BF2S Forums Mosque to be built by Ground Zero?

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Excellent analogy there.


Exactly why I tend to ask him for numbers and specific details rather than his typical sweeping statements. I have yet to see him ever come back with figures on any of these things.

He asks for explicit proof for every point of his that is questioned, but does not provide anything that could remotely be considered proof.

actually all the evidence you ask for is found at thereligionofpeace.com. Ask yourself any question regarding Islam and this argument and an answer can be found.

There is no reason not to trust the site because there is no evidence that anything your beloved Jim Sutter has said is true. Especially given that everything said about Jim Sutter has been substantiated and proven to be true. Even if the sites motives are questionable, this does not automatically null its accuracy.

You were taking Jim Sutters words and accusations as evidence without proof and apparently still are willing to do so, why not the same standard for those you disagree with? Your separate standard regarding that point is so obviously pathetic all you can is shake your head in disbelief.

Then provide the evidence. You have never done so in the past, I suspect you never will.

Well I have done nothing but, I am the one linking sources remember?

What evidence are you asking for that you could not substantiate in anything I have sourced?
Good job steering clear of the Jim Sutter reference...I don't blame you


Dismiss
Deny
Ignore. check
Emulate superiority

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-04 09:29:45)

it'll also be a symbolic victory for western tolerance and understanding, multi-cultural diversity and rational-minded thinking...

because mosques are the place-of-worship for ordinary muslims, not radical islam.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Then provide the evidence. You have never done so in the past, I suspect you never will.

Well I have done nothing but, I am the one linking sources remember?

What evidence are you asking for that you could not substantiate in anything I have sourced?
Good job steering clear of the Jim Sutter reference...I don't blame you


Dismiss
Deny
Ignore. check
Emulate superiority

I have yet to see any numbers.

Here are my responses to what you said I dismissed. You have yet to answer them beyond saying "religionofpeace" and "I've linked to sources".

If you have linked to sources with the relevant information in them then it really shouldn't be too hard for you to extract it and use it to answer the questions.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

ISLAM is doing more than its fair share to instil that hatred and negativity.

Based on what? That's far too vague a point to answer directly.

What evidence do you have for this? I see no evidence that this is the case outside certain 3rd world countries. Lets take the largest Muslim country and the country with the largest Muslim population as examples - both of them seem perfectly ok. Care to be a bit more specific?

lowing wrote:

Islam does little to promote the opposite. In fact the dancing in the streets by Muslims ( and no not extremists) regarding 911 and most other bombings does little to help their cause.

Yes extremists. Not the most extreme extremists, but extremists nonetheless. A minority. Get some numbers of how many Muslims were dancing in the streets regarding 9/11, not some pictures with some Muslims holding up Death to America placards, numbers.

lowing wrote:

you are forgetting damn near all of the sources used against Islam COMES FROM FUCKIN ISLAM!!!

Typically from those who have been exposed to extremist Islam, former extremists are more likely to have prejudiced positions. Care to specify some examples?

Oh by asking what happens in the name of Islam that holds it in a negative light, I thought you were kidding...Can't believe you really need to ask that.

Nope those Muslms were everyday students and citizens hardly any of which would be considered extremist. Fact is Islam is an extremist religion.

Already have, what the Koran teaches in violent response far outweighs what it says in peace.

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Then provide the evidence. You have never done so in the past, I suspect you never will.

Well I have done nothing but, I am the one linking sources remember?

What evidence are you asking for that you could not substantiate in anything I have sourced?
Good job steering clear of the Jim Sutter reference...I don't blame you


Dismiss
Deny
Ignore. check
Emulate superiority

I have yet to see any numbers.

Here are my responses to what you said I dismissed. You have yet to answer them beyond saying "religionofpeace" and "I've linked to sources".

If you have linked to sources with the relevant information in them then it really shouldn't be too hard for you to extract it and use it to answer the questions.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

ISLAM is doing more than its fair share to instil that hatred and negativity.

Based on what? That's far too vague a point to answer directly.

What evidence do you have for this? I see no evidence that this is the case outside certain 3rd world countries. Lets take the largest Muslim country and the country with the largest Muslim population as examples - both of them seem perfectly ok. Care to be a bit more specific?


Yes extremists. Not the most extreme extremists, but extremists nonetheless. A minority. Get some numbers of how many Muslims were dancing in the streets regarding 9/11, not some pictures with some Muslims holding up Death to America placards, numbers.


Typically from those who have been exposed to extremist Islam, former extremists are more likely to have prejudiced positions. Care to specify some examples?

Oh by asking what happens in the name of Islam that holds it in a negative light, I thought you were kidding...Can't believe you really need to ask that.

Nope those Muslms were everyday students and citizens hardly any of which would be considered extremist. Fact is Islam is an extremist religion.

Already have, what the Koran teaches in violent response far outweighs what it says in peace.

No you haven't.

This is exactly the response we always get from you.

Now actually answer the questions:

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

ISLAM is doing more than its fair share to instil that hatred and negativity.

Based on what? That's far too vague a point to answer directly.

What evidence do you have for this? I see no evidence that this is the case outside certain 3rd world countries. Lets take the largest Muslim country and the country with the largest Muslim population as examples - both of them seem perfectly ok. Care to be a bit more specific?

lowing wrote:

Islam does little to promote the opposite. In fact the dancing in the streets by Muslims ( and no not extremists) regarding 911 and most other bombings does little to help their cause.

Yes extremists. Not the most extreme extremists, but extremists nonetheless. A minority. Get some numbers of how many Muslims were dancing in the streets regarding 9/11, not some pictures with some Muslims holding up Death to America placards, numbers.

lowing wrote:

you are forgetting damn near all of the sources used against Islam COMES FROM FUCKIN ISLAM!!!

Typically from those who have been exposed to extremist Islam, former extremists are more likely to have prejudiced positions. Care to specify some examples?

3 points - evidence of hatred and negativity in Islam; numbers of Muslims dancing in the streets about bombing; examples of the sources you have used being typical Muslims.

Very straightforward to answer, if as you say all the information to support these claims is found in your sources.

since when did the pope like to frequent tittybars

Uzique wrote:

Lowing have you actually read the Koran in any circumstance or context that doesn't involve some neo-con/neo-nazi selectively editing bits and spoonfeeding it to you with ideological flavourings? you can cut out excerpts of nietzsche and justify eugenics and nazism - doesn't mean that's the 'real' underlying ideology or philosophy of his work, does it? the fact that you're 'sourcing' all of your information from a network of politically-bias and racially/culturally narrowminded people means the only information you receive is highly-engineered and tainted.

we're back 15 pages again to my point about sociological 'virtual balkanization'. you surround yourself with this neo-con conterie and then your entire worldview co-aligns to share their narrow, right-wing scope. the fact that they pretend with rhetoric and persuasion to have an 'objective' and 'rational' view is laughable. but then again every extremist fringe has that front for credibility.

Nope, I haven't read the bible either in full either. Do you honestly think that by reading the Koran, all that is happening and has happened in the name of Islam, all that is taught within Islam, and all that is lawful with Sharia, will all of sudden be dismissed or rationalized or justified?

Yes we are back 15 pages, stop attacking and or dismissing the sources and address or refute the information cited.

lowing wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Lowing have you actually read the Koran in any circumstance or context that doesn't involve some neo-con/neo-nazi selectively editing bits and spoonfeeding it to you with ideological flavourings? you can cut out excerpts of nietzsche and justify eugenics and nazism - doesn't mean that's the 'real' underlying ideology or philosophy of his work, does it? the fact that you're 'sourcing' all of your information from a network of politically-bias and racially/culturally narrowminded people means the only information you receive is highly-engineered and tainted.

we're back 15 pages again to my point about sociological 'virtual balkanization'. you surround yourself with this neo-con conterie and then your entire worldview co-aligns to share their narrow, right-wing scope. the fact that they pretend with rhetoric and persuasion to have an 'objective' and 'rational' view is laughable. but then again every extremist fringe has that front for credibility.

Nope, I haven't read the bible either in full either. Do you honestly think that by reading the Koran, all that is happening and has happened in the name of Islam, all that is taught within Islam, and all that is lawful with Sharia, will all of sudden be dismissed or rationalized or justified?

Yes we are back 15 pages, stop attacking and or dismissing the sources and address or refute the information cited.

Then stop dismissing the questions you are being asked.

You are always very quick to dismiss sources and points without answering them in any way. Why should your points and sources not be dismissed?

"Sorry, I don't buy that" being one of your typical responses to points that have been made.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2010-07-04 10:08:36)

Uzique wrote:

seeing as you frequently like to distinguish between 'islam' and 'muslims', i.e. the book/theology and the people that subscribe to it... YES lowing, i do think, according to YOUR logic, that reading the Koran would help you greatly in 'understanding' the 'religion' (as opposed to its 'people'). if you say your problem isn't with ordinary muslims, it is with the instructions of the prophet in their holy book... perhaps you should go read the fucking holy book then, and get a fair, personal idea? having quotes and excerpts selectively cut-and-pasted for you by people with a political AGENDA is far from fucking smart. islamic fundamentalists could do the exact same with the bible: lets cut out the plagues bit and the juicy revelations part and the sodom and gomorrah part and spread hate around about christian's VENGEFUL, EVIL and RETRIBUTIVE god now, shall we?

and im fucking already regretting bringing up the source. as i SAID previously- you can attack sources ALL DAY, and it's a weak way to argue. i don't CARE about the back-and-forth gossip between their blogging networks. the POINT (and that is ALL you should be taking from the source-argument) is that the guy has had websites in the past shut-down, that he is clearly ideologically bias - to a criminal degree - and therefore shouldn't be taken as the gospel and go-to person for information on islam. i don't care about the reputation of the people that dug the dirt on him, i don't in short care about SOURCES in debates- at all. for all demonstrative purposes i have shown that you are getting your 'information' from a network of neo-con ideologues and public speakers/slimeballs. that's all you need to take away from that. furthermore the fact you haven't read any of the theology of islam for yourself, and judged it on its own merit, makes your 'claims' of 'knowledge' and 'FACTS' seem even more laughably ridiculous. you just can't say half the shit you say about islam when you get it straight from another neo-con's mouth, and believe it as lawful-fact.

get a clue man.

I do not need to read the book. Muslims themselves have cited their book to justify their actions. and as has been pointed out extensively to a far greater extent than any other religion.

Your second paragraph is baffling. You say condemning sources it is a weak way to debate yet you unarguably hung your hat on exactly that, and even used another blogger for a grandstanding performance in "finishing me off". Are you still high fiving each other over that?

If you despise attacking sources, then stop doing it and address the information,  go to the site, read, look around. start with the tab title "about Muslims".

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

No you haven't.

This is exactly the response we always get from you.

Now actually answer the questions:

3 points - evidence of hatred and negativity in Islam; numbers of Muslims dancing in the streets about bombing; examples of the sources you have used being typical Muslims.

Very straightforward to answer, if as you say all the information to support these claims is found in your sources.

Never made any claims about "typical Muslims". The argument is against Islam, that has made clear.

1. go to therelgionofpeace.com and look under womens rights, and human rights, then Islamic terror. Everything is addressed and sourced. If you refuse then don't bother me again.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-P … ontroversy

3. go to therelgionofpeace.com and read under "about Islam" all information is sourced. if you refuse then do not bother me again.

1. I can't. The site is blocked by netfiltering software for me as my ISP determines it to be racist.

2. I don't see numbers - which is what I asked for and the only thing that could possibly demonstrate this to not be a minority. Nor do I see that as being in response to 9/11. The protests in that instance were perfectly valid, the fact that things got out of hand is not unexpected and is exactly the sort of thing you see at a number of heated protests (the protests in Greece against the austerity measures for example). There is nothing speical or unique to Islam here.

3. See 1.

See the Jihad Watch site for details of the site being filtered:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/11/the-r … -help.html

Holy Shit!! You have argued against this site and me, and what is cited AT LENGTH, and you have not even been there or read anything in it?? Wow.  Is this true for Uzi as well?

I think we are done. Just out of curiosity however, were you able to open Uzi's source? I am betting you were.

Gotta love your govt.  doing your thinking for you. Congratulations

Last edited by lowing (2010-07-04 10:37:16)

Since you can't actually read anything in the site, let me show you how it starts off with this statement.

"Our Statement on
Muslims (and Islam)


"Don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam and
don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know. "


 


Since we hear from so many critics who either don't take the time to read this site, or simply can't understand the distinction between Islam and Muslims, we thought it best to bring together in one place what we have said in so many others over the years.

Islam is an ideology.  No ideology is above critique, particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet.

Muslims are individuals.  We passionately believe that no Muslim should be harmed, harassed, stereotyped or treated any differently anywhere in the world solely on account of their status as a Muslim.

Islam is not simply a belief about God.  It is a word that means submission.  Islam is a set of rules that establish a social hierarchy in which Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. 

Since we don't live in a Muslim country (where censorship, intimidation and brute force are shamelessly employed to protect Islam from logical analysis), we are still free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism.

Are men really superior to women as the Qur'an says?  Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught?  Does propagating material (the Qur'an) that openly curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence really make for a better social environment?  Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Qur'an explicitly allows it in multiple places?  Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose and an outward profession of faith in Allah?

Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but it doesn't change what Islam is.  Don't confuse the ideology with the individual.  Don't draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, be they terrorists or humanitarians.  Islam must be understood on the basis of what it is, as presented objectively in the Qur'an, Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad).

By the same token, don't draw conclusions about the Muslims in your life based on the true nature of Islam.  Like any other group, not all Muslims think alike.  Even if there is no such thing as moderate Islam, it does not mean that there are no moderate Muslims.

If our years of dialogue with literally hundreds have taught us anything, it is that most Muslims (even devout ones) have only a superficial understanding of their religion.  Many are secular and very few made the choice to even be Muslim.  As with all religion, there are widely varying degrees of seriousness with which they may take the teachings of Islam.

The Muslims that you know are not terrorists.  More than likely, their interests in life are similar to yours and they have the same ambitions for their children.  They should neither be shunned, mistreated, nor disrespected merely because of their religion.  Their property should not be abused, and neither should copies of their sacred book be vandalized.

Prejudging an individual by their group identity (or presumed group identity) is not only unethical, it is blatantly irrational, since group identity reveals absolutely nothing about a person.  Every individual should be judged only on the basis of their own words and deeds. 

Don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know, and don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam."


Quite a Nazi ain't he?

lowing wrote:

Since you can't actually read anything in the site, let me show you how it starts off with this statement.

"Our Statement on
Muslims (and Islam)


"Don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam and
don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know. "


 


Since we hear from so many critics who either don't take the time to read this site, or simply can't understand the distinction between Islam and Muslims, we thought it best to bring together in one place what we have said in so many others over the years.

Islam is an ideology.  No ideology is above critique, particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet.

Muslims are individuals.  We passionately believe that no Muslim should be harmed, harassed, stereotyped or treated any differently anywhere in the world solely on account of their status as a Muslim.

Islam is not simply a belief about God.  It is a word that means submission.  Islam is a set of rules that establish a social hierarchy in which Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. 

Since we don't live in a Muslim country (where censorship, intimidation and brute force are shamelessly employed to protect Islam from logical analysis), we are still free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism.

Are men really superior to women as the Qur'an says?  Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught?  Does propagating material (the Qur'an) that openly curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence really make for a better social environment?  Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Qur'an explicitly allows it in multiple places?  Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose and an outward profession of faith in Allah?

Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but it doesn't change what Islam is.  Don't confuse the ideology with the individual.  Don't draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, be they terrorists or humanitarians.  Islam must be understood on the basis of what it is, as presented objectively in the Qur'an, Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad).

By the same token, don't draw conclusions about the Muslims in your life based on the true nature of Islam.  Like any other group, not all Muslims think alike.  Even if there is no such thing as moderate Islam, it does not mean that there are no moderate Muslims.

If our years of dialogue with literally hundreds have taught us anything, it is that most Muslims (even devout ones) have only a superficial understanding of their religion.  Many are secular and very few made the choice to even be Muslim.  As with all religion, there are widely varying degrees of seriousness with which they may take the teachings of Islam.

The Muslims that you know are not terrorists.  More than likely, their interests in life are similar to yours and they have the same ambitions for their children.  They should neither be shunned, mistreated, nor disrespected merely because of their religion.  Their property should not be abused, and neither should copies of their sacred book be vandalized.

Prejudging an individual by their group identity (or presumed group identity) is not only unethical, it is blatantly irrational, since group identity reveals absolutely nothing about a person.  Every individual should be judged only on the basis of their own words and deeds. 

Don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know, and don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam."


Quite a Nazi ain't he?

He certainly sounds like a nutter.

I see statements with no evidence for any of them. Where is all the evidence you claimed this site had?

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Since you can't actually read anything in the site, let me show you how it starts off with this statement.

"Our Statement on
Muslims (and Islam)


"Don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam and
don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know. "


 


Since we hear from so many critics who either don't take the time to read this site, or simply can't understand the distinction between Islam and Muslims, we thought it best to bring together in one place what we have said in so many others over the years.

Islam is an ideology.  No ideology is above critique, particularly one that explicitly seeks political and social dominance over every person on the planet.

Muslims are individuals.  We passionately believe that no Muslim should be harmed, harassed, stereotyped or treated any differently anywhere in the world solely on account of their status as a Muslim.

Islam is not simply a belief about God.  It is a word that means submission.  Islam is a set of rules that establish a social hierarchy in which Muslims submit to Allah, women submit to men and all non-Muslims submit to Islamic rule. 

Since we don't live in a Muslim country (where censorship, intimidation and brute force are shamelessly employed to protect Islam from logical analysis), we are still free to openly exercise our right to debate the merits of the Islamic value system against Western Liberalism.

Are men really superior to women as the Qur'an says?  Are women intellectually inferior as Muhammad taught?  Does propagating material (the Qur'an) that openly curses people of other religions amidst random calls to violence really make for a better social environment?  Is it right to keep women as sex slaves merely because the Qur'an explicitly allows it in multiple places?  Should atheists and homosexuals have to choose between the noose and an outward profession of faith in Allah?

Yes, there are Muslims who take issue with these aspects of Islamic theology, but it doesn't change what Islam is.  Don't confuse the ideology with the individual.  Don't draw conclusions about Islam based on the Muslims that you know, be they terrorists or humanitarians.  Islam must be understood on the basis of what it is, as presented objectively in the Qur'an, Hadith and Sira (biography of Muhammad).

By the same token, don't draw conclusions about the Muslims in your life based on the true nature of Islam.  Like any other group, not all Muslims think alike.  Even if there is no such thing as moderate Islam, it does not mean that there are no moderate Muslims.

If our years of dialogue with literally hundreds have taught us anything, it is that most Muslims (even devout ones) have only a superficial understanding of their religion.  Many are secular and very few made the choice to even be Muslim.  As with all religion, there are widely varying degrees of seriousness with which they may take the teachings of Islam.

The Muslims that you know are not terrorists.  More than likely, their interests in life are similar to yours and they have the same ambitions for their children.  They should neither be shunned, mistreated, nor disrespected merely because of their religion.  Their property should not be abused, and neither should copies of their sacred book be vandalized.

Prejudging an individual by their group identity (or presumed group identity) is not only unethical, it is blatantly irrational, since group identity reveals absolutely nothing about a person.  Every individual should be judged only on the basis of their own words and deeds. 

Don't judge Islam by the Muslims that you know, and don't judge the Muslims that you know by Islam."


Quite a Nazi ain't he?

He certainly sounds like a nutter.

I see statements with no evidence for any of them. Where is all the evidence you claimed this site had?

Well if you think he sounds like a nutter with this, then we are too far devided to move along. You may not agree with this, but it is a rational, level headed even keeled opinion. THat or again you did not read it.