NYT Refuses To Run Anti-Islam Ad

[East of Eden]

......AFTER running an anti-Catholic ad.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ny-time ... tholic-ad/

Score one for the Islamic war on free speech.

Anyone want to defend this?

[East of Eden]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

If the Iman really wants to promote interfaith dialogue, he should go where it's really needed like Saudi Arabia, you know, that place where Bibles are routinely destroyed when found at airport customs. This guy lectures us on interfaith matters, I'd like to ask him which Muslim nation we should be emulating when it comes to interfaith cooperation. In much of the Muslim world, there is an ongoing 'Kristallnacht' against Christians and other 'infidels'.

On a side note, I heard from an American Christian Egyptian immigrant (ex-Muslim) who got an e-mail from friends still in Egypt. They said when Bin Laden was killed, they didn't know of any Egyptian Muslims who were not sad it happened. There were some apathetic people, but nobody who was glad the criminal was dead. Nice......No doubt the same 85% of Egyptian Muslims who approve of the killing of 'apostates'.

[East of Eden]

On the Cordoba Initiative...

CURRENT INITIATIVES AT SIP

The project has given rise to the forthcoming Shariah Index Project book, which includes an extended scholastic deliberation on the nature of Islamic governance and the process of Islamic state indexing. In addition, the Cordoba Initiative will introduce the State of the Muslim World Annual Index. The Index will offer Muslim governments and citizens a measurement that shows how well their nations comply with Islamic legal benchmarks found to be fundamental to Islamic governance.

All I see is a group that strives - for better or worse - to set forth what constitutes an "Islamic State", and then they'll judge how good States are at being it.

To this paranoid individual, I see nothing about this group that provides me sufficient reason not to think they seek an essentially Islamic State across the globe.

My takeaway is that this is a tool for Islamists to say such as, "See, they're way better Islamists over yonder, so y'all gotta step up with the Islaming."

Where's this group's "You leave me the heck alone and I'll leave you the heck alone" index?

Say what you will about their policies, this group does nothing to alleviate my fears of a growing Islamic population, and the potential influence that population may have here where I sit.

I don't think it takes a rocket surgeon to realize that if only x% out of a Billion Islamists are the bad apples, then at 2 Billion of 'em, you've got twice the problems.

Joey, on the general subject of the threat from radical Islam, I heard a very plausible scenario yesterday. Let's say in 50 years (less in Europe) an area like Dearborn, MI is overwhelmingly Muslim and asks to be governed by Sharia Law. They are denied by the Federal government, which ignites a separatist terror movement like Chechnya, complete with the killing of school children, suicide bombers and the bombing of apartment buildings. This happens all over the world, there is no reason it couldn't play out similarly here given a large enough Muslim population.

What the Muslim apologists don't get is that many (not all) Muslim immigrants are all about domination, not assimilation.

[micatala]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on, and you ignore the intention of the Park 51 project.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

If the Iman really wants to promote interfaith dialogue, he should go where it's really needed like Saudi Arabia, you know, that place where Bibles are routinely destroyed when found at airport customs. This guy lectures us on interfaith matters, I'd like to ask him which Muslim nation we should be emulating when it comes to interfaith cooperation. In much of the Muslim world, there is an ongoing 'Kristallnacht' against Christians and other 'infidels'.

In other words, if the Imam is not promoting interfaith dialogue in the particular way or in the particular places you think he should, then we should deny that he is promoting interfaith dialogue. That simply does not make sense.


I certainly accept Saudi Arabia needs reform.

On the other hand, we clearly have a need for interfaith dialogue here in the U.S., as evidenced by Miss Gellar, by people saying no more Mosques should be built anywhere in the U.S., by people actually trying to prevent Mosques from being built, etc., etc.

[East of Eden]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

Crusade has several meanings, including 'an enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm'. I think you knew that.

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on,

Only if you ignore the persecution that went on during the Muslim occupation.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

I don't know what you're talking about there, probably more of your opinion.

In other words, if the Imam is not promoting interfaith dialogue in the particular way or in the particular places you think he should, then we should deny that he is promoting interfaith dialogue. That simply does not make sense.

I'm saying Muslim words should not always be taken at face value. See taquiya.

I certainly accept Saudi Arabia needs reform.

That's an understatement. On a scale of 1 to 10 for interfaith dialogue, 10 being good, Saudi Arabia is a 1 and we're a 10, which is why I said the Iman should go there.

On the other hand, we clearly have a need for interfaith dialogue here in the U.S., as evidenced by Miss Gellar,

Ms. Geller hasn't hurt a fly.

by people saying no more Mosques should be built anywhere in the U.S., by people actually trying to prevent Mosques from being built, etc., etc.

You don't have a right to put up a place of worship anywhere you want.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08 ... urch-dead/

I think considering the huge amounts of foreign money going to US mosques, and that up to 80% have been estimated to be infected by radical Whahabbi thought, it is a bit different that whatever your local Methodist church does. Radical Islam is as much an expansionary fascist political system as it is a religion.

[dusk]

I think considering the huge amounts of foreign money going to US mosques, and that up to 80% have been estimated to be infected by radical Whahabbi thought, it is a bit different that whatever your local Methodist church does. Radical Islam is as much an expansionary fascist political system as it is a religion.

So what? Let them build their churches/mosques whatever. They aren't as many as the xenophobic make them out to be. You can penalize the hate preachers and the small Muslim population don't really stand a chance of changing any important laws before they have eventually assimilated into the general culture.

[micatala]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

Crusade has several meanings, including 'an enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm'. I think you knew that.

Granted, but this only highlight your inconsistency. Cordoba also has positive as well as negative connotations. You commit the fallacies of ignoring the positive and only acknowledging the negative, and then futher assume without one shred of evidence that the intention of Imam Rauf was the negative.

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on,

Only if you ignore the persecution that went on during the Muslim occupation.

No, you are the only one ignoring one side here. I granted their was negative connotations, you ignored the positive.

The fact that you point out the positive aspects of the word "crusade" serves to clearly indicate the bias in your argument.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

I don't know what you're talking about there, probably more of your opinion.

Sorry, facts and logic are different than opinion.


Here are some facts and logic you have ignored.

I fully accept that some Muslim authorities practiced atrocities and persecution, including expulsions, of the Jews.


But Christians were doing the very same thing at the time as well.



Consider the "results" of the Disputation of Paris, held in 1240.

wikipedia wrote:

The terms of the disputation demanded that the four rabbis defend the Talmud against Donin's accusations that the Talmud was immoral, blasphemous, and spoke offensively of Jesus. Though the rabbis presented a defense of the Talmud, a commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on June 17, 1244. Twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were set on fire in the streets of Paris.

These hand copied scrolls would have represented thousands of years of labor.


A few years later, there was the Disputation of Barcelona.

wikipedia wrote:

The Disputation of Barcelona (July 20–24, 1263) was held at the royal palace of King James I of Aragon in the presence of the King, his court, and many prominent ecclesiastical dignitaries and knights, between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Rabbi Nachmanides (whose full name, Rabbi Moshe ben Nahman Gerondi, is often abbreviated as Ramban).

The disputation was organized by Raymond de Penyafort, the superior of Christiani and the confessor of King James. Christiani had been preaching to Jews of Provence. Relying upon the reserve his adversary would be forced to maintain through fear of wounding the feelings of the Christian dignitaries, Christiani assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings. Nahmanides complied with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech should be granted.

Not exactly a fair fight. The end result of the debate was that Nahmanides was banished from Spain.


And these two events are among the milder persecutions of the Jews during this time.

wikipedia wrote:

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in, 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.[4]

As the Black Death epidemics devastated Europe in the mid-14th century, annihilating more than a half of the population, Jews were taken as scapegoats. Rumors spread that they caused the disease by deliberately poisoning wells. Hundreds of Jewish communities were destroyed by violence in the Black Death persecutions. Although Pope Clement VI tried to protect them by the July 6, 1348 papal bull and another 1348 bull, several months later, 900 Jews were burnt alive in Strasbourg, where the plague hadn't yet affected the city.[5]

Following East of Eden's logic, if someone names their coffee shop "Cafe Paree" or "Cafe Barcelona" we should understand that as a statement in support of anti-semitism and victory of Christianity over the Jews, regardless of the actual reason for the name given by the proprietor.

These are not simply my opinion. They are historical facts, and logical comparisons based on those facts. Dismissing them as opinion is simply a dodge to avoid addressing the fallaciousness of your own arguments.

In other words, if the Imam is not promoting interfaith dialogue in the particular way or in the particular places you think he should, then we should deny that he is promoting interfaith dialogue. That simply does not make sense.

I'm saying Muslim words should not always be taken at face value. See taquiya.

But you are saying more than "we should not take Muslims at face value." You are essentially assuming that since some Muslims might practice taquiya, any particular Muslim you have an issue should be assumed to be lying. You have essentially done this to Rauf without one shred of evidence that he is dishonest or practicing taquiya.

On the other hand, we clearly have a need for interfaith dialogue here in the U.S., as evidenced by Miss Gellar,

Ms. Geller hasn't hurt a fly.

Not physically no. BUt then, neither has Rauf. So what is your point?

by people saying no more Mosques should be built anywhere in the U.S., by people actually trying to prevent Mosques from being built, etc., etc.

You don't have a right to put up a place of worship anywhere you want.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08 ... urch-dead/

I never said you did. You are changing the fact that some don't want any Mosques built anywhere to the general idea of zoning.

I think considering the huge amounts of foreign money going to US mosques, and that up to 80% have been estimated to be infected by radical Whahabbi thought, it is a bit different that whatever your local Methodist church does. Radical Islam is as much an expansionary fascist political system as it is a religion.

More Red Herrings. First off, what is your source for this "80%" figure? Secondly, radical Islam has nothing to do with Imam Rauf or his project, so that is irrelevant anyway.

I agree we should be concerned about those who promote violence. Rauf is not doing that, so I have to ask why you continue your attempts to smear him by associating him with those that do promote violence.

[East of Eden]

I think considering the huge amounts of foreign money going to US mosques, and that up to 80% have been estimated to be infected by radical Whahabbi thought, it is a bit different that whatever your local Methodist church does. Radical Islam is as much an expansionary fascist political system as it is a religion.

So what? Let them build their churches/mosques whatever. They aren't as many as the xenophobic make them out to be. You can penalize the hate preachers and the small Muslim population don't really stand a chance of changing any important laws before they have eventually assimilated into the general culture.

How are they assimilating in Europe?

[East of Eden]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

Crusade has several meanings, including 'an enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm'. I think you knew that.

Granted, but this only highlight your inconsistency. Cordoba also has positive as well as negative connotations. You commit the fallacies of ignoring the positive and only acknowledging the negative, and then futher assume without one shred of evidence that the intention of Imam Rauf was the negative.

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on,

Only if you ignore the persecution that went on during the Muslim occupation.

No, you are the only one ignoring one side here. I granted their was negative connotations, you ignored the positive.

The fact that you point out the positive aspects of the word "crusade" serves to clearly indicate the bias in your argument.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

I don't know what you're talking about there, probably more of your opinion.

Sorry, facts and logic are different than opinion.


Here are some facts and logic you have ignored.

I fully accept that some Muslim authorities practiced atrocities and persecution, including expulsions, of the Jews.


But Christians were doing the very same thing at the time as well.



Consider the "results" of the Disputation of Paris, held in 1240.

wikipedia wrote:

The terms of the disputation demanded that the four rabbis defend the Talmud against Donin's accusations that the Talmud was immoral, blasphemous, and spoke offensively of Jesus. Though the rabbis presented a defense of the Talmud, a commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on June 17, 1244. Twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were set on fire in the streets of Paris.

These hand copied scrolls would have represented thousands of years of labor.


A few years later, there was the Disputation of Barcelona.

wikipedia wrote:

The Disputation of Barcelona (July 20–24, 1263) was held at the royal palace of King James I of Aragon in the presence of the King, his court, and many prominent ecclesiastical dignitaries and knights, between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Rabbi Nachmanides (whose full name, Rabbi Moshe ben Nahman Gerondi, is often abbreviated as Ramban).

The disputation was organized by Raymond de Penyafort, the superior of Christiani and the confessor of King James. Christiani had been preaching to Jews of Provence. Relying upon the reserve his adversary would be forced to maintain through fear of wounding the feelings of the Christian dignitaries, Christiani assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings. Nahmanides complied with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech should be granted.

Not exactly a fair fight. The end result of the debate was that Nahmanides was banished from Spain.


And these two events are among the milder persecutions of the Jews during this time.

wikipedia wrote:

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in, 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.[4]

As the Black Death epidemics devastated Europe in the mid-14th century, annihilating more than a half of the population, Jews were taken as scapegoats. Rumors spread that they caused the disease by deliberately poisoning wells. Hundreds of Jewish communities were destroyed by violence in the Black Death persecutions. Although Pope Clement VI tried to protect them by the July 6, 1348 papal bull and another 1348 bull, several months later, 900 Jews were burnt alive in Strasbourg, where the plague hadn't yet affected the city.[5]

Following East of Eden's logic, if someone names their coffee shop "Cafe Paree" or "Cafe Barcelona" we should understand that as a statement in support of anti-semitism and victory of Christianity over the Jews, regardless of the actual reason for the name given by the proprietor.

These are not simply my opinion. They are historical facts, and logical comparisons based on those facts. Dismissing them as opinion is simply a dodge to avoid addressing the fallaciousness of your own arguments.

I don't know what your point is, I'm not denying there were Christian persecutions, but no Christian is naming anything after that period.

You are essentially assuming that since some Muslims might practice taquiya, any particular Muslim you have an issue should be assumed to be lying. You have essentially done this to Rauf without one shred of evidence that he is dishonest or practicing taquiya.

How would you know if he was lying? As pointed out, he has some suspicious connections.

I never said you did. You are changing the fact that some don't want any Mosques built anywhere to the general idea of zoning.

OK, who here has said NO mosques should be built? Without good cause, banning them would be against the constitution. I do think European nations should consider a policy of no new mosques until there is freedom to build a church in Saudi Arabia.

More Red Herrings. First off, what is your source for this "80%" figure?

It's not really new. http://thecandideye.wordpress.com/2009/ ... s-mosques/

I agree we should be concerned about those who promote violence. Rauf is not doing that, so I have to ask why you continue your attempts to smear him by associating him with those that do promote violence.

Why do you smear the non-violent Pam Geller?

[micatala]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

Crusade has several meanings, including 'an enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm'. I think you knew that.

Granted, but this only highlight your inconsistency. Cordoba also has positive as well as negative connotations. You commit the fallacies of ignoring the positive and only acknowledging the negative, and then futher assume without one shred of evidence that the intention of Imam Rauf was the negative.

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on,

Only if you ignore the persecution that went on during the Muslim occupation.

No, you are the only one ignoring one side here. I granted their was negative connotations, you ignored the positive.

The fact that you point out the positive aspects of the word "crusade" serves to clearly indicate the bias in your argument.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

I don't know what you're talking about there, probably more of your opinion.

Sorry, facts and logic are different than opinion.


Here are some facts and logic you have ignored.

I fully accept that some Muslim authorities practiced atrocities and persecution, including expulsions, of the Jews.


But Christians were doing the very same thing at the time as well.



Consider the "results" of the Disputation of Paris, held in 1240.

wikipedia wrote:

The terms of the disputation demanded that the four rabbis defend the Talmud against Donin's accusations that the Talmud was immoral, blasphemous, and spoke offensively of Jesus. Though the rabbis presented a defense of the Talmud, a commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on June 17, 1244. Twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were set on fire in the streets of Paris.

These hand copied scrolls would have represented thousands of years of labor.


A few years later, there was the Disputation of Barcelona.

wikipedia wrote:

The Disputation of Barcelona (July 20–24, 1263) was held at the royal palace of King James I of Aragon in the presence of the King, his court, and many prominent ecclesiastical dignitaries and knights, between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Rabbi Nachmanides (whose full name, Rabbi Moshe ben Nahman Gerondi, is often abbreviated as Ramban).

The disputation was organized by Raymond de Penyafort, the superior of Christiani and the confessor of King James. Christiani had been preaching to Jews of Provence. Relying upon the reserve his adversary would be forced to maintain through fear of wounding the feelings of the Christian dignitaries, Christiani assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings. Nahmanides complied with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech should be granted.

Not exactly a fair fight. The end result of the debate was that Nahmanides was banished from Spain.


And these two events are among the milder persecutions of the Jews during this time.

wikipedia wrote:

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in, 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.[4]

As the Black Death epidemics devastated Europe in the mid-14th century, annihilating more than a half of the population, Jews were taken as scapegoats. Rumors spread that they caused the disease by deliberately poisoning wells. Hundreds of Jewish communities were destroyed by violence in the Black Death persecutions. Although Pope Clement VI tried to protect them by the July 6, 1348 papal bull and another 1348 bull, several months later, 900 Jews were burnt alive in Strasbourg, where the plague hadn't yet affected the city.[5]

Following East of Eden's logic, if someone names their coffee shop "Cafe Paree" or "Cafe Barcelona" we should understand that as a statement in support of anti-semitism and victory of Christianity over the Jews, regardless of the actual reason for the name given by the proprietor.

These are not simply my opinion. They are historical facts, and logical comparisons based on those facts. Dismissing them as opinion is simply a dodge to avoid addressing the fallaciousness of your own arguments.

I don't know what your point is, I'm not denying there were Christian persecutions, but no Christian is naming anything after that period.

This is a rather insubstantial response to all of what you have quoted here.

However, I'll accept you acknowledge the Christian persecuations.

But notice, you continue the distortion in the very next statement.

You have provided NO evidence, not one bit, that the name of the project is motivated by the persecutions you allude to.


I call for you to provide evidence for this repeated statement or retract it.






I will also point out, that there are lots of things named after Paris and Barcelona. Following your logic, we should ASSUME without evidence that these names are motivated by the persuctions.


We should ASSUME without evidence that Campus Crusade for Christ is named after the medieval crusades.

That is not my argument. That is following your argument in parallel.

You are essentially assuming that since some Muslims might practice taquiya, any particular Muslim you have an issue should be assumed to be lying. You have essentially done this to Rauf without one shred of evidence that he is dishonest or practicing taquiya.

How would you know if he was lying? As pointed out, he has some suspicious connections.

No, you provided a bunch of innuendo and unsubstantiated claims.

You are the one who is claiming he is being dishonest. Provide some evidence.

I never said you did. You are changing the fact that some don't want any Mosques built anywhere to the general idea of zoning.

OK, who here has said NO mosques should be built? Without good cause, banning them would be against the constitution. I do think European nations should consider a policy of no new mosques until there is freedom to build a church in Saudi Arabia.

I never said you said no Mosques should be built. I said there are those in America who have said no Mosques should be built. That is clear evidence there are some who are bigoted against Muslims. I think Gellar is clearly one of these, although she has not made that particular claim.

Bryan Fischer is one such individual.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

Here is his claim:

“This is for one simple reason,� he writes. “Each Islamic mosque is dedicated to the overthrow of the American government.�

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.c ... period.php



As far as Gellar, here are some examples.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... Statements

When a mosque got fire-bombed in NY, Gellar suggested it was done by Muslims. When it was found out it was in fact done by someone with anti-Islamic views, she certainly did not retract her original outrageous claim.

http://search.yahoo.com/404handler?src= ... ire_attack




She defends the marines who urinated on dead Taliban Afghans.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/ant ... se-marines



She posted a video suggesting Muslims have sex with goats.
http://www.cair.com/images/pamela_gelle ... ondoms.jpg



She admired Slobodan Milosevic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_Geller

Geller has also lent her support to a number of other political causes. She has strongly defended former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević,[14] denied the existence of Serbian concentration camps in the 1990s,[18] said that black South Africans are engaging in a "genocide" against whites,[19] and expressed support for the far right English Defence League.[14][20]

She seems to think Muslims are controlling the CIA.

She also claims Muslim groups "control information and how it is processed at senior levels of the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, and the various branches of the military."

Here is her own blog.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla ... lgion.html

In this blog, she attacks Muslims in general for deigning to consider Moses, Abraham and others prophets of their religion. THis does not seem like a very religiously tolerant person.


The Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that takes on extremist groups of all stripes, has the following short article on Gellar.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/01/1 ... im-effort/


She seems to have suggested Obama was a love child of Malcolm X.


And here is another article describing Gellar as the looniest blogger ever.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/08/pamela ... gger-ever/

They include a link to this quote of Gellar's

And I pray dearly that in the ungodly event that Tehran or its jihadi proxies (Hez’ballah, Hamas etc) target Israel with a nuke, that she retaliate with everything she has at Tehran, Mecca, and Medina……………

Not to mention Europe. They exterminated all their Jews, but that wasn’t enough. Those monsters then went on to import the next generation of Jew killers. (This New Hatred Comes from Muslim Immigrants. The Jewish People are Afraid Now)

So, if Iran nukes Israel, Israel should nuke Saudi Arabia and Europe???


Really, this does not seem like a person rooted in reality, or given to being fair to those she disagrees with.


I am absolutely fine with opposition to true radicals. But Gellar is off the deep end. She will often say she is not against all Muslims, but her statements and actions belie that claim.

More Red Herrings. First off, what is your source for this "80%" figure?

It's not really new. http://thecandideye.wordpress.com/2009/ ... s-mosques/

THis is not evidence. This is one guy, referred to only as "Barsky" in this article making a claim, and he does not provide any evidence either. This article goes on to describe funding of Mosques in the U.S. by the Saudi's. Even if we accept this, that does nto make them all Wahhabi.


Try again. This is not evidence for your claim.


For the record, "Barsky" seem to be Yehudit Barsky, a pundit for the American Jewish Congress. Now, perhaps he has some documentation to back up his claim, but at this point, none has bee provided.


I will certainly accept that extremists exist and that some of them are probably funding activities within Mosques in the U.S. But again, what does that have to do with the Park 51 project or Imam Rauf?

I agree we should be concerned about those who promote violence. Rauf is not doing that, so I have to ask why you continue your attempts to smear him by associating him with those that do promote violence.

Why do you smear the non-violent Pam Geller?

Nice attempt at creating a false equality.

I have provided information on Gellar's untruths, and outrageous statments, based on advertising she actually put out and her own statements in her Atlas Shrugs blog.

You have provided only innuendo, incredibly stretched associations, unfounded assumptions, and speculation presented as evidence.






Can you provide any credible evidence that Rauf promotes violence or that his Mosque is intended as a "Victory Mosque?"




PS. Barsky seems to be a she. Again. Perhaps she has documentation for the 80% claim, but as yet, it seems to be nothing more than her speculation.

[East of Eden]

I'll tell you what is dishonest, and what should raise a red flag in any open-minded person: The Iman's naming of his enterprise the Cordoba Institute. He is either lying about the gross mistreatment of 'infidels' during the Muslim occupation of Spain, or he approves of it.

If what you say about Cordoba and how muslims mean it is true then so are the claims made by muslims about the western use of the word crusade.

I'm not sure how we got from discussing the conduct of the Muslim occupation of Spain to the Crusades, but Christian groups aren't naming their enterprises the Crusades in an effort to promote interfaith dialogue. The evangelical Wheaton College recently changed the name of it's sports teams from the Crusaders.

You've never heard of Campus Crusade for Christ?

http://www.ccci.org/

Crusade has several meanings, including 'an enterprise undertaken with zeal and enthusiasm'. I think you knew that.

Granted, but this only highlight your inconsistency. Cordoba also has positive as well as negative connotations. You commit the fallacies of ignoring the positive and only acknowledging the negative, and then futher assume without one shred of evidence that the intention of Imam Rauf was the negative.

And again, you are ignoring that the name "Cordoba" also has positive connotations other than the one you focus on,

Only if you ignore the persecution that went on during the Muslim occupation.

No, you are the only one ignoring one side here. I granted their was negative connotations, you ignored the positive.

The fact that you point out the positive aspects of the word "crusade" serves to clearly indicate the bias in your argument.

You also have not addressed the analogies showing the fallaciousness in your logic.

I don't know what you're talking about there, probably more of your opinion.

Sorry, facts and logic are different than opinion.


Here are some facts and logic you have ignored.

I fully accept that some Muslim authorities practiced atrocities and persecution, including expulsions, of the Jews.


But Christians were doing the very same thing at the time as well.



Consider the "results" of the Disputation of Paris, held in 1240.

wikipedia wrote:

The terms of the disputation demanded that the four rabbis defend the Talmud against Donin's accusations that the Talmud was immoral, blasphemous, and spoke offensively of Jesus. Though the rabbis presented a defense of the Talmud, a commission of Christian theologians condemned the Talmud to be burned and on June 17, 1244. Twenty-four carriage loads of Jewish religious manuscripts were set on fire in the streets of Paris.

These hand copied scrolls would have represented thousands of years of labor.


A few years later, there was the Disputation of Barcelona.

wikipedia wrote:

The Disputation of Barcelona (July 20–24, 1263) was held at the royal palace of King James I of Aragon in the presence of the King, his court, and many prominent ecclesiastical dignitaries and knights, between Dominican Friar Pablo Christiani, a convert from Judaism to Christianity, and Rabbi Nachmanides (whose full name, Rabbi Moshe ben Nahman Gerondi, is often abbreviated as Ramban).

The disputation was organized by Raymond de Penyafort, the superior of Christiani and the confessor of King James. Christiani had been preaching to Jews of Provence. Relying upon the reserve his adversary would be forced to maintain through fear of wounding the feelings of the Christian dignitaries, Christiani assured the King that he could prove the truth of Christianity from the Talmud and other rabbinical writings. Nahmanides complied with the order of the King, but stipulated that complete freedom of speech should be granted.

Not exactly a fair fight. The end result of the debate was that Nahmanides was banished from Spain.


And these two events are among the milder persecutions of the Jews during this time.

wikipedia wrote:

During the High Middle Ages in Europe there was full-scale persecution in many places, with blood libels, expulsions, forced conversions and massacres. An underlying source of prejudice against Jews in Europe was religious. Jews were frequently massacred and exiled from various European countries. The persecution hit its first peak during the Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France were subject to frequent massacres. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320. The Crusades were followed by expulsions, including in, 1290, the banishing of all English Jews; in 1396, 100,000 Jews were expelled from France; and, in 1421 thousands were expelled from Austria. Many of the expelled Jews fled to Poland.[4]

As the Black Death epidemics devastated Europe in the mid-14th century, annihilating more than a half of the population, Jews were taken as scapegoats. Rumors spread that they caused the disease by deliberately poisoning wells. Hundreds of Jewish communities were destroyed by violence in the Black Death persecutions. Although Pope Clement VI tried to protect them by the July 6, 1348 papal bull and another 1348 bull, several months later, 900 Jews were burnt alive in Strasbourg, where the plague hadn't yet affected the city.[5]

Following East of Eden's logic, if someone names their coffee shop "Cafe Paree" or "Cafe Barcelona" we should understand that as a statement in support of anti-semitism and victory of Christianity over the Jews, regardless of the actual reason for the name given by the proprietor.

These are not simply my opinion. They are historical facts, and logical comparisons based on those facts. Dismissing them as opinion is simply a dodge to avoid addressing the fallaciousness of your own arguments.

I don't know what your point is, I'm not denying there were Christian persecutions, but no Christian is naming anything after that period.

This is a rather insubstantial response to all of what you have quoted here.

However, I'll accept you acknowledge the Christian persecuations.

But notice, you continue the distortion in the very next statement.

You have provided NO evidence, not one bit, that the name of the project is motivated by the persecutions you allude to.

How would you prove that, especially with a religion that approves of tacqiya? It is a reasonable guess. Muslims believe if an area was once Muslim it is always Muslim, perhaps that is further motivation.

I will also point out, that there are lots of things named after Paris and Barcelona. Following your logic, we should ASSUME without evidence that these names are motivated by the persuctions.

Look, the Iman is supposedly all about interfaith relations, yet he names his project after an occupation regime that according to Maimonides, persecuted Jews worse than anybody. I repeat, he is either ignorant or lying about this shameful period. As I said, if he really is interested in improving interfaith relations, he needs to leave for Saudi Arabia, which has actually arrested Christians at a private prayer gathering in a home. That doesn't seem to bother the Iman nearly as much as the fact many Americans are understandably upset with sticking a mosque in a building damaged on 9/11.

We should ASSUME without evidence that Campus Crusade for Christ is named after the medieval crusades.

You might have a case if Campus Crusade for Christ represented a religion with 18,000 terror attacks since 9/11. Can you really not see the difference? Do you really believe the multi-cultural myth that all religions and cultures are the same? They are not, as Pamela Geller tries to warn us.

No, you provided a bunch of innuendo and unsubstantiated claims.

You mean like you and Ms. Geller?

You are the one who is claiming he is being dishonest. Provide some evidence.

I am speculating he may be being dishonest, which is a different question to the appropriateness of a mosque being built in a building damaged on 9/11. Would you support a Shinto temple at Pearl Harbor?

I never said you said no Mosques should be built. I said there are those in America who have said no Mosques should be built. That is clear evidence there are some who are bigoted against Muslims. I think Gellar is clearly one of these, although she has not made that particular claim.

Bryan Fischer is one such individual.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162- ... 03544.html

Here is his claim:

“This is for one simple reason,� he writes. “Each Islamic mosque is dedicated to the overthrow of the American government.�

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.c ... period.php

Brian has no more to do with this conversation than Osama Bin Laden.

As far as Gellar, here are some examples.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article ... Statements

When a mosque got fire-bombed in NY, Gellar suggested it was done by Muslims. When it was found out it was in fact done by someone with anti-Islamic views, she certainly did not retract her original outrageous claim.

http://search.yahoo.com/404handler?src= ... ire_attack




She defends the marines who urinated on dead Taliban Afghans.
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/ant ... se-marines



She posted a video suggesting Muslims have sex with goats.
http://www.cair.com/images/pamela_gelle ... ondoms.jpg

From the late nutcase the Ayatollah Khomeini:

"A man can have sex with sheep, cows and camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine."

Don't the buyers deserve a discount of some kind?

Khomeini's "Tahrirolvasyleh" fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990

"If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed and as quickly as possible and burned."

She admired Slobodan Milosevic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_Geller

In what context? Obama used to be pals with the terrorist Bill Ayers, yet that doesn't seem to bother people.

Geller has also lent her support to a number of other political causes. She has strongly defended former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević,[14] denied the existence of Serbian concentration camps in the 1990s,[18] said that black South Africans are engaging in a "genocide" against whites,

I don't know about genocide, but it is absolutely true that whites in South America are persecuted as blacks used to be. Think Zimbabwe, but to a lesser extent, for now. I spoke recently with a white South African emigre to Canada about this. Canada granted asylum to a white South African because he was persecuted due to his race. Would Obama have the guts to do that?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/se ... lum-seeker

The Canadian immigration board chairman said that the irrigation sprinkler salesman's evidence showed "a picture of indifference and inability or unwillingness" from the South African government to protect white citizens. He added: "Persecution of white South Africans by African South Africans [is] a common event today in South Africa."

[19] and expressed support for the far right English Defence League.[14][20]

I can see why you would be against a group who warns about radical Islam. Have they been responsible violent acts in the UK such as Muslims have committed? I would be a bit upset also if crazed Islamofascists detonated a suicide bomb on a US subway, and regularly preached treason.

She also claims Muslim groups "control information and how it is processed at senior levels of the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, and the various branches of the military."

Broadly speaking, you could make an argument for that. Exhibit A is that criminal at Ft. Hood was not given a dishonorable discharge for his outrageous statements. His fellow soldiers were afraid to say anything due to political correctness. As a result, many innocent people died.

Here is her own blog.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atla ... lgion.html

In this blog, she attacks Muslims in general for deigning to consider Moses, Abraham and others prophets of their religion. THis does not seem like a very religiously tolerant person.

So because you think another religion to be wrong it makes you intolerant? What does that make Islam. Is Ms. Geller calling for 'apostates' from her religion to be killed, as Sharia calls for, and as is supported by 85% of Egyptian Muslims?

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that takes on extremist groups of all stripes, has the following short article on Gellar.

The SPLC IS an extremist group. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45144

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/01/1 ... im-effort/


She seems to have suggested Obama was a love child of Malcolm X.

Tongue in cheek, probably. Maybe she meant he was Malcolm's son in spirit. I guess that makes her even with Obama, who recently claimed his dad was a WWII vet, and that Obamacare was passed by a big margin.

And here is another article describing Gellar as the looniest blogger ever.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/08/pamela ... gger-ever/

They include a link to this quote of Gellar's

"And I pray dearly that in the ungodly event that Tehran or its jihadi proxies (Hez’ballah, Hamas etc) target Israel with a nuke, that she retaliate with everything she has at Tehran, Mecca, and Medina……………

Not to mention Europe. They exterminated all their Jews, but that wasn’t enough. Those monsters then went on to import the next generation of Jew killers. (This New Hatred Comes from Muslim Immigrants. The Jewish People are Afraid Now)

So, if Iran nukes Israel, Israel should nuke Saudi Arabia and Europe???

I absolutely think Israel should threaten retaliation to other extremist Muslim nations, and their holy sites. They threaten Jerusalem, Israel threatens Mecca. What, do you want them to just lay down and take a nuke for Obama?

Really, this does not seem like a person rooted in reality, or given to being fair to those she disagrees with.

And I can say the same about Obama.

THis is not evidence. This is one guy, referred to only as "Barsky" in this article making a claim, and he does not provide any evidence either. This article goes on to describe funding of Mosques in the U.S. by the Saudi's. Even if we accept this, that does nto make them all Wahhabi.


Try again. This is not evidence for your claim.

Here is National Review talking about the 80% figure, which comes from Shia and other non-Whabbi Muslim community members:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/ ... n-schwartz

I have provided information on Gellar's untruths, and outrageous statments, based on advertising she actually put out and her own statements in her Atlas Shrugs blog.

Your attempt to smear Geller hasn't worked. It reminds me of when Reagan was running the lefty media was always talking about his 'gaffes' (Evil Empire, etc.) which most Americans loved and called telling the truth.

Can you provide any credible evidence that Rauf promotes violence or that his Mosque is intended as a "Victory Mosque?"[/size]

Here is an opinion that says Rauf made a veiled threat about getting his way on the mosque:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/ ... imams.html

Instead of saying if he doesn't get his mosque, there would be violence, he should be denouncing Muslims inclined to violence.