As many of you know by now, the plan to build a very controversial mosque within yards of Ground Zero has now been officially approved. The first ok was given by the local community board which is made up of local residents, most of whom are Leftist/ultra Leftist Jews. Then came the NYC Landmarks Preservation Committee, a group of very liberal, "unelected" political appointees who most NY'ers have never even seen before. Their decision was then affirmed by "His Majesty" Bloomberg making it official.
What i personally find amazing, albeit not surprising, is that people, (Muslims) who have sworn to eradicate Jews (and all other non-believers) should be given so much support from Jews. But, this is NYC, and especially Manhattan, where Liberalism trumps all. Below is a list of points which were submitted by a commenter to the liberal NY Daily News today. I found them very interesting and informative. Hope you do also. (Note; below are the words of the commenter, not mine, although i do agree with them)..
Can a good Muslim also be a good American?
Theologically: No. . . .Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon god of Arabia.
Religiously - no.. . . Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256) (Koran.)
Scripturally - no. . . Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.
Geographically - no . Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
Socially - no. . . Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.
Politically - no.. . . Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel, and destruction of America, 'the great Satan'.
Domestically - no. .. . Because he is instructed to marry four women, and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34.)
Intellectually - no. . Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles,and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
Philosophically - no. . . . Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran does not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Spiritually - no.. . . Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' The Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly Father, nor is he ever called Love in the Quran's 99 'excellent names.
"Therefore, after much study and deliberation.... perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. - - - They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans. Call it what you wish, it's still the Truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future.The religious war is bigger than we know or understand..."
Footnote: "Radical Muslims have said they will destroy us from within."
10 comments:
"Can a good Muslim also be a good American?"
Hmmm, seems to me that Jack Kennedy was asked the same kinds of questions about Catholics. But I'll play your silly game. But can we add RADICAL to that question?
Because (and I've said this about a thousand times here) there's NOTHING in the Koran that would exclude them from being good Americans. There's a ton of divorce your wife, stone adulterers, beat the old Lady and kids, kill the unbelievers in the Bible too. It's all in the Old Testament. Oddly, that's WHERE the Great Prophet Mohamed got it!!
And given that Old Testament connection, how could Jews be good Americans, if they follow the Torah? Could it be that there is a non-extremist way to go? Seems like it.
The Torah and the Koran are completely different. Read the Torah before trying to make such comparisons.
Here's one example:
"....the Jewish court does not stone people for sinning. But the message behind stoning still applies. Even today we are "stoned" by our wrongdoings. The Kabbalists (Jewish mystics) teach that when we sin our heart turns hard and cold like stone. By engaging in evil acts we become desensitised to what's good and right. After repeating a sin a few times, we start to justify it. Soon we feel that it isn't bad at all. When we are criticised for it, we respond with righteous indignation, having convinced ourselves that we are actually acting morally. This is all because we are metaphorically stoned -- we are cold and impervious to the voice of our own soul.
On Rosh Hashanah, the sound of the Shofar pierces a hole in the stone blocking our heart, and the layers of indifference start to melt away.
That is the mystical view of the law of stoning in the Torah, and it explains a lot of the evil in the world today."
This is just an example. Every law, story and idea the Torah teaches can be taken literally but also has layers of meaning beyond the surface. It is an exhilirating and inspiring journey to discover how those lessons speak to us today.
Stonings which may have occurred during Taludic times (thousands of years ago) have no bearing on teachings and actions today.
If you want a parallel, think of how the "Vulcans" learned from their prior ancient history.
The laws of the Quoran is followed today.
I don't agree with your assertion that is where "Mohammed got it". There were many groups of people who continued with such punishments for centuries. By the Ninth Century AD, The Hebrews were thousands of years beyond any such punishments of this nature.
The law of the Koran is followed that way today, but only in countries where the radicals, or those who support them, are in charge.
And I have read the Torah, and the Bible and the Koran, and the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and blah, blah, blah. Is there a point that I missed in there, about the difference in ancient religious practices, ancient ways of thinking and modern radicals who follow those ideals?
'cause I gotta tell you, I'm continually amazed at how you smart people are so "out there" on this topic. I'm the least formally educated one here, but I know stereotyping when I hear it.
I'm guessing you think moving those GD Nips to camps was a good idea too? Or that lynching those stealing rapist niggers was what they had coming?
Steve, American Japs (and Germans and some Italians) were put into those camps out of sheer necessity, (self preservation) and under the circumstances, and at the time, it was neccessary. In most other countries they would have been executed. There are times when one must do what's necessary, and it's not always right.
And you say we should distinguish "good" Muslims from radicals. It would be a great help to us, and especially to our troops, if you just told us how to do that, especially since we're fighting an enemy who's #1 tactic is mixing with civilians. We're involved in a religious war against the toughest enemy we've ever faced, and we can't afford to worry about silly things like "sterotyping", not when so much is at stake. We're already at a huge disadvantage because of our "compassion and anti-war" mentality. Perhaps if we had engaged in sterotyping, those two huge buildings a few miles from my house might be still standing.
Neal Boortz Sounds off on the Ground Zero Victory Shrine - Uh - Mosque
"There's going to be a lot of controversy on this issue. I think it's just starting. As you listen to the various parties of interest present their cases on the Ground Zero Mosque you need to remember one thing. You cannot trust anything that is said by a Muslim about this Mosque. Nothing. The goal here is to build a Mosque as close to Ground Zero as possible in order to erect a monument to what they see as a great Muslim victory over the United States. Of course they would never admit this when questioned by government officials or the media. They will lie - and their religion tells them that is perfectly OK to lie in furtherance to the Islamist agenda so long as they are lying to non-believers.
You want a lie? Try this one. It came from Nihad Awad, one of the founders and presently the Executive Director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Awad has past connections to the Islamic terrorist group Hamas and has declared his support of the Hamas movement. Last night Awad was a guest on O'Reilly. The topic, of course, was the Mosque. Now ... here's your lie. Awad told O'Reilly that there was no connection with the Muslim community and the 9/11 terrorist hijackers. Islam is supposed to condemn the liar ... but Awad will not be condemned for this lie because it was (a) uttered in the furtherance of Islamist goals; and (b) was told to infidels.
Oh .. and to make sure I stir the righteous pudding here, let's remind you that "terrorism" is only half a word. The first half is "Islamic."
NY Post 8/6/10:
"Opponents of the proposed construction of a controversial mosque just blocks from Ground Zero (ought to be ashamed of themselves) for opposing it, Mayor Bloomberg said this morning.
Bloomberg said he also (doesn't care where the people behind the mosque and Islamic cultural center will get the money to build.)"
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan
/mayor_bloomberg_said_ground_zero
_mDsDf21UzAjgmeU7Lb0W7J#ixzz0vsxZaQO4
As much as I hate to say it, I agree with Steve (not hate to agree, hate what I am about to say).
I have met some "good" muslims who would be "good" Americans. The trouble we run into is being able to distinguish between the good and the bad. However, like all cancers, you have to take out some of the good to make sure you get rid of all the bad. Not fair? Don't care. Very sad, but too bad.
Regarding the koran, yep, that is where moohamhead got it. If you do a true comparison of the two, the stories and teachings are basically the same just in a different order and with different main characters, up to a point. Then as a following was built he had to come up with some new stuff.
I would call it the "New Arabic (circa 800) translation of the Torah."
Post a Comment