Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-09-2010, 08:05 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,293 posts, read 84,292,537 times
Reputation: 114641

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On View Post
"There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them."

It doesn't appear to be born out of anything but their own ideology of self-advancement.

The Iman of this new planned mosque, with his background of supporting terrorism and saying he is here for unity is just another example of this tactic. Right here - in our face - hiding in the broad daylight. But, we won't look at it. We won't call it for what it is. Another Ft. Hood type, with a record, that we refuse to acknowledge. We will call it "freedom of religion" when anyone that is opposed to our way of life and our Constitution, as written, should be stripped of their Constitutional rights.

That would go for illegals entering our country illegally, inmates that should not be allowed to vote, a soldier leaking information (treason), etc. A world gone mad.
Well, your personal perspective isn't everyone else's. I don't see that he has a record of supporting terrorism, for one, or that he is opposing "our way of life." I realize that you do, and that you believe fervently that everything he or any other Muslim is saying is a falsehood and that they want to take over. Therefore, we are never going to be able to agree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:17 AM
 
4,814 posts, read 3,834,955 times
Reputation: 1118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyqueen801 View Post
Well, your personal perspective isn't everyone else's. I don't see that he has a record of supporting terrorism, for one, or that he is opposing "our way of life." I realize that you do, and that you believe fervently that everything he or any other Muslim is saying is a falsehood and that they want to take over. Therefore, we are never going to be able to agree.
A very useful technique for determining the genuineness for those claiming to be "moderate" Islamists is to pose the question - "Do you support Hamas?"

"I'm not a politician," replied Rauf. "I try to avoid the issues. The issue of terrorism is a very complex question. ... I'm a bridge builder. I define my work as a bridge builder. I do not want to be placed, nor do I accept to be placed in a position of being put in a position where I am the target of one side or another."

This will leave the New York residents in a tough place. They are being denied political redress for their concerns.

Quote:
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has been dedicated to spreading the Wahhabi ideology that spawned al Qaeda — and 9/11. If Saudi money is meant to make this mosque part of that cause, don’t New Yorkers (of all people!) have a right to know?

Read more: Mosque nanny - NYPOST.com


Quote:
Muslim American Society
The Investigative Project on Terrorism
Dossier


http://www.investigativeproject.org/...ts/misc/85.pdf


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:30 AM
 
4,814 posts, read 3,834,955 times
Reputation: 1118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On View Post
Yet, this imam has a record of support for causes that have been sympathetic with terrorism. That is the issue. Let's keep our focus.

Another issue with Islam that is a concern is the particular term - TAQIYYA.

A Muslim is allowed to deceive a non-muslim IF it helps Islam. It is a principle and it is called, Taqiyya. Other religions speak highly of truthfulness and honesty, yet, Islam affords the opposite. The Qur'an instructs a Muslim to lie to non-muslims about their beliefs and their political ambitions in order to protect and spread Islam.

Muslim leaders will say one thing to the West and another thing to their followers in Arabic. Deceiving the enemy is useful in war and Islam is at war with the non-Islamic world until Sharia is enforced on all the world.
“My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America’s Muslim population into the mainstream society.” May 25, 2010, NY Daily News - Abdul Rauf

“I Do Not Believe in Religious Dialogue”. March 24, 2010, Rights4All - Abdul Rauf

Note: Rights4All is the website of the media department of Cairo University, the leading educational institution of the Arabic-speaking world.

Hiding in plain sight...... sigh.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:37 AM
 
46,891 posts, read 25,860,181 times
Reputation: 29355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On View Post
“My colleagues and I are the anti-terrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America’s Muslim population into the mainstream society.” May 25, 2010, NY Daily News - Abdul Rauf

“I Do Not Believe in Religious Dialogue”. March 24, 2010, Rights4All - Abdul Rauf

Note: Rights4All is the website of the media department of Cairo University, the leading educational institution of the Arabic-speaking world.

Hiding in plain sight...... sigh.....
It's fascinating how that exact one-sentence snippet is all over the right-wing echochamber, yet nobody seems to have a link to the text itself. I am getting very curious to see it in context. Besides, looking at Rauf's work history, it is pretty damn obvious that he's actually doing a boatload of interfaith dialogue.

And frankly, jumping from "He won't publicly denounce Hamas" to "He supports terrorism" is pretty damn low.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:45 AM
 
4,814 posts, read 3,834,955 times
Reputation: 1118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
It's fascinating how that exact one-sentence snippet is all over the right-wing echochamber, yet nobody seems to have a link to the text itself. I am getting very curious to see it in context. Besides, looking at Rauf's work history, it is pretty damn obvious that he's actually doing a boatload of interfaith dialogue.

And frankly, jumping from "He won't publicly denounce Hamas" to "He supports terrorism" is pretty damn low.
“Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more then just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Shariah that are required to govern. It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by [Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and the governed.”

“Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.” He added “New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad…so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Shariah.” Rights4All, Abdul Rauf

Go look it up. Or here Hadiyul-Islam, May 26, 2010
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:54 AM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,661,760 times
Reputation: 5131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
It's fascinating how that exact one-sentence snippet is all over the right-wing echochamber, yet nobody seems to have a link to the text itself. I am getting very curious to see it in context. Besides, looking at Rauf's work history, it is pretty damn obvious that he's actually doing a boatload of interfaith dialogue.

And frankly, jumping from "He won't publicly denounce Hamas" to "He supports terrorism" is pretty damn low.
I have heard him in interviews skirt around the Hamas question. He does not answer it. The "interfaith dialogue" may just be a cover for proselytizing. Generally, proselytizing is thought of as missionary type work, sharing one's faith and inducing them to convert. However, it's also defined as recruiting someone to join one's party, institution, or cause.

Your last point reminds me of the charge that is so often levied against moderate Muslims that if they don't publicly denounce terrorism, they must support terrorism.

I understand that some are speaking up, but I also understand there is a reluctance to do so because of centuries of tradition and teachings of their faith not to criticize another Muslim. Even moderates might have some difficulty overcoming that. I don't know if it represents any kind of risk to them if they do so, in which case fear may be a factor as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 10:00 AM
 
174 posts, read 372,294 times
Reputation: 120
There's an awful lot of this. Has anyone pointed out that it isn't a mosque and isn't at Ground Zero? Sounds like a very Republican debate to me, just a wee bit illiterate in its basic premisses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 10:01 AM
 
46,891 posts, read 25,860,181 times
Reputation: 29355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On View Post
“Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more then just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Shariah that are required to govern. It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by [Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and the governed.”

“Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.” He added “New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad…so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Shariah.” Rights4All, Abdul Rauf

Go look it up. Or here Hadiyul-Islam, May 26, 2010
If that was supposed to be a link, it didn't work. And frankly, more snippets bereft of context do not convince me. Not that it matters overly much, I am sure I'd much rather not live in a society as envisioned by Imam Rauf - or by any other number of clergy, no matter what faith.

The basic question still has to be: Is there freedom of religion in the United States? That does involve the freedom to seek to change the United States in a direction more in accordance with your faith - a right we freely extend to every congregation.

Personally, I think the entire fiath-as-basis-for-law is a really silly, outdated concept. But it is the right of my fellow man to work towards it. And as long as he doesn't break my bones or pick my pocket in doing so, well - freedom means acknowledging the less popular viewpoint's right to exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 10:01 AM
 
4,814 posts, read 3,834,955 times
Reputation: 1118
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
I have heard him in interviews skirt around the Hamas question. He does not answer it. The "interfaith dialogue" may just be a cover for proselytizing. Generally, proselytizing is thought of as missionary type work, sharing one's faith and inducing them to convert. However, it's also defined as recruiting someone to join one's party, institution, or cause.

Your last point reminds me of the charge that is so often levied against moderate Muslims that if they don't publicly denounce terrorism, they must support terrorism.

I understand that some are speaking up, but I also understand there is a reluctance to do so because of centuries of tradition and teachings of their faith not to criticize another Muslim. Even moderates might have some difficulty overcoming that. I don't know if it represents any kind of risk to them if they do so, in which case fear may be a factor as well.
I agree. All I want to do is make sure we have turned over every rock. We are making this issue (NYC mosque) as a freedom of religion issue. It is a bogus misdirection, IMO. It goes much deeper than that and we need to look at it. Shame on any of us that go into this thing blindly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-09-2010, 10:07 AM
 
4,814 posts, read 3,834,955 times
Reputation: 1118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
If that was supposed to be a link, it didn't work. And frankly, more snippets bereft of context do not convince me. Not that it matters overly much, I am sure I'd much rather not live in a society as envisioned by Imam Rauf - or by any other number of clergy, no matter what faith.

The basic question still has to be: Is there freedom of religion in the United States? That does involve the freedom to seek to change the United States in a direction more in accordance with your faith - a right we freely extend to every congregation.
Not when the basis of that faith undermines our Constitution subjugating us to Sharia Law. Saudi Arabia is the "hub" and "mothership" of Islam. They are the largest supporter of Sharia Law. That should be enough to raise an eyebrow for any Muslim work in this country.

Righst4All is a correct link. Hadiyul-Islam appears to have expired on Yahoo. You'll find what you need at Rights4All, if, you care to look.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top