PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security A Little Islamic History Lesson for those....


Chiefshrink
09-10-2010, 08:33 AM
who still want this Terror Mosque to be built.:shake:

Islam center's eerie echo of ancient terror
Last Updated: 8:35 AM, September 10, 2010

Posted: 5:34 AM, September 10, 2010

by Amir Taheri

Should there be a mosque near Ground Zero? In fact, what is pro posed is not a mosque -- nor even an "Islamic cultural center."

In Islam, every structure linked to the faith and its rituals has a precise function and character. A mosque is a one-story gallery built around an atrium with a mihrab (a niche pointing to Mecca) and one, or in the case of Shiites two, minarets.

Other Islamic structures, such as harams, zawiyyahs, husseinyiahs and takiyahs, also obey strict architectural rules. Yet the building used for spreading the faith is known as Dar al-Tabligh, or House of Proselytizing.


TOWER: The Ground Zero project doesn't fit the traditional minaret. This 13-story multifunctional structure couldn't be any of the above.

The groups fighting for the project know this; this is why they sometimes call it an Islamic cultural center. But there is no such thing as an Islamic culture.

Islam is a religion, not a culture. Each of the 57 Muslim-majority nations has its own distinct culture -- and the Bengali culture has little in common with the Nigerian. Then, too, most of those countries have their own cultural offices in the US, especially in New York.

Islam is an ingredient in dozens of cultures, not a culture on its own.

In theory, at least, the culture of American Muslims should be American. Of course, this being America, each ethnic community has its distinct cultural memories -- the Iranians in Los Angeles are different from the Arabs in Dearborn.

In fact, the proposed structure is known in Islamic history as a rabat -- literally a connector. The first rabat appeared at the time of the Prophet.

The Prophet imposed his rule on parts of Arabia through a series of ghazvas, or razzias (the origin of the English word "raid"). The ghazva was designed to terrorize the infidels, convince them that their civilization was doomed and force them to submit to Islamic rule. Those who participated in the ghazva were known as the ghazis, or raiders.

After each ghazva, the Prophet ordered the creation of a rabat -- or a point of contact at the heart of the infidel territory raided. The rabat consisted of an area for prayer, a section for the raiders to eat and rest and facilities to train and prepare for future razzias. Later Muslim rulers used the tactic of ghazva to conquer territory in the Persian and Byzantine empires. After each raid, they built a rabat to prepare for the next razzia.

It is no coincidence that Islamists routinely use the term ghazva to describe the 9/11 attacks against New York and Washington. The terrorists who carried out the attack are referred to as ghazis or shahids (martyrs).

Thus, building a rabat close to Ground Zero would be in accordance with a tradition started by the Prophet. To all those who believe and hope that the 9/11 ghazva would lead to the destruction of the American "Great Satan," this would be of great symbolic value.

Faced with the anger of New Yorkers, the promoters of the project have started calling it the Cordoba House, echoing President Obama's assertion that it would be used to propagate "moderate" Islam.

The argument is that Cordoba, in southern Spain, was a city where followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism lived together in peace and produced literature and philosophy.

In fact, Cordoba's history is full of stories of oppression and massacre, prompted by religious fanaticism. It is true that the Muslim rulers of Cordoba didn't force their Christian and Jewish subjects to accept Islam. However, non-Muslims could keep their faith and enjoy state protection only as dhimmis (bonded ones) by paying a poll tax in a system of religious apartheid.

If whatever peace and harmony that is supposed to have existed in Cordoba were the fruit of "Muslim rule," the subtext is that the United States would enjoy similar peace and harmony under Islamic rule.

A rabat in the heart of Manhattan would be of great symbolic value to those who want a high-profile, "in your face" projection of Islam in the infidel West.

This thirst for visibility is translated into increasingly provocative forms of hijab, notably the niqab (mask) and the burqa. The same quest mobilized hundreds of Muslims in Paris the other day to close a whole street so that they could have a Ramadan prayer in the middle of the rush hour.

One of those taking part in the demonstration told French radio that the aim was to "show we are here." "You used to be in our capitals for centuries," he said. "Now, it is our turn to be in the heart of your cities."

Before deciding whether to support or oppose the "Cordoba" project, New Yorkers should consider what it is that they would be buying.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/islam_center_eerie_echo_of_ancient_iRTMW6TprkULnaA1Nqi9xM#ixzz0z8Y4Kvgh

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 08:52 AM
I don't really understand the culture argument. It seems he is saying that culture is something strictly related to the boundaries of modern-day nation states. I don't think that's correct. Britain and the United States of America have very similar cultures, but they are separate states. It makes sense that many Muslims view themselves as having a common culture with other Muslims, regardless of which particular state they came from. Afterall, they share a common scripture and religious beliefs and practices, history, possible foods that come along with that, most likely the Arabic language, and, as the article pointed out, common architectural features.

It seems the author is saying that the whole matter would be more acceptable if the proposed building looked more like a traditional Islamic mosque, as if they can't adapt their architecture to more "American cultural" standards, which seems contradictory to his first point.

talastan
09-10-2010, 09:17 AM
I don't really understand the culture argument. It seems he is saying that culture is something strictly related to the boundaries of modern-day nation states. I don't think that's correct. Britain and the United States of America have very similar cultures, but they are separate states. It makes sense that many Muslims view themselves as having a common culture with other Muslims, regardless of which particular state they came from. Afterall, they share a common scripture and religious beliefs and practices, history, possible foods that come along with that, most likely the Arabic language, and, as the article pointed out, common architectural features.

It seems the author is saying that the whole matter would be more acceptable if the proposed building looked more like a traditional Islamic mosque, as if they can't adapt their architecture to more "American cultural" standards, which seems contradictory to his first point.

So we're focusing on that instead of the main point? The building's purpose is following Muslim traditions of building a mosque, or rabat when you have conquerored a territory. This location is nothing more than a reason for these extremists to gloat. They've had many reasons to move the location but haven't. Now while they certainly have the right, just like the Koran burning (which I think is ridiculous as well), that doesn't necessarily make it right. :shake: Look into the history of this and you'll see the point.

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 09:25 AM
So we're focusing on that instead of the main point? The building's purpose is following Muslim traditions of building a mosque, or rabat when you have conquerored a territory. This location is nothing more than a reason for these extremists to gloat. They've had many reasons to move the location but haven't. Now while they certainly have the right, just like the Koran burning (which I think is ridiculous as well), that doesn't necessarily make it right. :shake: Look into the history of this and you'll see the point.

Muslims have been know for centuries building mosques where they have won a battle. At times right on top of a Christian church site it had conquered at some time.

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 09:37 AM
So we're focusing on that instead of the main point? The building's purpose is following Muslim traditions of building a mosque, or rabat when you have conquerored a territory. This location is nothing more than a reason for these extremists to gloat. They've had many reasons to move the location but haven't. Now while they certainly have the right, just like the Koran burning (which I think is ridiculous as well), that doesn't necessarily make it right. :shake: Look into the history of this and you'll see the point.

I tried searching "rabat" with google, but the only thing that keeps coming up is the capital of Morocco. For now, I'm convinced that there is no such thing.

Now, let's talk about this 'troubling and dangerous' idea of a conquerer building his place of worship in the conquered territory. This might be obvious, but . . . why wouldn't he? Why is it any surprise that as a cultural group sweeps in to a new territory, they bring along with them . . . their culture? This isn't something that is unique to Muslims.

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 09:39 AM
Muslims have been know for centuries building mosques where they have won a battle. At times right on top of a Christian church site it had conquered at some time.

I know of Muslims converting churches into mosques, like the Hagia Sophia. Can you provide us with examples of Muslims building a mosque "right on top of a Christian church site it had conquered?"

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 09:55 AM
I know of Muslims converting churches into mosques, like the Hagia Sophia. Can you provide us with examples of Muslims building a mosque "right on top of a Christian church site it had conquered?"

Just google it, you'll find many.

Here's one ..... http://www.sacred-destinations.com/syria/bosra.htm

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 12:47 PM
Just google it, you'll find many.

Here's one ..... http://www.sacred-destinations.com/syria/bosra.htm

?? That's a city.

Chiefshrink
09-10-2010, 02:12 PM
Muslims have been know for centuries building mosques where they have won a battle. At times right on top of a Christian church site it had conquered at some time.

Hence one of the main reasons for the Crusades.

talastan
09-10-2010, 03:16 PM
Hence one of the main reasons for the Crusades.

This and to further the power of the Roman Catholic church at that time among the main reasons.

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 03:26 PM
Hence one of the main reasons for the Crusades.

The Turks

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 03:26 PM
This and to further the power of the Roman Catholic church at that time among the main reasons.

Could you flesh that argument out for us a bit?

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 04:09 PM
?? That's a city.

Damn, you that lazy to look it up ?

FTR, there is a mosque in Istanbul that was once a Christian church site.

Get over yourself , that is unless you love the Muslims that much.

Jenson71
09-10-2010, 04:20 PM
Damn, you that lazy to look it up ?

FTR, there is a mosque in Istanbul that was once a Christian church site.


The Hagia Sophia? I mentioned that already. What else you got?

Brock
09-10-2010, 04:22 PM
Damn, you that lazy to look it up ?

FTR, there is a mosque in Istanbul that was once a Christian church site.

Get over yourself , that is unless you love the Muslims that much.

There is a mosque in Istanbul that used to be a christian church, built by Constantine. They didn't tear it down.

ClevelandBronco
09-10-2010, 04:28 PM
Damn, you that lazy to look it up ?

FTR, there is a mosque in Istanbul that was once a Christian church site.

Get over yourself , that is unless you love the Muslims that much.

Uh, Roy, we are supposed to love the Muslims that much.

vailpass
09-10-2010, 04:31 PM
The whole muslim thing would be a little easier to take if they didn't smell so damn bad.
Their restaurants, hotels, cabs, you name it stinks. They have that odor about them that is just plain bad.

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 04:56 PM
Uh, Roy, we are supposed to love the Muslims that much.

Love then as a brother through Christ, but that's as far as it goes. Their belief and mine are not the same.

The extremist / jihad nut heads I do not care for.

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 05:00 PM
The Hagia Sophia? I mentioned that already. What else you got?

Like I said, Google it, you find plenty if you take the time to explore. Here's another one.... after this, it's all yours, stop being lazy.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/muslim_extremists_forcibly_turn_catholic_church_into_mosque/

Plus another site that talks about them..
http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-13954.html

Dave Lane
09-10-2010, 05:01 PM
This and to further the power of the Roman Catholic church at that time among the main reasons.

Winner winner chicken dinner

vailpass
09-10-2010, 05:07 PM
This and to further the power of the Roman Catholic church at that time among the main reasons.

Better us than them.

talastan
09-10-2010, 05:07 PM
Could you flesh that argument out for us a bit?


It is widely argued and debated that the Church used propaganda of wealth, and eternal salvation for any who fought in the crusades. The goal of the church was to control Jerusalem and solidify the power of the Papal state in Israel. By offering work-based faith anyone could earn their way to heaven. Otherwise the crusades wouldn't have ever had the historical signifigance they had without the church's propaganda.

ROYC75
09-10-2010, 05:09 PM
One can not argue about the beauty of the mosque. For years I have been amazed by their ability to architecturally design and build like this. Even in their early years .

Hydrae
09-10-2010, 05:16 PM
I tried searching "rabat" with google, but the only thing that keeps coming up is the capital of Morocco. For now, I'm convinced that there is no such thing.

Now, let's talk about this 'troubling and dangerous' idea of a conquerer building his place of worship in the conquered territory. This might be obvious, but . . . why wouldn't he? Why is it any surprise that as a cultural group sweeps in to a new territory, they bring along with them . . . their culture? This isn't something that is unique to Muslims.

Try with the spelling ribat.

The Mad Crapper
09-12-2010, 07:15 AM
So we're focusing on that instead of the main point?

Jenson suffers from cognitive dissonance. All moonbats do.

Ugly Duck
09-14-2010, 11:25 PM
Each of the 57 Muslim-majority nations has its own distinct culture...

... so therefore Muslim New Yorkers cannot build a cultural center. That don't make no sense.

Direckshun
09-14-2010, 11:56 PM
I have read some really stupid arguments, and this may be tops.

I'll never understand why people who want to eradicate entire religions and cultures think they have any understanding of that religion or culture.

StcChief
09-15-2010, 06:43 PM
for all involved build it elsewhere... or it will come down.