 11. He described the organization as an armed civilian militia group."

Quote :

"But in a statement sent to CNN by the Dove World Outreach Center, Right Wing Extreme founder Shannon Carson said: "We fully support Dove World Outreach Center and its efforts to put an end to the notion that Islam is a peaceful religion. Islam is a violent cult"

Nothing like militias and setting things on fire to prove the other group is the violent one. Total messaging fail.

8/25/2010 2:28:01 PM

haha, yep.

8/25/2010 2:33:42 PM

Gainesville Fla

has to be the biggest shithole in a state known for shitholes.

8/25/2010 2:37:36 PM

My God, don't those idiots see what they're doing? We already ship a bunch of money to Muslims to buy oil for us to burn. Now we're adding Korans? I just hope we can find a domestic source of Korans so that we don't have to import it. Of course, that has its own risks. If we accidentally blow up a Koran Drill and fill the gulf with holy books it'll be bad. I can see it now, those poor pelicans, covered in Korans...terrible.

8/25/2010 2:52:12 PM

Quote :

"Enright asked the driver if he was a Muslim. When the driver said he was, police say the man pulled a knife and slashed him in the throat, arm and lip. The head of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance suggests the attack was provoked by anti-Muslim sentiment surrounding the proposed Islamic cultural center near the World Trade Center. "

http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/124368/man-who-allegedly-attacked-taxi-driver-charged-with-hate-crimes

8/25/2010 3:13:37 PM

Yay! Hate crime!

8/25/2010 3:20:23 PM

Quote :

"Are we really going to trade anecdotes now?"

Obviously it's just that, an anecdote...but that doesn't make it uninteresting or irrelevant to your statement.

8/25/2010 3:35:58 PM

Quote :

"Obviously it's just that, an anecdote...but that doesn't make it uninteresting or irrelevant to your statement."

Racism is not exclusive to America, and explicit racism is actually taboo here. In many ways, Europe is behind us with respect to race relations.

8/25/2010 3:39:28 PM

Quote :

"I'm sorry but I take freedom of religion too seriously to spit in the face of Muslim Americans."

McDanger

message_topic.aspx?topic=595066&page=17

Let's examine that claim. Here are just a quick couple of examples of your opinions concerning Christianity:

"Christianity -- man's immortal blunder" by McDanger

Quote :

"How long do you think it’ll be until the poisonous specter of Christianity is shrugged off from an enlightened western world?"

Quote :

"I'd argue that religion such as Christianity is nihilism in itself."

McDanger

message_topic.aspx?topic=412249

BTW, most of your post in the OP of that thread was copied and pasted. You should've changed the smart quotes.

You will argue, of course, that your position is not inconsistent with those statements. But we all know the truth.

You continually swoop in here to declare that you're the smartest person in the room. Yet, you can't even figure out that periods should be placed inside closing quotation marks--but this is just one trivial example.

You claim to base your posts on "reason" and "logic"--and "MATH!" Yet, you continually commit the logical fallacies of hasty generalization (and we've seen a lot of this in the last few exchanges); irrelevant argument; self-contradiction; argument to the person (ad hom); guilt by association; false or irrelevant authority (often yourself); card-stacking; either-or fallacy; and taking something out of context. And these are just the fallacies that immediately occurred to me.

And your sudden concern about religious rights is a joke, McDanger--and one has to read no further than the thread I linked to above to realize this. Furthermore, you want nothing more than to use mostly false charges of bigotry and the like as a club to bludgeon conservatives (and any who would dare to agree with them)--this is a well-known tactic used by you and other leftists for decades.

At any rate, there are those that disagree with building the mosque near Ground Zero that are not bigots--I'm one of them. And I think you know this position to be true. Your back-pedaling is evidence that you were wrong to state all who oppose the mosque at issue are bigots.

BTW, your rage over those here not meeting you intellectual expectations is laughable. Please cry more.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 5:19 PM. Reason : BUT, BUT I'VE EVOLVED SINCE A FEW YEARS AGO! NIETZSCHE!!!1 ]

8/25/2010 5:11:58 PM

Quote :

"In many ways, Europe is behind us with respect to race relations."

Agreed, and that was all I was trying to illustrate.

8/25/2010 5:18:09 PM

Quote :

"I mean a political scientist (a guy with a 4-year degree, at least) in this very thread said that economics, sociology, and politics can't be formalized or quantified. His own field's bread and butter is multivariate linear regression and structural equation modeling. How the fuck am I supposed to deal with such outrageous (and intentional, at this point) ignorance? This "political scientist" can't be bothered to open a single academic journal ever (obviously), but he can spend countless hours pontificating on this website on the basis of nothing? "

There are aspects of the social sciences that can be quantified. I never denied that. Here's the problem: you're alluding to some distant point in the future when everything can be calculated by math or computers, and that unless I'm doing some kind of statistical analysis, my opinion isn't valid.

You're the only here being willfully ignorant. It doesn't seem like you've even taken an introductory course in sociology or any other class that attempts to study human relations. Shit, for someone that supposedly works with statistics, you won't even concede that there are serious limitations to quantitative analysis. Have you ever actually used multivariate linear regression to study the things we're talking about? You can easily study opinions on a topic, or explore associations, but you don't use a computer to answer questions like, "should X be legal" or "is X moral." Your statement that these issues are, at their heart, dealing with statistics, is dead wrong. These issues are philosophical at their core, and if you want to be taken seriously, you need to accept that, rather than foolishly believe that your area of expertise can answer all questions.

8/25/2010 6:15:58 PM

Quote :

"There are aspects of the social sciences that can be quantified. I never denied that. Here's the problem: you're alluding to some distant point in the future when everything can be calculated by math or computers, and that unless I'm doing some kind of statistical analysis, my opinion isn't valid."

I'm saying "How do you form an educated opinion on many public issues without at least a cursory knowledge of statistics?"

Quote :

"Shit, for someone that supposedly works with statistics, you won't even concede that there are serious limitations to quantitative analysis."

These limitations are computational in nature. They get solved as we improve our methods and the machines we deploy these methods on. Sorry but you have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote :

"Have you ever actually used multivariate linear regression to study the things we're talking about?"

I've written software used to teach social scientists how to do regression analysis and structural equation modeling. I'd say I'm familiar with it.

Quote :

"You can easily study opinions on a topic, or explore associations, but you don't use a computer to answer questions like, "should X be legal" or "is X moral.""

You sure can if you're remotely empirical about either legality or morality.

Quote :

"These issues are philosophical at their core, and if you want to be taken seriously, you need to accept that, rather than foolishly believe that your area of expertise can answer all questions."

The prevailing opinion in contemporary philosophy is that you're dead wrong.

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 10:56 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 10:56:30 PM

Quote :

""Christianity -- man's immortal blunder" by McDanger"

troll thread

although i acknowledge the fact that christianity was a terrible, terrible blunder. just like islam. just like judaism. Isn't it cool how I feel that way and still not want to discriminate against and harass Muslims?

It's almost like ... I'm an atheist, but not an evangelical asshole or a bigot ... ???

Quote :

"You continually swoop in here to declare that you're the smartest person in the room. Yet, you can't even figure out that periods should be placed inside closing quotation marks--but this is just one trivial example."

If you ever read an academic journal worth a damn, you'd realize you're wrong.

Quote :

"You claim to base your posts on "reason" and "logic"--and "MATH!" Yet, you continually commit the logical fallacies of hasty generalization (and we've seen a lot of this in the last few exchanges); irrelevant argument; self-contradiction; argument to the person (ad hom); guilt by association; false or irrelevant authority (often yourself); card-stacking; either-or fallacy; and taking something out of context. And these are just the fallacies that immediately occurred to me."

You don't know what any of those terms mean.

Quote :

"And your sudden concern about religious rights is a joke, McDanger--and one has to read no further than the thread I linked to above to realize this. Furthermore, you want nothing more than to use mostly false charges of bigotry and the like as a club to bludgeon conservatives (and any who would dare to agree with them)--this is a well-known tactic used by you and other leftists for decades. "

I can disagree with religion and wish that it didn't exist and still believe people have the right to disagree with me. I wouldn't expect you to understand this.

Quote :

"At any rate, there are those that disagree with building the mosque near Ground Zero that are not bigots--I'm one of them. And I think you know this position to be true. Your back-pedaling is evidence that you were wrong to state all who oppose the mosque at issue are bigots."

You're either a bigot, siding with bigots, or misinformed. You're probably all three.

Quote :

"BTW, your rage over those here not meeting you intellectual expectations is laughable. Please cry more"

Not crying, just embarrassed for NCSU. Low standards, apparently. Then again, it can't be good at everything (and untalented people can't be expected to do those things).

[Edited on August 25, 2010 at 11:04 PM. Reason : .]

8/25/2010 11:04:32 PM

I love how hooksaw thinks this is a conservative vs liberal issue.

It's not part of either ideology to oppress or discriminate against people because of their religion.

8/25/2010 11:44:49 PM

Oh snaps! I remember Christianity--Man's Immortal Blunder.

I tried so hard to understand and get in on the debate.

AHA

8/26/2010 12:15:57 AM

IT IS NOW!

Republicans have always been at war with Eastmuslima.

8/26/2010 12:17:31 AM

i thought we were at war with Eastislamasia

8/26/2010 12:22:37 AM