“So, you’re offended? So fucking what?”

I am amazed that the Park 51 Community Centre or the so called “Ground Zero Mosque” debate in still chundering on, with no end in sight, despite the paucity of cogent arguments on why it should be opposed by those who oppose it.

Alex Massie’s comment on the “Ground Zero Mosque” is spot on:

One of the recurring arguments against the plan is that, however well-intentioned its backers may be, it represents an unfortunate and unnecessary “provocation”. Even if those involved mean no harm and don’t mean to “provoke” they should have been wise enough to appreciate that their proposal was bound to provoke a hostile reaction. Which means they should think again.

That’s certainly an argument; I just don’t think it’s a very good one. It is a familiar one, however. Cast your mind back 20 years and remember the rumpus that erupted when Salman Rushdie had the temerity, the gall, the bare-arsed effrontery to publish The Satanic Verses. There were those – including plenty of so-called liberals – who effectively sided with the book-burners and maniacs who protested against Rushdie (and the Penguin group) calling for the book to be banned.

Rushdie, you see, should have appreciated that publishing was bound toprovoke people and, this being so, he should have been wise enough to pulp his novel. Yes, yes, of course we all believe in the right to freedom of expression but, in this instance, is it really sensible to insist upon it in such a provocative fashion? If there’s a backlash, well, poor Rushdie has brought it upon himself hasn’t he? He should have known better.

It was, as Christopher Hitchens has often argued a telling and not-so small moment that showed how willing many soi-disant liberals were to abandon liberalism as soon as that liberalism was tested. Liberty must be trimmed or even abandoned for fear its expression might upset someone else. The “right” not to be offended trumped all other more ancient and worthwhile rights.

But no-one has the right not to be offended and to try and insist upon such a right is a) absurd b) wrong and c) deeply inimical to the values of the kind of society we like to think we may, in our better moments anyway, be.

As with the Rushdie case, so with this “Ground Zero Mosque”. You can be as offended by it as you want to be but the mere fact that you may be offended does not trump other, more vital, considerations and nor does it give you any kind of moral, let alone substantive, veto over proceedings. Your outrage is not persuasive and nor does it shift the fundamental aspects of the matter.

Which is why the sub-Augustinian stuff we’ve been hearing lately is so depressing. Grant me religious tolerance lord – and a respect for the Constitution! – but not here and not yet, not now! That, you must understand, would be too hard.

To oppose the building of GZM on the grounds that it is “offensive” or a “provocation” or “controversial” is puerile and reactionary. The depressing fact is not so much that plans for a religious edifice near the site of “Ground Zero” could be shafted lest it offend anyone, it is rather that there is a large contingent of Americans today for whom building a mosque almost anywhere in the USA is an affront.

It is not “anti-American” to make this observation, nor does a mosque have to be in the vicinity of the World Trade Centre in south Manhattan to be considered an offensive “provocation”.

Take a look at the anti-mosque antics in Sheboygan Wisconsin, where:

a few Christian ministers led a noisy fight against a Muslim group that sought permission to open a mosque in a former health food store bought by a Muslim doctor.

At one time, neighbors who did not want mosques in their back yards said their concerns were over traffic, parking and noise – the same reasons they might object to a church or a synagogue. But now the gloves are off.

In all of the recent conflicts, opponents have said their problem is Islam itself. They quote passages from the Quran and argue that even the most Americanized Muslim secretly wants to replace the Constitution with Islamic Shariah law.

Not every opponent of the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” is an anti-Muslim bigot with arguments rooted in prejudice. But if I were opposed to the GZM, I would be very keen to distinguish my set of reasons for opposing it from those by reactionary demagogues like Bill O’Reilly or Raheel Raza or even from a bunch of redneck farmers from Sheboygan, WI. Because at the moment, they are hardly indistinguishable at all.

If the reasons for opposing the mosque come down to not much more than being “offended”, then the response proffered by Stephen Fry in a conversation with Christopher Hitchens is without peer.

“So, you’re offended? So fucking what?”

Update: Good post from Gene at HP

This entry was posted in Anti Muslim bigotry, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Religion. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

76 Comments

  1. Abid ul-Abid ul-Nabi
    Posted August 20, 2010 at 10:51 AM | Permalink

    You lefties, you have to swear don’t you?

    Still rather that than come out with some of the spew that the right has come out with the G-ZERO mosque issue…

  2. Posted August 20, 2010 at 10:57 AM | Permalink

    That’s very sweet of you, Abid ul-Abid ul-Nabi.

  3. bananabrain
    Posted August 20, 2010 at 11:31 AM | Permalink

    who are you calling a leftie?

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  4. yantra the cat
    Posted August 20, 2010 at 11:56 AM | Permalink

    A friend made this observation about the GZM issue:

    “This is the mirror image of the MoToons affair”

    He’s right, isn’t he?

  5. Rachel
    Posted August 20, 2010 at 7:55 PM | Permalink
  6. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 12:00 AM | Permalink

    There are plenty of Mosques in NYC. There is no need to build a Mosque two blocks from ground Zero. It is in dreadful taste especially considering that 2900 of my fellow NYC residents were incinerated by people acting in the name of Islam. The Mosque belongs six or so blocks North where the actual local Muslim Community resides. The money should be raised from the local community as well.

    What name is the project going to take next?

    This is not a project financed by the local Muslim community. As this is being largely financed from abroad this is not the case of local Muslims being denied rights.

  7. Posted August 21, 2010 at 12:40 AM | Permalink

    “It is in dreadful taste especially considering that 2900 of my fellow NYC residents were incinerated by people acting in the name of Islam. “

    No end to the barrage of “bad taste” and “offended” tropes from the Palinite religious right in the US, is there? It’s as if they want the right not to be offended by their own prejudices!

    The church is not the universal symbol of American religiosity any more than the synagogue or the mosque is. Of the 2900 of your fellow NYC residents who were incinerated are some 60 Muslims whose names cannot be deleted from the record.

  8. John
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 1:42 AM | Permalink

    Another point of view;

    Muslims care nothing for others’ sentiments

    Do Muslims have the right to build a mosque near ground zero? Absolutely! But do they care about the sentiments of the people? Absolutely not! In fact, Muslims have shown utter disregard to the sentiments of the people worldwide. Here are a few examples:

    In India, most Muslims refuse to sing the Indian national anthem, claiming it is against their religion. The national anthem was composed more than 100 years ago and it says: Praise to the motherland, which is endowed with sweet water, fruits and fragrant air, etc. Muslims say only Allah deserves their praise. Of course, the same Muslims will not mind getting billions of rupees of Indian taxpayer money to make free trips to Mecca.

    In England, many Muslims routinely hurl abuses at veterans coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan. In the name of freedom of speech, they routinely criticize Christianity in mosques and proclaim that they will convert the people of England, the United States and the rest of the world to Islam. Several of these videos are available on YouTube. Please do watch these videos.

    So far, only two Muslims have won a Nobel Prize in science worldwide, and one is from Pakistan. His name is Dr. Abdus Salam, who died in 1996 in England. He was buried in Pakistan, according to his wish. His gravestone was ordered to be defaced by the magistrate to the horror of the Ahmadiyya community, which is not recognized as Muslim there. Also dozens of Hindu temples have been demolished by the government orders.

    Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence was behind the destruction of Bamian Buddhas and more than 5,000 Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. Many of these statues date back to the 2nd century B.C. Muslims in Pakistan cared little about the public uproar.

    Muslims are making full use of laws in the free world to their advantage and at the same time give no freedom to the minorities in their own country. It is high time they understand that playing with sentiments of majority of people can cause bitterness that may linger on for years.

    Vir Gupta
    Springfield

    http://www.sj-r.com/letters/x1371494023/Letters-Curious-about-Obama-hosting-Iftar-dinner

  9. Rachel
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:34 AM | Permalink

    Having just returned from America, I really think the ‘anti’ position is not that representative.

    The issue demonstrates how divided the US is now, between red/blue states, and rural/urban areas. In the ‘blue’ west coast city where I was, people don’t seem to oppose the Mosque and are aware of the right-wing machinations behind the ‘controversy’.

    My impression was that they may strongly oppose the Mosque in the rural town I visited 50 miles north (where some Christians seemed to be having their own troubles: apparently the Baptists were spreading rumours that the local female Presbyterian minister might be a witch).

    I don’t believe that the commentator from NY, who said on this site recently that most people in Manhattan oppose the Mosque, can be right.

    The point of the poem I posted the link to above was to remind people that there are other histories to the ‘Ground Zero’ site. Please don’t believe anyone who says that Americans are united in opposing the plans.

  10. Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:56 AM | Permalink

    I understand the public opposition to the GZM is a staggering 70%!

  11. Jasmine
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 12:13 PM | Permalink

    Provided that the mosque is in accordance with the planning laws and the rule of law, as well as the immediate neighbours of the district, the organisers have the right to build the mosque. As such, I support them.

    I am however, quite horrified at the complete lack of self awareness of the organisers of the project, as well as their championing of its proximity to ground zero as being the main reason for its righteousness. First of all, this is a sensitive issue, secondly, they themselves link their presence thereby to the act of 9/11, and thirdly, it just comes across as an exercise in dawah, using 9/11 as an exercise in dawah, and thus causing division and suspicion.

    I wish Americas Muslims had better leaders than this.

  12. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 12:32 PM | Permalink

    Rachel

    Unlike you I live here and work in the area near the Mosque. I am a Native NYC and grasp the city better than a person who visits. Most of the time NYC residents are too polite to tell Euros to can their condescending views on our local politics. Euros come here all the time and behave quite poorly. You would not appreciate Americans coming into your area and lecturing you on local issues or elected leaders.

    Even in very liberal NYC the opinions against the Mosque at its current location are 70%. There are more than 100 mosques in NYC. This project is not being funded by local Muslims. This is a foreign funded project from the same local as the 9-11 terrorists.

    Nor is all the opposition from the right as you delude yourself. Many people from sites such as Harry’s Place delude themselves with false expertise based on trips to NYC, LA and Disney accompanied by readings of Huffington and the NYT. Sorry,
    but the knowledge displayed by Michael Ezra, Gene and the usual suspects is abysmal and often comedic.

    An example of this was the description of Nuremberg Style so called Peace protests.
    One can find antisemites, truthers, communists and sometimes Holocaust deniers
    with ease. Americans showed pictures of this to the self described America experts
    who continue to claim the Peace Protests are not hateful. I have never seen anything like this at a Tea Party event and I actually searched for it. The so called America experts don’t believe the lack of arrests at Tea Party events is significant either.

  13. Posted August 21, 2010 at 1:04 PM | Permalink

    John – that piece you quote is a mishmash of random observations/facts. Some of them are horrific but they don’t seem to have much bearing on the mosque itself. I don’t think the large numbers of people opposing the mosque in the USA should be ignored, patronised or insulted – and I assume they represent many shades of opinion. But, from the perspective of those supporting the mosque (and I’m making the assumption their wish to build bridges is made in good faith) such opposition must also be hurtful. I read someone make an inteesting parallel between this case and a decision not to build a Christian convent near Auschwitz. But Christians in that context , unlike Muslims in this one, are not a minority group who sometimes feel that they are discriminated against and seen in a bad light.

  14. John
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 1:43 PM | Permalink

    Sarah, I’m sure some churches would be built in Saudi Arabia pretty soon to show Muslims really do want to build bridges.

  15. Posted August 21, 2010 at 3:29 PM | Permalink

    We’re not exactly enamoured of the Saudi religious orthodoxy on this site either, John. And we get plenty of insults thrown at us by Islamists (not to mention their tacit supporters and fellow travellers) for being critical of any aspect of Islamic sectarianism, if you care to take a look.

    But it’s tragic if defenders of Western values have to cite Saudi Arabian examples of sectarianism and religious narrow mindedness to back up their own, don’t you think?

  16. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 4:37 PM | Permalink

    The figure ” 70% ” opposing the mosque is exactly equal to percentage of Americans who wrongly believe 9/11 was masterminded by Saddam. This 70% figure has a direct bearing on fear-mongering propaganda used by USA as the precurser to invade Iraq, which has ultimately succeeded in making Islam the “enemy of USA ”

    Apparently, Al-Qaeda’s main goals in 9/11 were:
    1) to create panic in USA to destroy US economy
    2) to establish ENMITY against Islam, so that Arabs lose their ties with USA (Bin Laden hated the Saudis)

    These goals have been met today with double-dip recessions (caused by so-called “war”) and anti-Islam propaganda which were needed to drum-up support for war.

    Also, when Obama was running for President, Al-Qaeda had expressed their wish that he LOSES the election, as they feared he might bring Arabs closer to peace, and Islam less ‘feared’ in USA. Even though Obama won, today the third goal of Al-Qaeda has also been met.

    3) recent polls show 40% Americans think Obama is a Muslim !! when he is a devout church-going Christian.

    The militants are a happy twisted bunch, celebrating war, and peace is a mirage.

  17. Ron John
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 4:40 PM | Permalink

    Mr John

    ‘Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence was behind the destruction of Bamian Buddhas and more than 5,000 Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. Many of these statues date back to the 2nd century B.C. Muslims in Pakistan cared little about the public uproar.’

    I was on the border of Afghanistan before the destruction of the Buddhas, would you believe several Taliban commanders I met out on the Durand Line tried arduously to escort some of Kabul Museum’s Gandharan art to safety. Our sluggish attempts were thwarted by the thuggish behaviour of some Talibs who smashed it with pick axes. The ISI did not order their destruction it was actually Mullah Omar and a number of clerics.

    I should strongly advise against the reading of Beano and Dandy it can seriously impair rationale.

  18. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 5:11 PM | Permalink

    John,
    You should also read the shenanigans of Hindu extremism in India, to balance their propaganda against Islam.

  19. alfie
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 6:45 PM | Permalink

    Given that the ISI was (and still is) hand in glove with the Taliban, its only really an issue of how many degrees of separation there were between Mullah Omar and the rest.

  20. Annie
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 8:04 PM | Permalink

    Pakistan’s senior scribe Irfan Hussain on the NYC Mosque: Is it Faith or Fitna?

    http://tinyurl.com/252bxqo

    Hussain concludes that this is clear fitna.

  21. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 8:48 PM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    You are not good with the numbers as the polls state around 24% not 40%. Given the actual religious quirks of Pastor Wright, Islam would be an improvement. The MSM has given the basic facts of his life inspection. His school and employment records are hidden. I am not a birther, but the degree of secrecy is unheard of in the modern era.

    Onto Hinduism. Jews, Christians, Jains and Zoroastrians had zero problems living with Hindus long before the European colonization. In fact the expansion of Islam into India was accompanied by large scale slaughter. India provided two ethnically
    cleansed states and Muslims refused to leave and demand even more territory.

    As for the Hindu community I have spent the last year in the local Hindu community in NYC. I have been welcomed into the community on a local level and am active at community events. I help raise money for local groups. My relationship with a Hindu woman is supported by the community. The reason is quite simple I respect the traditions that are not my own.

  22. Rachel
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 8:55 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin for the record
    I’m not a Euro – not a New Yorker either, though my father is.
    Not a fan of Harrys Place either and certainly wouldn’t rely on them to form my political opinions!

  23. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 9:23 PM | Permalink

    Rachel

    Correction noted. I do not know what Americans you are talking to. You are obviously not talking to the people in the polls. I work a very short distance from the proposed Mosque and frequently drink with my coworkers at the Dakota Roadhouse next to the proposed Mosque. The site is in the middle of the block and I expected worse.

    There has been a local Muslim community about six blocks North. A mosque built by the locals and for the local community where it exists would raise no objections.
    Just North of Chambers on Church Street is the local Muslim community. No doubt Mosques probably existed there before 9-11 and are there now.

    Harry’s Place provides some good articles but the bombastic arrogance of Michael Ezra and Gene are a bit much. Michael Ezra has a very poor grasp of America and seems to have zero respect for how our systems work. Do note that Americans in large really do not care who leads whatever foreign country so long as the over the top rhetoric is toned down.

  24. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 9:43 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,

    The Obama figures are “A new national survey by the Pew Research Center finds that nearly one-in-five Americans (18 percent) now say Obama is a Muslim, up from 11 percent in March 2009. Only about one-third of adults (34 percent) say Obama is a Christian, down sharply from 48 percent in 2009. Fully 43% say they do not know what Obama’s religion is.” As you can see the propaganda against him makes these figures constantly dynamic !!

    Many of my closest friends are Hindu. But you have to get the facts right about massacre in India too.

    Ancient Indian history, when there were none but Hindus, is full of events “accompanied by large scale slaughter” by Hindus. Asoka the Hindu ruler controlled his empire with the sword, and massacre of entire regions was much too common a method of conquering territory in those days, long before Muslims applied the same strategies in India centuries later.

    Not only that, long before the arrival of Muslims, when Buddha’s preaching of equality-for-all was seen as a threat to Hindu Caste system, the ‘superior-caste’ Brahmins burnt and destroyed thousands of peace-loving Buddhists in India, until Buddha himself was driven away from India to Burma Thailand and onwards.

    Thats how Buddhism expanded into Far-East where Buddha took refuge, from the “large scale slaughter” by Hindus in India.

    The Hindu community are not too proud of their violent past, you wont hear much about this from them. But denouncing Muslims for all the bads of History is not a good way to promote harmony in the community.

  25. Rachel
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 10:03 PM | Permalink

    I wonder how the questions in the polls are posed – maybe Beakerkin or Faisal knows. When I first heard about the this issue it was put that a mosque was going to be built on the site of Ground Zero. I also thought that maybe it was something to do with London’s Cordoba Foundation. So for those reasons I didn’t much like the sound of it. I still don’t know that much about the project, but I do know both those things are entirely wrong. A lot of the opposition to the project may well be based on such utter ignorance. And after decades of damage to the education system, including damage inflicted by Christian fundamentalists, Americans can be
    pretty darn ignorant.

    Beakerkin is far more erudite than say, Sarah Palin, but pretty quickly the underlying prejudice comes out, and clearly you draw little or no distinction between those who carried out the 911 attacks and Muslims in general. You write beautifully, but are making sweeping generalisations that really only show your own ignorance.

    Well, if you want to talk about Hinduism I’m up for it as I’ve just been reading Chetan Bhatt on Hindu nationalism. Wow, after reading about Savarkar and Golwalkar, Mawdudi looks almost sensible! Hindu right-wing fundamentalist movements are in no way less murderous than their counterparts in Islamic or Christian fundamentalism. If you are involved with a Hindu community in NYC and don’t know about history and rise of Hindutva in India, you should probably look into it.

    I’m not intending to pick on Hindus here, just to point out that it’s totally wrong to suggest that fundamentalist or fascist movements define an entire religion.

  26. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 10:18 PM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    As Obama has deservedly kept his vulgar ( Rev Wright) religious views low key this leaves plenty of room for those who say I don’t know. Obama is not classically Christian in the manner of recent Presidents. Any examination of the views of his racist reverend preaching “Black Liberation Theology” would kill Obama in the polls so the MSM allowed him to feign ignorance despite 20 years of membership.

    I am not disputing the history of Buddhists in India but Islam has its own chapters of abusing them as well. The fact remains that Jews, Christians and many others lived in peace in India for quite a while. Any notion that Hinduism is intolerant is laughable considering others did quite well. As Islam the history of whole sale slaughter of Hindus by Muslims remains a fact.

    India generously provided two independent states for Muslims that were ethnically cleansed. Muslims remained in India and still demand more real estate.
    One can pick up plenty of items that say made in India. Other than a few items of garments I can not recall much made in Pakistan and zero produced in Bangladesh.

    India created the finest University system on the planet IIT grads are known for their skill. By contrast MIT is known for a nutty linguistics professor. Even the most accomplished of many of Pakistan’s scientists are mistreated by a rouge society that persecutes Ahmadis.

  27. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 10:40 PM | Permalink

    Rachel

    Once again you fail reading 101. There is zero problem with Mosques in NYC. The false sense of victimization of Muslims like Faisal really are preposterous. There are over one hundred mosques in NYC and there has been a thriving Muslim community North of Chambers Street about six blocks North. This is not the case of local Muslims trying to build a Mosque and being denied by bigots. This is a foreign sponsored project that was purposely placed in an area in the shadow of Ground Zero that is offensive to survivors of 9-11 (myself included) and Americans.
    Despite Faisal and Kgazi’s word games 2900 people were incinerated there by people acting in the name of Islam. While Faisal is quick to say I do not agree with incinerating people in office buildings. He fails to grasp the magnitude of the crime and refers to the area as “expensive real estate”. Mosques probably do exist about six blocks North and serve the local community.

    Onto India

    Fact Muslims invaded the area and butchered large numbers of Hindus
    Fact Muslims were given two ethnically cleansed states and still demand more real estate as well as the right to remain in India. Where are the rights of Hindus and the highly persecuted Christians of Pakistans? Bangladesh has been a literal mess since its creation.

    Hindus got along very well with Jews and other religious minorities. The claim that Hinduism is intolerant by Muslims is comedic.

    Far left types need to look at actual history. Muslims are not victims and need to deal with their history of colonialism, Jim Crow style abuses of minorities and the legacy of terrorism before we can deal with where do we go from here.

  28. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:03 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,

    Your association with Indians has produced another Indian propagandist in you, constantly comparing what India exports and what its Neighbors do, as if this comparison tells us how supreme is India above its neighbors. This is horrendous for communal harmony, and explains why India is so far behind China, with a Nuclear Neighborhoood of India & Pakistan pointing their Nukes at each other along their own borders. How wonderful is the community!!

    Since you so like statistics, With One Billion Population, India has never won an Olympic Gold Medal, and I attribute this failure to their constant poking of religion as a topic of comparison between its own neighbors. Instead of developing and re-building their region – they are constantly at each others throat comparing their Gods and Goddesses. Are YOU turning into an Indian ?

    Oh, India and Pakistan do have one talent in common – they both win Olmypic bronze medals in SHOOTING. They get plenty of practice in Kashmir !!

  29. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:46 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin says; “Hindus got along very well with Jews and other religious minorities. The claim that Hinduism is intolerant by Muslims is comedic.”
    ————-

    How about this:
    http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4911

  30. Beakerkin
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:46 PM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    Would you like to look at the transcripts of Indian grads from IIT, Osmania, Periyar,IGNOU, Pune. When was the last time Pakistan produced anything. I can say that as a person familiar with H1B visas in the USA Pakistani educated recipients are very rare.The few H1B slots that come from Muslim nations are almost entirely from Iran. The Universities there function in spite of theocrats and were created long before the 1979 revolution.

    Where are the great Universities in Muslim countries outside of Iran? Why is it that
    Muslims need to send their kids to the West to get an education. Lets see India produces scores of engineers and Pakistan produces what???? India had the fortune of being run by the Nehru clan who valued education. As poor Indira Ghandis son repaired relations with Washington and moved away from socialism progress was made.

    India is a thriving democracy with some minor issues with communist criminals and Muslim terrorists. The contrast between Pakistan, Bangladesh and India shows what can be achieved with secular democracy as opposed to ethnically cleansed thugocracies.

    For the record I spend my time amongst the IndoGuyanese and IndoTrinidadian communities. Muslims, Hindus and Christians get along and there are Afro-Indian
    racial issues as well. The nation does quite well as the Guyanese left all the old world garbage behind. Unfortunately socialists mismanaged the place and everyone gets along and moves to Queens or Toronto at the first opportunity.

    Take the Olympic medals and place them where the sun doesn’t shine. Olympic medals are not as valuable as world reknown universities.

    I remain an American patriot.

  31. Kgazi
    Posted August 21, 2010 at 11:49 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,
    Your comparative theocrap is highly unproductive.

    http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4911

  32. Beakerkin
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 12:00 AM | Permalink

    Lets go over this slowly as you are not the swiftest.

    1) Do you wish to claim that Christians are treated well in Pakistan. This is not true and any comparison between India and Pakistan on the subject of Christianity is comedic.

    Muslims who convert to Christianity are sentenced to death under those wonderful humanitarian laws by government means.

    2) The article mentions Dalits and affirmative action created chaos and death by creating a spolis system for jobs.

    3) Historically many Indian Christians have lived in Kerala with little or no incedents. They are Syrian Christians and got there the familiar way by fleeing Muslim persecution.

    4) Unlike Pakistan, Syria or whatever thugocracy you wish India has a functional government that will deal with these issues.

    5) We could talk about Hindus in Pakistan but the place is practically ethnically cleansed and is still a mess.

  33. Posted August 22, 2010 at 2:26 AM | Permalink

    Personally, I doubt very much this silly point scoring along the lines of “My fascism is way better than your fascism” is going anywhere.

    Though I do agree with every word of this comment from by David All left on Harry’s Place from this thread:

    Look, I have no trouble believing that Islam is more prone to violence than other major religions with Christianity being a close second. And yes currently there is a sizeable minority in Islam that is sympathetic to extremism, much more so than any other major religion. But the large majority of the world’s Muslims are not violent nor sympathetic to those who are. People like Imam Rauf are a good representative of their viewpoint. Because the violent Islamists will see a mosque/Islamic center that close to Ground Zero as a victory for them, I believe that Imam Rauf and his group should accept NY Governor Patterson’s offer to find a new location for their proposed Islamic Center.

    Note: For Christian conservatives after nearly 2,000 of religious anti-Semitism to suddenly embrace Judaism as an ally in their imagined holy war with all of Islam is truly an act of chutzpha.

  34. Beakerkin
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 3:32 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    With the exception of denominations infested with liberation theology most Churches have dealt with their history of abuse of Jews. I will contrast this with the fairy tale lies that minorities lived peachy lives under the rule of Islam.

    Muslims need to stop this inane victimization dance and deal with their history.

    When is the last time you picked up something other than a shoddy garment that said made in Pakistan. Haiti will get its act together before Pakistan.

  35. Posted August 22, 2010 at 11:09 AM | Permalink

    Muslims need to stop this inane victimization dance and deal with their history.”

    Yes agree with that. But the irony is that in the GZM debate is that the “inane victimization” has been played up for all it is worth from your side of the debate. In fact “victimization” [sic], petulant “offence” and knuckle-dragging prejudice are the only ‘cards’ your lot has played. All that and a complete lack of principle.

    However having said that, I believe that the GZM should bow to public sentiment. Not to all of it, much of which is largely a baying mob. But to that thin sliver of opinion which is the genuine expression of hurt caused by the presence of the GZM. It would not be capitulation to empathise with their sentiments.

    That’s why I now believe the GZM should not be built on that particular site and moved to another location.

  36. Kgazi
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 4:37 PM | Permalink

    Since we dont see anything made in USA anymore either, and there is already a mosque 6 blocks away, why another one 2 blocks away, or even zero blocks away, would make any difference to the religiosity of GZero, which is surrounded by porn-shops and sleazy bars anyway, is only Sarah-Palinic pink strawberry hype. Basically there is no substance to it.

  37. Beakerkin
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 5:41 PM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    Lets go through this again Muslims have lived and worked in the area long before 9-11.Their enclave is roughly six blocks just North of Chambers Street. There are many businesses run by Muslims that I frequent in the area. There is likely a Mosque already serving this community without indecent.

    The proposed Mosque is not something built by the local community. It is not located where the local community is as it is roughly six blocks South. This structure is not financed by local Muslims who are being denied a place to pray.
    This is an over sized foreign sponsored monstrosity not even in the area where the local Muslims reside.

    The sponsors of the Mosque could have easily moved to the area where Muslims reside and conduct business each and every day. Not only is this not in the area where Muslims conduct business it is way too close to Ground Zero were 2900 people were incinerated in three war crime attacks on the WTC committed in the name of Islam. There was one attack in 1993 and two on 9-11. In the area are many survivors of those war crimes committed against civilians.

    There are projects that are simply not appropriate for certain locations. This is more so because this is a foreign sponsored mega mosque around six blocks South
    where the Muslim community works. Unfortunately, Ground Zero is the site of war crimes committed against the USA in the name of Islam.

    Since you are so great with statistics try enlightening this grizzled NYC resident on what percentage of Muslims in select countries think 9-11 is a Zionist or CIA plot.
    Much of the responsibility for that lies with Commies who profane the area with antisemitic conspiracy literature. Of course Michael Ezra and Gene are not going
    to focus on this much because Huffington and the NYT are not likely to report on
    the vulgar activities of commies that are well known to NYC residents.

    Of course after 9-11 the folks at CAIR played word games in interviews. Rather than come out like stand up fellows like Stephen Schwartz of the Center of Islamic Pluralism they waffled and gave unclear statements. Regular Muslim Americans have zero difficulty condemning these war crimes by name but the folks at CAIR parse words. The community has not exactly been co-operative with law enforcement in the prevention of future war crimes. Most of the attacks have been foiled by incompetence and luck.

  38. Kgazi
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 7:19 PM | Permalink

    This is where you are Wrong !!

    9-11 is not a war crime, created by Islam. It was a criminal act by a handful of muslim militants, funded by Al-Qaeda, a banned group disowned by Islamic church.

    Had 9-11 been a war crime by Islam, then NO MOSQUES would be allowed in NYC. But if you allow even one mosques, then your refusal-theory goes down the drain. Yet there are 9 mosques in NYC ?

    An “islamic war-crime” is exactly what you are trying to portray, by creating an Islam-free zone in Gzero, and trying to establish an ANTI_ISLAMIC SHRINE there, a world class symbol against Islam in Ground Zero. Even if you deny such design, the entire population of Muslims will see GZero as such an attempt – because an Islamic participation was denied in the GZero. Admit it – and thats the psychology behind your refusal.

    The more you support such an anti-islamic shrine, the more will USA divulge away from the purity of American “freedom and liberty”. Whereas the Statue of Liberty is symbol of peace, the GZero will forever remain in the eyes of muslims, as the statue of Anti-Islamic Hatred, a symbol of hypocrisy.

  39. Beakerkin
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 7:48 PM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    The war crimes committed three times at Ground Zero were committed in the name of Islam. Other than Stephen Schwartz of the CIP ( who is against the mosque) Muslim leaders in America played word games with the American people. The folks at CAIR could have easily stated as Schwartz did without word games that the attacks at the WTC were not in the name of his religion. Then again Schwartz is quite vocal stating that terrorism and apartheid laws hurt the cause of Islam.

    Who banned Al Queda? Al Queda operates openly in parts of Pakistan and the local Pashtuns know exactly where the leaders are. Familiar thugocracies have not stopped the flow of money or the bombastic rhetoric. Although the leaders are not
    quite vocal in support of terrorism. If you are a pencil necked geek ruler of Syria you are not so eager to tangle with the USA. Even Iran has turned most of its rhetoric to Israel.

    9-11 was a war crime committed in the name of Islam. This does not infer all Muslims are guilty. However, like everyone else they have a duty to co-operate with law enforcement especially where public safety and national security are involved.

    There is a profound difference between America and your Islamic thugocracies as typified by Syria, Saudi Arabi, Iran and Pakistan. We respect the rule of law and the right of people to PEACEABLY practice their faith. There are over 100 mosques in NYC and with the rare exception of an incident over 30 years ago with the Nation of Islam ( not considered Muslim by most Muslims) and NYPD it has been uneventful.

    Ground Zero is a place where survivors like myself work each and every day. The notion of an “anti Islamic shrine” is laughable if you are familiar with the area. The local community has plenty of businesses on Church Street about six blocks North.
    The businesses have flourished and serve the public without fanfare or notice. I frequent many of the establishments myself.

    This is a foreign funded affront to NYC residents. The mosque should be built where the Muslim community resides to the North.

    Given the serious nature of the War Crimes committed in the name of Islam, Muslims should understand why Americans want this project located up the block.

  40. Kgazi
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 7:59 PM | Permalink

    Based on your theory, therefore, Iraq War was a war crime in the name of Christianity, where 150,000 innocent muslims were incenerated in the holy land of islamic history. Therefore Christians should be denied in the Holy land,a nd USA is a war criminal. That is as laughable as your argument, and therefore the hypocrisy of the GZero shrine is sound.

  41. Beakerkin
    Posted August 22, 2010 at 8:25 PM | Permalink

    Lets run this back

    Iraq is the Holy land? Where do you get the number 150,000 from. Divide that inflated number by the deaths caused by Baathist (Arab Socialist) Saddam before you point fingers. Moreover, Saddam could have left for France with his family for a comfortable exile with his French buddies. Rather than conveying the seriousness of the situation the French, Germans and Russians emboldened Saddam. Saddam likely though the USA would leave like the last time.

    Sorry, but your analogy is off.

    Christians are fleeing the region anyway due to poor treatment by Muslims in their indigenous lands.

  42. Posted August 22, 2010 at 11:00 PM | Permalink

    “Christians are fleeing the region anyway due to poor treatment by Muslims in their indigenous lands.”

    Oh stop talking out of your arse will you.

  43. Beakerkin
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:30 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    Would you care to tell that to the Coptic, Assyrians and Maronite Christians who are in the NYC Immigration Office? The percentage of Christians in the Middle East has been dropping for years. Of course people vote with their feet.

    While you are entitled to your own opinions you are not entitled to your own facts.

  44. Kgazi
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:42 AM | Permalink

    “Iraq is the Holy land?”
    ——-

    This demonstrates the ignorance that USA produces, and the downfall of US economy & society. Like ‘empty vessels that sound much’ these bogus liberty wallas have no idea about the history of Iraq, and like swaggering cowboys have the gall to BS about Islam.

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

  45. Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:42 AM | Permalink

    Sorry, I thought you were referring to reverse gentrification in parts of New York! My misreading, apologies.

    Yes of course the situation of Christians in the Middle East is appalling, as it is with Dalit Christian converts in India. I hope the US will widen its Immigration ports in India to protect these people from the terrible oppression they currently face.

  46. John
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 1:46 AM | Permalink

    In 2006, British filmmakers went undercover at London’s Central Mosque, a prominent center of worship that had long cultivated a moderate image. The resulting footage instead showed imams saying that God orders the faithful to kill homosexuals, that women should not have the same rights as men, and that followers should limit their contact with non-Muslims.

    The documentary noted that the mosque — whose public outreach masked a private hate — was funded by Saudi Arabia.

    While the debate regarding the mosque at Ground Zero has focused primarily on the sensitivity of the survivors versus the constitutional rights of Muslims, the real question is who will be funding the $100 million Islamic center.

    If it is the Saudis, as seems likely considering their wealth and influence, then America should be concerned.

    This would be the ultimate victory for al Qaeda: to have its views taught to American Muslims at the site of its greatest strike. Keeping Saudi influence out of the new mosque is more important than keeping the mosque out of Ground Zero.

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/on_mosque_beware_the_saudis_GzrsJDAMaueKfWZLXkuSYI

  47. Beakerkin
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 1:53 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    I have been a lone voice in the wilderness for expanding the Lautenberg Laws to include Christians in Middle Eastern countries as well as Ahmadis and Bhai. Somehow I have confidence in India’s ability to get things right. Indian justice will resolve those matters.

    I have a problem with the Asylum area. The law is precisely meant to protect people such as gays fleeing Zimbabwe and Christians fleeing Egypt. Many of our slots are being wasted by bogus claims of Female Genital Mutilation and Chinese Family Planning cases.

    The area needs reform.

    Kgazi

    Actually Kgazi you are in over your head. I am familiar with the history of the area
    and your lack of knowledge is astounding.

    As for your contemptuous remarks about America it is you who have much to learn. Remember, that NYC is very genteel and you would be likely to be laughed at as a bumpkin here. I can assure you in rural Vermont where I resided for some time you might get a wedgie or worse with that attitude.

    You have zero idea who I am and the life I have led. You might find it amusing that in Northern Vermont I was mistaken for Muslim because I drink almost no alcohol.
    When locals spoke against a local Vermont Muslim family owning a local business I made it my point to buy my gas there every day even with the wacked out Jew hating middle brother. My message was quite clear that if I as a WTC survivor could befriend Muslims the rest of you can STFU.

    Of course with your lousy attitude I would not recommend visiting the heartland.
    Americans take their liberties and freedoms seriously and your attitude could get you into serious trouble.

    I do not believe in the Disney version of Muslim history. However, until Muslims can deal with their history and respect others we can not move forward.

  48. Kgazi
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 3:13 AM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,
    Your self-proclaimed knowledge has been missing in this discussion with comments like
    “Iraq is the Holy land? Where do you get the number 150,000 from.”
    The link I repeat below shows the death in Iraq probably far more than 150,000.

    I dont blame you for such shocking statements, it’s the US media and politics that generates it, and sadly its this lack of information that creates the attitudes in Ground Zero.

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

  49. Beakerkin
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 3:45 AM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    Lets see a terrorist blows up a Mosque or a road side bomb and the number gets added in. The 150,000 is significantly less than Saddam butchered in peace time.

    Iraq is not the Holy Land. All of the States in the region were produced by an Anglo French treaty. I will not bandy history with one who has shown aptitude for it.

    The attitudes in Ground Zero were created by three war crimes committed in the name of Islam. It is remarkable considering the level of carnage that you and many
    others fail to grasp why a foreign subsidized Mega Mosque in the shadow of this war
    crime would be offensive to many Americans.

    What you fail to grasp is that these war crimes in NYC, Beslan, Mumbai and elsewhere are responsible for damaging the cause of Islam more than the critics of
    Islam. There is zero excuse or rationalization for incinerating 2900 people in office building, shooting school kids in the back or attacking people in hotels in and Chabad Houses in Mumbai.

    Given this history Muslims need to stop making excuses and pointing fingers. Wafa Sultan points out that these behaviors are inexcusable.

    Yet there is a cancerous parasite rationalizing these crimes and stoking behavior
    that is beyond the pale of humanity. The far left in the West shares much of the blame for the rationalization of behavior that is inexcusable. The far left has sought to make common cause with terrorists and can be counted upon to stab the West in the back.

    While the Towers were still burning and the stench of fiery evil lingered in the air Communists on the Saturday after 9-11 held a Nuremberg style rally and blamed the Jews for 9-11. The conspiracy talk started while the buildings were still burning.

    Of course with the far left rationalizing inexcusable behavior and the most outrageous claims there can be no peace. The far left does not want peace as it gets its power from strife.

  50. Kgazi
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 4:11 AM | Permalink

    ” The 150,000 is significantly less than Saddam butchered in peace time. ”

    Doesnt matter what Saddam did. As foreigners, if USA killed 150,000 + in a Holy Land, then is USA any better than the 9-11 terrorists?

  51. Posted August 23, 2010 at 10:13 AM | Permalink

    “The attitudes in Ground Zero were created by three war crimes committed in the name of Islam. It is remarkable considering the level of carnage that you and many”

    It’s quite interesting that in spite of that faux man-of-the-world artifice you’ve adopted, when it comes to Islam and Muslims you are willing to let your guard down ease into bigotspeak. The 9/11 atrocity was not “done in the name of Islam” any more than the Mumbai atrocity was, or any of the hundreds of suicide missions in Pakistan, killing thousands. The large majority of Muslims want to live peaceably and reject extremism outright. In every society where Islamists attempt to gain power by the electoral vote, they invariably fail miserably to win the mandate.

    “I have been a lone voice in the wilderness for expanding the Lautenberg Laws to include Christians in Middle Eastern countries as well as Ahmadis and Bhai. Somehow I have confidence in India’s ability to get things right. Indian justice will resolve those matters.”

    Somehow I don’t think your “confidence” imparts any confidence or hope for the Dalit victims of Indian social bigotry themselves. Nor do I think the situation is going to be resolved at all nor is the problem going away anytime soon, since oppression of the Dalits has been a demonstrable aspect of India’s history for the last two or three thousand years. When you say that the problem will resolve itself, then you begin to ape the average Indian upper-caste reactionary, who are more than happy for Dalits to remain oppressed.

  52. Posted August 23, 2010 at 10:28 AM | Permalink

    John posts this:

    The documentary noted that the mosque — whose public outreach masked a private hate — was funded by Saudi Arabia.

    While the debate regarding the mosque at Ground Zero has focused primarily on the sensitivity of the survivors versus the constitutional rights of Muslims, the real question is who will be funding the $100 million Islamic center.

    If it is the Saudis, as seems likely considering their wealth and influence, then America should be concerned.

    Well, I would be more than happy to see the end of Saudi funding of mosques and their associated pro-Saudi brand of cod-Wahhabi salafism.

    But it is a bit rich for the religious right wing , from Gingrich to Geller, to use the claim of Saudi funding as yet another pretext to attack the GZM, yet they will say nothing about the fact that Saudi Arabia buys weapons from the USA amounting to a jaw-dropping $60 billion!

    U.S. Weapons Sale to Saudi Arabia Said to Reach $60 Billion

    Where is your “outrage” now, john?

  53. Rachel
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 10:28 AM | Permalink

    Faisal, can you let us know which voices have caused you to decide that the GZM should not be built (or should be moved)? To me that would definitely seem like a capitulation to the likes of Beakerkin who, underneath his veneer of sophistication (“faux man-of-the-world artifice” is perfect) comes out with the most outrageous anti-Muslim chauvinism.
    What has made you change your mind?

  54. Rachel
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 10:32 AM | Permalink

    Oh maybe its to do with possible Saudi funding – I haven’t been reading John’s posts, for some reason.

  55. Posted August 23, 2010 at 10:57 AM | Permalink

    Rachel

    No it’s nothing to do with Saudi funding, because there is hardly a large mosque building project of the last two decades in the west, which has not involved Muslims going to the Saudis with a begging bowl for a contribution.

    These are the reasons why I have come to the conclusion:

    1) There is, most certainly, a genuine sentiment of hurt caused by the 9/11 atrocity, that exists amongst victims’ families. Now in spite of the fact that the large majority of those opposing the GZM are nothing more than racists and anti-Muslim bigots, the existence of a small but real body of sentiment does exist out there cannot be ignored in spite of the emergence of opportunists who have shown no scruple when it comes to milking that sentiment for all it is worth. However, to ignore it would be adding insult to injury.

    2) Building a mosque at Ground Zero would be seen as a victory by the violent Islamists. And that is a sizeable minority who should not granted that victory without their having lifted a finger to win it.

    3) This is is no longer a battle of rights and logic. The opposition to the mosque is entirely about offence and sentiment. And with 70% of opinion against the mosque, Muslims will lose a massive PR battle if they force through the move and build on that site. Whereas it would be a PR victory if the centre is simply moved and built on another location. There would be no harm done and it would score a point against the anti-Muslim bigots.

    These are my reasons. What do you think?

  56. Beakerkin
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 11:38 AM | Permalink

    Rachel

    You are not the sharpest tool in the shed.

    Faisal

    The attacks mentioned were indeed war crimes carried out in the name of Islam. Now you can pretend otherwise and correctly point out that most Muslims disagree with the mindless violence.

    Muslims are not the only people who face injustices on the planet. Yet one does not see other people carrying out these blatant attacks aimed at civilians. One can
    look at religious and ethnic minorities living under Islam and not see this blatant disregard for human life.

    India is a country that has a competent judiciary and well respected leaders. The question of the Dalits is an illustration of the chaos when social engineers set up a group spoils system. It is one thing to demand better schools and conditions. It is quite another to impose reverse discrimination on people solely on the basis of group membership. India has a sound legal system and has made much progress in the area. The powers that be will remedy the situation.

    Countries with sound legal and democratic traditions make progress. The fate of the Dalits has improved just as some similar inequites in America took time. The laws of refugee and asylum were designed for political and religious reasons not
    economic refugees.

    As for dealing with history and false claims of bigotry. One can be a patriot in the American tradition and have zero problems dealing with the history of America in terms of slavery and Native Americans. Muslims need to get to the same place with their own history.

    The claim that Iraq is “Holy Land” is based upon what. The Asyrian Christians and Kurds were there prior to Arab invasions. Are we going back to the concept of infidel free land?

    Sorry, but Iraq is not Holy and it is a facetious leap to claim the history of the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians with the current residents. The exception
    being the Assyrians are likely related to the culture with the same name.

    Lastly weapons sales have zero to do with Mosques.

  57. Posted August 23, 2010 at 11:47 AM | Permalink

    “The attacks mentioned were indeed war crimes carried out in the name of Islam. Now you can pretend otherwise and correctly point out that most Muslims disagree with the mindless violence.”

    They were no more the crimes carried out in the name of Islam than the Koresh death cult in Waco Texas, or the Jonestown cyanide massacres were crimes committed in the name of Christianity. If you posit the first, you’ll have to provide an explanation of why the the second and third don’t apply to your thesis.

    “It is quite another to impose reverse discrimination on people solely on the basis of group membership. India has a sound legal system and has made much progress in the area. The powers that be will remedy the situation.”

    India has a sound legal system but it has done nothing to with the entrenched bigotry and undermining of the rights of the Dalits. And to say that the judicial system will deal with the phenomenon of searing oppression of the dalits is, in and of itself, a silly and ineffective bromide. A peculiar acknowledgement that this is the status quo you are comfortable with.

    Also, I was not talking about the requirements or provisions for “positive discrminiation” for Dalits. Rather, there is the far more pressing phenomenon of anti-Christian bigotry, which is blighting the lives of millions of Dalits in India. Let’s talk about the oppression first!

    “Lastly weapons sales have zero to do with Mosques”

    Oh, it most certainly does, particularly when the weapon sales are to Saudi Arabia, who whether you like it or not, is USA’s closest strategic ally of the Arab states. And since you now claim that Saudi contributions to the construction of the GZM is an indictment, do explain why that is inappropriate but investment in the US arms industry is not.

  58. Rachel
    Posted August 23, 2010 at 12:38 PM | Permalink

    Faisal, you sound sensible, as usual (though you do know it’s not ‘at Ground Zero’ don’t you? ) But if I read plea for the cancellation of the project by someone who doesn’t promote the racist superiority of other religions/’civilisations’ over Islam then I will be more sympathetic. But, as it looks now, it would be a capitulation to the bigots and idiots.

    Beakerkin, I wonder if you even realise the service to which some of your arguments are put – your insistence on the benign nature of Hinduism and the belief that the Indian judiciary will sort everything out. I wonder if you are even aware of the fact that some of those successful Indian immigrants you praise are complicit in atrocities against minorities in India by promoting and funding violent right-wing campaigns against minorities back home.

    http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-india_pakistan/article_1684.jsp

    Not to reignite the ‘my fascisms worse than your fascism’ non-debate but really I can’t stand more pro Chrstian/Jewish/Hindu chauvinism in relation to this ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ story.

  59. Beakerkin
    Posted August 24, 2010 at 2:48 AM | Permalink

    Here we go again

    1) Jim Jones was a communist preaching something known as Communalism. This was two decades ago and has little to do with any series of crimes. In essence Jones
    in classic Marxist style practiced class genocide on himself.

    No Guyanese drank the Kool Aide. Just dumb leftist from San Fransisco. When I go to Guyana in October it is off the beaten path.

    2) David Koresh was a generic cult. This has little to due with generic Christianity.
    Furthermore, Koresh did not kill outsiders. Much of the blame fell on the Clinton
    administrations mismanagement of the situation.

    This is quite different from a continuing pattern of war crimes committed around the globe aimed at civilians for maximum publicity. Moreover, these war crimes are indeed committed in the name of Islam. As stated you are not responsible for these crimes. However, it is proper respect that the grounds of these crimes be respected.

    This is quite curious in that apparently as stated a Mosque has existed about four blocks North with zero fanfare. Apparently, this rubbish about there not being Mosques in the area is BS. Of course that particular Mosque was built by the local community and may have existed prior to 9-11.

    Onto India

    1) India of its own free will has created two ethnically cleansed Muslim states. There is zero need for any other group to create an ethnically cleansed state. While these States are ethnically cleansed Muslims refuse to leave after a bargain was made.

    2) Jews, Jains, Almost all Christians and many other groups live with Hindus with zero issues. Any claim that Hindus are not tolerant needs to be looked at with that history in mind.

    3) The back drop of the problems with the Dalits is social engineering not religion.
    India has created a spoils system that pits groups against each other with very predictable consequences.

    India like the USA will get through its problems. It is a multi ethnic democracy with the best Universities on the planet. Just like the USA went through the Civil Rights Era so will India.

    As far as radical parties in improbable places much of the rise of these groups is attributable to militant Islam. You have a score of these parties in Europe as well.
    Of course much of the appeal is populist. However, when the far left does its own version with familiar targets the usual Euroelite scoff arrogantly at the critique as being quaint.

  60. Kgazi
    Posted August 24, 2010 at 3:53 AM | Permalink

    There is an old saying in India “Chagol e ki na bole, Pagol e ki na na shune” and that applies well for Beakerkin.

  61. Rachel
    Posted August 24, 2010 at 10:03 AM | Permalink

    Word.

  62. Posted August 24, 2010 at 10:07 AM | Permalink

    haha, yes.

    Certainly not the serious, objective commenter she/he likes to pretend she/he is.

  63. Beakerkin
    Posted August 24, 2010 at 11:28 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    What other group requires ethnically cleansed states? You can look at the population statistics and see that India is religiously mixed society and Pakistan and Bangladesh are not. India voluntarily ceded territory and created ethnically cleansed states.

    Now the ignorantii can sit back and pretend that Bangladesh and Pakistan have developed at the same rate as India. For the purposes of this discussion we will leave out Bangladesh allowing for its constant environmental disasters that seem to happen like clock work.

    Pakistsan is an ethnically cleansed state. It produces nowhere near the amount of
    graduates or industrial production of India. India has secular law ( not in the family arena) and is politically stable. Investors can build a plant and it will be a safe investment as opposed to government of the month in Pakistan.

    Pakistan is not even a real country. The Pashtun who make up about 60% of the population of Afghanistan are in the North. They probably have a better case for nation status than your usual cause celeb group. The Baloch are split between three countries. The Soviets funded their rebel group and then invaded Afghanistan where the refugees flooded the area. They make up a large percentage of Al Queda leaders. Gujaratis, Sindhs,Punjabis and Mohajairs. The later three groups exist on the other side of the border with India.

    Any basic comparison between India and Pakistan shows what country is a superpower and what country is veering towards anarchy. India produces engineers, doctors and entrepenuers. You can find plenty of Pakistani businessmen
    in NYC and abroad. No doubt their kids will be educated in the West a few turn lawless like the 7-7 and Times Square bombers who were not poor and oppressed.

    You can look to the societies where Islam exists in large numbers with no social problems such as Guyana and Trinidad. These immigrants did not have Saudi Mosques and existed quite well under secular law. Families do marry across religious lines and there is little strife. Most of the Blacks are Christians and there is
    very minor problems there.

    The usual suspects can not refute facts so they cringe.

    Islam will progress only when Muslim patriot can look at their own history in the same manner as American and European patriots and grasp that they have wronged whole groups of people. An American patriot has zero problem grasping the evils of slavery and the injustices committed against Native Americans. Most Germans grasp the crimes of the Nazi years. Russians have largely come to terms with Communism and colonialism. Yet Muslims refuse to acknowledge their history of slavery, colonialism and treatment of minorities that makes Jim Crow look like a walk on the beach.

    Peace begins when the sense of victimhood ends. Any serious look at Muslim history shows they are not victims of anything.

    Onto NYC as shown earlier a Mosque has existed for years about three blocks North of the Ground Zero Mosque. Unlike this Ground Zero abomination it was built by and for the local community. It is not an oversized Mega mosque and serves the community peacefully and likely existed before 9-11.

    This claim of an Islam free zone and victimization is preposterous.

  64. Posted August 24, 2010 at 11:46 AM | Permalink

    Do you think a strong judiciary and an exceptional economic growth rate justifies India’s systematic persecution and heinous oppression of its huge Dalit/Christian minority?

  65. Kgazi
    Posted August 24, 2010 at 8:14 PM | Permalink

    “This claim of an Islam free zone and victimization is preposterous.”
    ———-

    Will I be allowed to build a 500 square-foot, 1-room mosque one block away from Ground zero, to condole the 9-11 crime? The answer is NO.
    Then, it is nothing but an Islam-free zone.

    Is Ground Zero being built to show the world how mean is the religion of Islam? YES.
    Then Ground Zero is an anti-Islamic Shrine.

  66. Beakerkin
    Posted August 25, 2010 at 11:20 AM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    A Mosque has existed since 1970 two blocks away. That Mosque was built by and for the local community. Of course rational people would merely work to expand or enhance the existing structure.

    This project is also not funded by locals.

    Faisal

    Countries do grasp with issues that do get corrected. Americal dealt with the Civil Rights era and India will deal with this issue. Much of the tension between groups does have its basis in anger over set asides in jobs and Universities for special groups. It is wholy reasonable to insist that poorer groups get better schools. It is not reasonable for government to institute reverse discrimination. India is a thriving democracy and just like America got it right so will India.

    More importantly Muslims need to be able to grasp their own history in the manner
    of every other group. American patriots have zero problem acknowledging Slavery, Jim Crow and the history with Native Americans. Muslims need to grasp that Islam was spread by the sword and frequently religious and ethnic minorities were mistreated.

    We get to peace when Muslims grasp this

  67. Posted August 25, 2010 at 12:34 PM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,

    You seem to be suggesting that the three millenial issue of persecution of the Dalits is somehow to do with positive discrimination in modern Indian universities! Therebey diversion. You haven’t answered by question.

  68. Beakerkin
    Posted August 26, 2010 at 12:04 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    India as a democracy is 60 years old. They have already made great progress in the area and will continue to do so. They have a commitment to education that is second to none in the world. Their legal and political systems will remedy the situation just as America dealt with the Civil Rights issues in the 60′s.

    Much of the planets future will depend on events in India and China.

  69. Posted August 26, 2010 at 12:43 AM | Permalink

    So you do think the exceptional economic growth rate justifies India’s systematic persecution and heinous oppression of its huge Dalit/Christian minority.

    Can’s say I’m surprised. Explains your point of view for everything you have said on this thread though.

  70. Kgazi
    Posted August 26, 2010 at 4:20 AM | Permalink

    “Much of the planets future will depend on events in India and China.”
    ———-
    Yes – the self-proclaimed supremacy of the Judeo-Saharan religions is over.
    Neither India nor China are governed by the 3 religions of “The Holy Land”, Islam Judaism & Christianity, whose animosity between each other in the name of “peace” and “liberty” has succeeded in self-destruction.

    A new age of the statue-worshippers has returned !!

  71. Beakerkin
    Posted August 26, 2010 at 10:24 AM | Permalink

    Kgazi

    While the rest of the planet produces little human Capital China and India have cultivated it. Your bigoted remarks about societies without familiar religions are to be expected.

    Faisal

    Lets see India has placed laws to guarantee jobs and University slots for several groups. They are a normal Democratic society progressing towards enlightenment.
    While India has taken huge steps you seem to forget that it is far more enlightened
    than its two ethnically cleansed states. Ethnically cleansed states have zero need to
    protect the rights of minorities.

    While India is clearly on the road to enlightenment Pakistan is a mess.

    You merely lack the objectivity to learn from the example of India.

  72. Posted August 26, 2010 at 10:43 AM | Permalink

    Beakerkin, I suggest you swallow your own medicine.

    Your skewed ignorance of South Asia and the subjective manner of projecting this ignorance upon others is getting more than a little boring and doesn’t do you any favours either. Really, give it a break.

  73. Kgazi
    Posted August 26, 2010 at 3:50 PM | Permalink

    Faisal well said. Beakerkin is in a transcedentral trance, reading Indian trash inspired by Bollywood fantasy & RAW trafficking.

  74. Beakerkin
    Posted August 27, 2010 at 1:06 AM | Permalink

    Faisal

    Enlighten me if you can. What Islamic country comes close to India. At one point you could have said Turkey but it looks like it is regressing. Tell me where religious minorities have set aside jobs in the Universities and Government.

    Of course if you have an ethnically cleansed state one doesn’t need many jobs.

    You can sit in your ignorance or be wiser and learn from India. India is a growing society because it values human capital, entrpenuership and is politically stable.
    Where is the investment in human capital in Pakistan. The first thing a bright Pakistani does is head abroad and start a business outside or emigrate if he is a professional. One can find plenty of Pakistani small businessmen in the USA who work like dogs and send a bit home.

    Investors do not place their money in unstable countries where at any moment their can be a coup, terrorism or revolution. If you had read the Malady of Islam which was written by a Muslim you would comprehend the situation.

    You are merely incapable of grasping why India is growing and Pakistan is a colossal mess.

  75. Kgazi
    Posted August 27, 2010 at 3:27 AM | Permalink

    Beakerkin,
    You sound EXACTLY like an Indian, talking how bad everything is in Pakistan, its people, religion, food, etc, even sunshine is bad in Pakistan – while anything Indian is the greatest on earth !

    You want to be enlightened? If you read Indian history you will find that in India the lower hindu castes, minorities and especially muslims were NOT allowed to get education in pre-partition India, only hindu upper caste were allowed – which is why muslims revolted in 1947 and created the separate State of Pakistan.

    You want to know “What Islamic country comes close to India?” Try Pakistan.

    Read article below:
    ‘Pakistan ahead of India in literacy rate: UN [United Nations].
    http://www.asianews.com.pk/2009/12/pakistan-ahead-of-india-in-literacy-rate-un/

  76. Posted August 27, 2010 at 10:06 AM | Permalink

    Beakerkin, Sorry, mate – I lost interest in your simplistic, ahistoric and ignorant views quite early on.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Subscribe without commenting

  • Categories

  • Archives