Anti-Muslim group places ad in NYC subway


#1

With the Muslim world still roiled by a YouTube video denigrating Islam that was made in California, an ad that some groups consider anti-Muslim will appear in 10 of New York’s subway stations starting on Monday.
"In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat Jihad,” reads the ad, which is being paid for by two groups, the American Freedom Defense Initiative and Stop the Islamization of America, both of which have a distinctly anti-Muslim bent.
The Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center consider Stop Islamization of America to be a hate group.

More....
csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0921/Anti-Muslim-groups-ad-in-NYC-subway-calls-jihad-savage.-Is-now-a-good-time


#2

There was already a thread about this last week.


#3

[quote="JustaServant, post:1, topic:299417"]
More....
csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0921/Anti-Muslim-groups-ad-in-NYC-subway-calls-jihad-savage.-Is-now-a-good-time

[/quote]

This kind of free speech, sponsored by a hate group, we don't need nowadays in NYC, America, or the world.


#4

go to YouTube and search Dearborn, Mi. Muslims. it will show you first hand what muslims think of christians


#5

The group "Stop the Islamization of America" may be classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center... but so is Focus on the Family, and numerous Christian groups for their stances against gay marriage, abortion, etc.

Stop the Islamization of America was founded by Pamela Geller... who is mentioned in the article, and Robert Spencer, who is not. Robert Spencer is a practicing Catholic, and has written many books critical of Islam. And he has been featured on EWTN a number of times to share his knowledge of Islam.

Both of the groups mentioned in the article were founded by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. And I just wanted to posit that before people start barking out the orders of the Mainstream media and calling this a hate group that is using hate speech that could incite violence from Muslims...

That the views of these groups are in line with the Catholic Church. In line enough that Robert Spencer would be on EWTN numerous times (and 2 programs are just Robert Spencer... it's not like he's a guest on a panel, it's just him- similar to how Mother Angelica had shows of just her talking the whole time).

Anyways, I haven't read any of his books, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had an Imprimatur and a Nihil Obstat from some Bishop or Archbishop. [Meaning that the Church has found no doctrinal or moral errors in the book].


#6

[quote="dsapienz, post:4, topic:299417"]
go to YouTube and search Dearborn, Mi. Muslims. it will show you first hand what muslims think of christians

[/quote]

What it won't show you though is the deliberate provocation of Muslim that led to those angry exchanges.


#7

[quote="JharekCarnelian, post:6, topic:299417"]
What it won't show you though is the deliberate provocation of Muslim that led to those angry exchanges.

[/quote]

So being dumb and using you free speech, is 'deliberate provocaton of Muslims'? I wonder what putting a cricafix in a jar of urion is and do I have the right to riot over that? :confused::p:shrug:


#8

[quote="tabycat, post:7, topic:299417"]
So being dumb and using you free speech, is 'deliberate provocaton of Muslims'? I wonder what putting a cricafix in a jar of urion is and do I have the right to riot over that? :confused::p:shrug:

[/quote]

Going up to people and deliberately trying to prosleytise them in a manner guaranteed to give offence is not a good way to evangelise. How would you like a Muslim Imam to turn up at Mass this Sunday when it had concluded and start telling you why you are damned? How would you respond and what do you think likely response might be?

I fail to see the relevance of the piece of art in question or even why Dearborn was introduced to the thread.


#9

I see nothing wrong with what Stop the Islamization of America is doing.


#10

[quote="Semper_Zelare, post:5, topic:299417"]
The group "Stop the Islamization of America" may be classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center... but so is Focus on the Family, and numerous Christian groups for their stances against gay marriage, abortion, etc.

[/quote]

There is a wide divergence about what is and what is not a hate group.

Some people believe that a group that says another group is wrong in their opinion is a hate group.

Some people believe that groups that simply believe that others are wrong is a hate group.

This is how we get the insane idea that the RCC could be a hate group simply because the pope teaches that same sex marriage and abortion are wrong.


#11

[quote="cthulhubryan, post:10, topic:299417"]
There is a wide divergence about what is and what is not a hate group.
...
Some people believe that groups that simply believe that others are wrong is a hate group.

...

[/quote]

This is a consequence of the worship of the false god of non-discrimination. The word “discrimination” has gotten a bum rap ever since “racial discrimination” got shortened to just “discrimination”. Suddenly, all discrimination is bad, and anyone “discriminated” against becomes a victim [white males being the one exception].

To the Modern Liberal, non-discrimination is a moral imperative. Because an act of discrimination is a reflection of personal bigotry, the only way to be moral is not to discriminate, not even between right and wrong, good and evil, better and worse, truth and lies. Non-discrimination is a moral imperative because its opposite is the ultimate evil of having discriminated. So nothing can be better or worse than anything else; and therefore, to the Left, groups that do distinguish between right and wrong are "hate" groups.

When we fail to discriminate between good and evil, right and wrong, and the behaviors that lead to success and those that lead to failure, we do not end up objective, neutral, tolerant, or even indifferent; we end up hating what is good, right, and successful. We have seen this pattern over an over. The idea that one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter has led to a resurgence of anti-Semitism; a successful person is not a testimony of the opportunities in America; it is an indictment of American greed; the belief that America is no better than any other country has led to hatred of America.. So, the idea that same-sex partners, for example, should be allowed to marry will lead, not to tolerance, objectivity, neutrality, or even indifference, but to hatred of heterosexual couples and heterosexual marriage. – The Closing of the American Mind


#12

[quote="JustaServant, post:1, topic:299417"]
More....
csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0921/Anti-Muslim-groups-ad-in-NYC-subway-calls-jihad-savage.-Is-now-a-good-time

[/quote]

The general maxim is far more appalling than the specific reference to Islam. It's fundamentally imperialistic and racist.

In fact, its application to the Israel-Palestine situation would confirm the belief of many Arabs and other Middle Easterners (not just Muslims) that the state of Israel is essentially a continuation of Western colonialism.

In any war between the "civilized man" and the "savage," I'm much more likely to root for the "savage."

Calling Arabs "savages" is offensive, of course, and absurd given their historic cultural contributions. But even more offensive is the idea that "civilized men" have the right to make war on "savages" with impunity. The whole thing is just vicious from beginning to end, completely apart from any religious issues.

Edwin


#13

[quote="Contarini, post:12, topic:299417"]
The general maxim is far more appalling than the specific reference to Islam. It's fundamentally imperialistic and racist.

In fact, its application to the Israel-Palestine situation would confirm the belief of many Arabs and other Middle Easterners (not just Muslims) that the state of Israel is essentially a continuation of Western colonialism.

In any war between the "civilized man" and the "savage," I'm much more likely to root for the "savage."

Calling Arabs "savages" is offensive, of course, and absurd given their historic cultural contributions. But even more offensive is the idea that "civilized men" have the right to make war on "savages" with impunity. The whole thing is just vicious from beginning to end, completely apart from any religious issues.

Edwin

[/quote]

BINGO!:thumbsup:
You win the prize behind the curtiain professor.
That is precisly why I deliberately changed the title of the article. The article implies that the poster is saying "Jihad is savage". Not what it says. It implies the Arab world and the people of the Middle East are savages.
People do not realize the way the media is spinning things. Like the article in the World News forum that reads Pakistani foreign minister: It’s time for the U.S. to rethink free speech. Except, thats not what Pakistani foreign minister said.
People need to realize they are being played like a violin.
And it sounds like we are being set up for another mid-east war.


#14

[quote="JustaServant, post:1, topic:299417"]
More....
csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0921/Anti-Muslim-groups-ad-in-NYC-subway-calls-jihad-savage.-Is-now-a-good-time

[/quote]

These two organizations are so far left that they are losing any credibility they once had. If a group is not promoting the ADL and SPLC's idea of a socialist marxist agenda they get labeled as a hate group.


#15

[quote="JustaServant, post:1, topic:299417"]
More....
csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0921/Anti-Muslim-groups-ad-in-NYC-subway-calls-jihad-savage.-Is-now-a-good-time

[/quote]

Why they put "Israel" in the middle! :shrug:, the issue is between "free speech" and "Islam".....


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.