Church will burn Quran

[Giambattista]

nice!

also there is a line of clothing, a town in indiana, cultural mecca.....

A place can be described as a "Mecca for aficionados of greyhound racing", a "horticultural Mecca", "a sporting Mecca", whatever you will. A "cultural Mecca" is just one option among many.(VSD)

It was because of this widespread use of Mecca that the Saudis changed their English spelling to Mekka some years ago (briggs)

I'd love to see the horticultural Mecca, myself.

So I guess we should just stop using any name remotely associated with Islam. Just strike them all from our vernacular, since they're so darn sensitive these days.

Or, much easier, since they seem to hate everything about the Great Satan maybe they should just not watch any television coverage of the Evil Western World. Don't patronize as a tourist, don't try to emigrate. Just stay in the part of the world that God loves most.

More practically, I just don't want to see the death blow to freedom of speech come in the form of "religious tolerance" or tiptoeing around the feelings of a (in this country) religious minority.

Or you'd get charged with a hate-crime for insulting Islam. :shrug:

Ha! They burn down your business, and YOU get charged with arson! Why does that not sound unrealistic?

I fear a scenario unfolding where especially in the United States, anyone who feels indirectly wronged by the wars of aggression (mainly Muslims) started under the previous administration will find some type of legal refuge from which to exact retribution against anyone they feel is not accomodating them.

I don't want to get too far into the realm of speculation there or demonize anyone unfairly, but this mentality can be seen with the recent immigration disputes. It is epitomized by a line I heard in the trailer for the recent movie "Machete" where a woman is heard yelling "We didn't cross the border; the border crossed US!" As if a sovereign nation ANYWHERE needs to tolerate people coming freely over the border.
It is further clarified by Mexican President Calderon when he addressed Congress claiming that his "people" were being discriminated against by the U.S. and that our gun laws were aiding the cartels to arm themselves. Yeah. Sure. A guy who presides over near anarchy and constant bloodshed in his own country is going to shake his finger at the U.S. and be listened to.

Mexico and its government are terminally ill. We don't owe them anything.

 

[Giambattista]

More practically, I just don't want to see the death blow to freedom of speech come in the form of "religious tolerance" or tiptoeing around the feelings of a (in this country) religious minority.

I would like to add that we have enough trouble with our Oxymoron Act and Free Speech Zones (since when does the 1st Amendment exist only on an island?) and other clear usurpations of the Bill of Rights to have to worry about a bunch of temperamental idiots who take religiosity to an absurd level of austerity.

As if a sovereign nation ANYWHERE needs to tolerate people coming freely over the border.

This is where this worst-case scenario agenda comes in. People wanted a war. They got it. Now the rest of us who had nothing to do with it will become the scapegoats to people who don't know the difference. And the people that wanted the war will now play this to their advantage.

America has been sold out by its so-called leaders, its corporations, and now they have stoked anger internationally and will put that burden on those of us who had nothing to with this evil.
And they will now sell this burden as a sin to be atoned for.

 

[Giambattista]

Ronald didn't realise as he fed Baby George that as time unfolded both of them would be President of the Greatest Country on Earth

That was a good laugh!

 

[GeoffP]

Look, I get it, you don't 'get' my posts, that's clear.

No, I understand your rage completely. I just want you to be honest for a second about it.

No, I didn't.

Sure did, in that post.

 

[Giambattista]

Church births Quran! Newest thing to be dealt to Manchurian candidates since Arkanoid gave up its fame.

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

No, I understand your rage completely. I just want you to be honest for a second about it.

I don't have any bloody rage you fool, cursing does not equal rage, this argument has worked for anyone else, what makes you think it'll work for you? I'm not the least bit 'angry' or 'upset'.

Sure did, in that post.

No, I didn't, when I was America I met many Americans whom were Christian who told me that Islam was a cult and other such things and had a prententious air of inherent moral/religious superiority about them. Even a lot of the Atheists I met could be described as cultural Christians seeing as their arguments against my religion and comments about it were similiar and equally as stupid. My post was specfically making fun of them because I am guessing that those whom I had talked to would be furious about the church backing down from it's threat. Not mentioning the fact that in terms of this forum my comments were a joke.

 

[GeoffP]

I don't have any bloody rage you fool, cursing does not equal rage, this argument has worked for anyone else, what makes you think it'll work for you? I'm not the least bit 'angry' or 'upset'.

Don't be ridiculous - the rage happened long before the cursing. Cursing's fine.

No, I didn't,

Yes you did, in that post. Got to think of everybody, you know. And your argument is that atheists are cultural Christians? Atheists can't have legitimage arguments against Islamic intolerance and Islamic extremism?

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

Don't be ridiculous - the rage happened long before the cursing. Cursing's fine.

You're silly. The 'cursing' is about the only thing in my posts that one could try to chalk up to the emotional response known as 'rage' if you honestly think my posts indicate 'rage' aside from this you're not only sadly mistaken but silly.

Yes you did, in that post. Got to think of everybody, you know. And your argument is that atheists are cultural Christians? Atheists can't have legitimage arguments against Islamic intolerance and Islamic extremism?

I don't really have an 'argument' here, these are just my own subjective observations from my own subjective experinces. I do not generalize and paint the entire American population based upon these experinces, if I did, just like with this forum, I would probably genuinely hate all Americans. These are among the mild responses I got, I did have violent experinces as well and was physically attacked. The Atheists that I met, yes could be described as cultural Christians, there arguments and own personal reactions and perceptions of Islam, Arabs and Middle-Eastern history/culture in general were virtually mirror image just missing the God, Jesus and ammunition part. I'm sorry if this offends you but aside from select cases not every Atheist is as rational and devoid of cultural hegemonic conditionaing as you.

 

[GeoffP]

I'm the one who's been culturally conditioned? That really would be the shoe on the wrong foot.

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

I'm the one who's been culturally conditioned? That really would be the shoe on the wrong foot.

No, did I say that no? I was making a joke about you, for fucks sake man.

 

[StrawDog]

I'm the one who's been culturally conditioned? That really would be the shoe on the wrong foot.

Are you denying that (to some degree at least) you are the product of the Western Christian mindset? :m:

 

[GeoffP]

Are you denying that (to some degree at least) you are the product of the Western Christian mindset? :m:

Here's a semi-reciprocal question: who, in your estimation, is the greater victim (if that be the word) of cultural conditioning? I know nothing of Ja'far's background, nor he of mine, but I don't think I've told all Muslims to "suck it". I think this is indicative.

 

[GeoffP]

No, did I say that no?

Er, you kind of implied it sarcastically here:

I'm sorry if this offends you but aside from select cases not every Atheist is as rational and devoid of cultural hegemonic conditionaing as you.

I was making a joke about you, for fucks sake man.

Well, it's a silly one then. But as you like.

 

[Ja'far at-Tahir]

Er, you kind of implied it sarcastically here

No shit but I'm not sure if you were aware but jokes aren't meant to be taken seriously.

 

[StrawDog]

Here's a semi-reciprocal question: who, in your estimation, is the greater victim (if that be the word) of cultural conditioning? I know nothing of Ja'far's background, nor he of mine, but I don't think I've told all Muslims to "suck it". I think this is indicative.

Fair enough - in principle. Caveat - given the general negative sentiment towards all things Islam in this environment (Sci-Fi), is aforesaid response a product of cultural conditioning or frustration in regard to endemic ignorance?

 

[nirakar]

It seems Islamism did suck up to Christianity and the Hebrew bible, only it selected what it thought would win over both these belief systems. It appears that first the new Muslims tried to impress the Jews by doctrines of Judaism, then it took from the Gospels - it discarded the resurrection because it saw this as Jews being more correct here, as opposed being different. But it did not work - Judaism and Christianity saw the ploy of a half backed acceptance, then assumed as transcended by the figurehead of Mohammed. Islam has to use the sword and mass murder to beget its adherants, and maintains this today by threats for anyone having second thoughts.
.
I looked but see nothing new given by Islam, all its doctrines and practices come directly from other belief systems: facing a sacred place when praying; making a blessing when a sacred name is mentioned; prompt burial of the dead; Hallal instead of Kosher; exaggerated doctrines of modest dress and behaviour advocated in Judaism; etc - are direct lift-offs from Judaism and cannot in any wise be seen as new revelation. But such is the nature of the beasts of religions, belief being the easiest faculty to exploit.

Such drivel.

Apart from the opinion, which is a fairly standard dismissal of Islam, his posts contain quite a few facts which I have always thought to be true.
Could you expand on that?

A lot of Josephs's facts are false. He makes up facts entirely, he is influenced by dubious sources and he does not really care about reality, and when he gets caught in a lie he reaffirms the lie. That is the pattern IamJoseph has established.

I don't think he should be banned but there should be a warning on Josephs posts like the warnings in packs of cigarettes that believing or remembering any history learned from IamJoseph may be hazardous to your understanding of history. It is better to know nothing than to know something wrong.

Once I get a wrong fact into my head it is hard to get the wrong fact out of my a head. I assume everybody else has the same problem.

Joseph presents like he knows stuff and might be interested in history. Saying some crazy ultra religious superstitious stuff from time to time did not disqualify Joseph as a possible source for historical facts for me; it just raised my guard. Then I found him saying wrong things repeatedly. Now if he says anything interesting that I don't already know about and if I have time, I check his "facts". At least a quarter of those new facts are totally made up by him. Another quarter are badly distorted or from bad sources. A third quarter are mildly distorted or debatable. That is not a good enough track record.

When somebody wants to post things they are not sure of they should put a phrase like "I think" in front of the thought and not present it as facts. Joseph presents everything he says as facts. Joseph rarely presents links for his dubious facts.

On Arabs and Islam the majority of words written about them in English on the internet are from irrationally anti-Arab and Anti-Islamic Biases. The largest minority view points are from irrationally pro-Arab and Pro-Islamic biases. You will find little from a neutral bias written in English about Arabs or Muslims. Joseph hates Arabs and Muslims and he dislikes Christians also. Joseph also dislikes Science when it conflicts with his religious beliefs. Joseph only wanted to see the History that fits with his religion and his hatreds. He only plays at looking interested in history he really is only interested in his religion.

It seems Islamism did suck up to Christianity and the Hebrew bible, only it selected what it thought would win over both these belief systems.

If you believe Mohamed the way IamJoseph believes Judaism then the similarity between Islam and Christianity and Judaism comes from God and what God told his prophets.

If you want look at the situation with the view that the Jewish and Christian and Muslim religions are delusions then you would say that Mohamed was influenced by Judaism and Christianity.

But IamJoseph says "Islamism did suck up to Christianity and the Hebrew bible, only it selected what it thought would win over both these belief systems."

Where does he get that? Did he make it up? What the hell is Islamism? The use of the word Islamism reveals something about IamJoseph and it is not revealing scholarship.

You can find this Idea that Islam was sucking up to the Jewish community in Medina in the the works of Christian historians from the 1800s. I prefer post 1950 historians because I think the standards and source materials available to historians have improved.

Islam haters will also portray things as they like. I don't think IamJoseph remembers any more details than he presented and he can't be bothered to research before he posts. But I can be bothered to research before I post.

According to the story Mohamed and those impressed by Mohamed Were in 620 AD (7 years after Mohamed began public preaching) being oppressed in their hometown Mecca by pagan Arabs and at the same time in Medina Arab pagan tribes and their Jewish tribe allies were getting into blood feuds with other Arab tribes and their Jewish tribe allies and needed somebody neutral to be their arbitrator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medina (Arabs were not yet called Arabs and the Jews were probably also Arabs or at least part Arabs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza These were just various clans of people) The Jews and non-Jewish pagan clans in Medina apparently agreed Mohamed from Mecca as their arbitrator. Now what qualified Mohamed as an arbitrator? Apparently he was personally impressive but also he was neither a Pagan Arab nor Jewish. Mohamed was clearly influenced by Judaism but he was not Jewish. Perfect for this arbitrator job.

Now IamJoseph says Mohammed was sucking up to Christians and Jews. I don't think so. I think he was influenced by them. I also don't think IamJoseph's has a quality source for his belief.

It appears that first the new Muslims tried to impress the Jews by doctrines of Judaism, then it took from the Gospels - it discarded the resurrection because it saw this as Jews being more correct here, as opposed being different.

Bravo Joseph, you used the phrase "it appears" yay. I can't draw those conclusions from the historical evidence.

But it did not work - Judaism and Christianity saw the ploy of a half backed acceptance, then assumed as transcended by the figurehead of Mohammed. Islam has to use the sword and mass murder to beget its adherants, and maintains this today by threats for anyone having second thoughts.

None of this should be presented as fact but one "it appears" or other disclaimer per paragraph is good enough for me.

The fact is that Islam converted both by the sword and peaceful means and the peaceful appeal of Islam appears to me to have been more important than coercion.

Why was the time right for Christianity to sweep through the pagan Greco-Roman urban middle class 600 years earlier? I know Jews won't like hearing this but there also appeared to be massive conversions of Pagans to Judaism at the same time as they were converting to Christianity. All these offshoots of offshoots of the cult of Abraham and Moses fill similar roles and have similar appeals to the human psyche.

I looked but see nothing new given by Islam, all its doctrines and practices come directly from other belief systems

Ideas evolve from their parent ideas. Islam evolved from Judaism and Christianity when they got into Mohammed's mind regardless whether they got into Mohammed's mind the normal way or some supernatural way.

Similarly most academic scholars say Judaism evolved in part out of the older Zoroastrianism.
This site http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/jud_zor.htm and others say Jews were not even monotheist until they absorbed monotheism from Zoroastrianism.

: facing a sacred place when praying; making a blessing when a sacred name is mentioned; prompt burial of the dead; Hallal instead of Kosher; exaggerated doctrines of modest dress and behaviour advocated in Judaism; etc - are direct lift-offs from Judaism and cannot in any wise be seen as new revelation. But such is the nature of the beasts of religions, belief being the easiest faculty to exploit.

There is something true about this lie of thinking. But be wary of believing the details.

More drivel: Today Muslims pray facing Mecca. But originally, they prayed facing Jerusalem, thinking this would make all Jews salute them and sign on the dooted line of the quran - this was abruptly changed when the Jews rejected this offer! It was not Allah but Mohammed to changed his mind when rebuffed.

Yes Muslims once prayed facing Jerusalem but everything else IamJoseph said is IamJoseph's opinion. Not surprisingly that is not the way Muslims tell the story. Who is more credible on this, Muslims or Muslim-haters?

OK IAmJoseph, here is a test for you. When did Muslims start praying facing towards Jerusalem and when did they stop.

http://www.hanifler.com/showthread.php?p=6692
http://www.ezsoftech.com/islamic/qiblatain.asp

 

[Big Chiller]

I'm the one who's been culturally conditioned? That really would be the shoe on the wrong foot.

Are you denying that (to some degree at least) you are the product of the Western Christian mindset? :m:

Isn't he the product of western Jewish atheist mindset?

 

[IamJoseph]

A lot of Josephs's facts are false. He makes up facts entirely, he is influenced by dubious sources and he does not really care about reality, and when he gets caught in a lie he reaffirms the lie. That is the pattern IamJoseph has established.

I don't think he should be banned but there should be a warning on Josephs posts like the warnings in packs of cigarettes that believing or remembering any history learned from IamJoseph may be hazardous to your understanding of history. It is better to know nothing than to know something wrong.

Once I get a wrong fact into my head it is hard to get the wrong fact out of my a head. I assume everybody else has the same problem.

Joseph presents like he knows stuff and might be interested in history. Saying some crazy ultra religious superstitious stuff from time to time did not disqualify Joseph as a possible source for historical facts for me; it just raised my guard. Then I found him saying wrong things repeatedly. Now if he says anything interesting that I don't already know about and if I have time, I check his "facts". At least a quarter of those new facts are totally made up by him. Another quarter are badly distorted or from bad sources. A third quarter are mildly distorted or debatable. That is not a good enough track record.

When somebody wants to post things they are not sure of they should put a phrase like "I think" in front of the thought and not present it as facts. Joseph presents everything he says as facts. Joseph rarely presents links for his dubious facts.

On Arabs and Islam the majority of words written about them in English on the internet are from irrationally anti-Arab and Anti-Islamic Biases. The largest minority view points are from irrationally pro-Arab and Pro-Islamic biases. You will find little from a neutral bias written in English about Arabs or Muslims. Joseph hates Arabs and Muslims and he dislikes Christians also. Joseph also dislikes Science when it conflicts with his religious beliefs. Joseph only wanted to see the History that fits with his religion and his hatreds. He only plays at looking interested in history he really is only interested in his religion.



If you believe Mohamed the way IamJoseph believes Judaism then the similarity between Islam and Christianity and Judaism comes from God and what God told his prophets.

If you want look at the situation with the view that the Jewish and Christian and Muslim religions are delusions then you would say that Mohamed was influenced by Judaism and Christianity.

But IamJoseph says "Islamism did suck up to Christianity and the Hebrew bible, only it selected what it thought would win over both these belief systems."

Where does he get that? Did he make it up? What the hell is Islamism? The use of the word Islamism reveals something about IamJoseph and it is not revealing scholarship.

You can find this Idea that Islam was sucking up to the Jewish community in Medina in the the works of Christian historians from the 1800s. I prefer post 1950 historians because I think the standards and source materials available to historians have improved.

Islam haters will also portray things as they like. I don't think IamJoseph remembers any more details than he presented and he can't be bothered to research before he posts. But I can be bothered to research before I post.

According to the story Mohamed and those impressed by Mohamed Were in 620 AD (7 years after Mohamed began public preaching) being oppressed in their hometown Mecca by pagan Arabs and at the same time in Medina Arab pagan tribes and their Jewish tribe allies were getting into blood feuds with other Arab tribes and their Jewish tribe allies and needed somebody neutral to be their arbitrator. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medina (Arabs were not yet called Arabs and the Jews were probably also Arabs or at least part Arabs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza These were just various clans of people) The Jews and non-Jewish pagan clans in Medina apparently agreed Mohamed from Mecca as their arbitrator. Now what qualified Mohamed as an arbitrator? Apparently he was personally impressive but also he was neither a Pagan Arab nor Jewish. Mohamed was clearly influenced by Judaism but he was not Jewish. Perfect for this arbitrator job.

Now IamJoseph says Mohammed was sucking up to Christians and Jews. I don't think so. I think he was influenced by them. I also don't think IamJoseph's has a quality source for his belief.




Bravo Joseph, you used the phrase "it appears" yay. I can't draw those conclusions from the historical evidence.



None of this should be presented as fact but one "it appears" or other disclaimer per paragraph is good enough for me.

The fact is that Islam converted both by the sword and peaceful means and the peaceful appeal of Islam appears to me to have been more important than coercion.

Why was the time right for Christianity to sweep through the pagan Greco-Roman urban middle class 600 years earlier? I know Jews won't like hearing this but there also appeared to be massive conversions of Pagans to Judaism at the same time as they were converting to Christianity. All these offshoots of offshoots of the cult of Abraham and Moses fill similar roles and have similar appeals to the human psyche.


Ideas evolve from their parent ideas. Islam evolved from Judaism and Christianity when they got into Mohammed's mind regardless whether they got into Mohammed's mind the normal way or some supernatural way.

Similarly most academic scholars say Judaism evolved in part out of the older Zoroastrianism.
This site http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/jud_zor.htm and others say Jews were not even monotheist until they absorbed monotheism from Zoroastrianism.






There is something true about this lie of thinking. But be wary of believing the details.

Yes Muslims once prayed facing Jerusalem but everything else IamJoseph said is IamJoseph's opinion. Not surprisingly that is not the way Muslims tell the story. Who is more credible on this, Muslims or Muslim-haters?

OK IAmJoseph, here is a test for you. When did Muslims start praying facing towards Jerusalem and when did they stop.

http://www.hanifler.com/showthread.php?p=6692
http://www.ezsoftech.com/islamic/qiblatain.asp

You omit the best parts.

I don't hate arabs or any group. I hate those who claim it is a blessing to kill others, then dump mosques on other peoples' known sacred sites, then deny it with impudence: is that still hate? Then I am guilty. But I won't let you blame God here - the hand that does the robbing and killing is the guilty party. That allah is great, does not also mean the one beheading a man on open TV by 50 hooded muslims with guns pointed to his brain - are also great. This is true even if they scream allah akbar in F minor while performing their murder.

You also claim my statements are false. I don't see any confusion in saying the Quran is an amalgamation of the Hebrew and Christian bibles, and I gave reasonable historical grounds to assume this and say nix to any semblance of revelation being applicable here. You surely never got the same rituals practiced by Jews - for 2,600 years before you - from any revelation! If someone says the sun will shine tomorrow - it is not revelation. If you say the Quran is not taken off from a pre-existing writing and belief, then please show us which part is revelation?

Of note is that I don't care what you believe in - as long as you don't use your belief to rob and commit mass murder. Of note I don't go around pointing the finger at Buddhists or Hundus - they did not claim it a blessing to kill all infidels, rob their lands, dump mosques - than deny it. Muslims do these things, and there is a right to confront such doctrines. The rule I follow is simplistic:

WHAT IS HATEFUL TO YOU - DO NOT UNTO OTHERS.

How would you like a temple or church dumped on Haj square, and then it is denied? This is what ALL Muslims are accepting today of others and seeing it as a blessing. Well, you fooled me - there was no Jewish temple under the al aqsa - hahahaha! Quranic revelation, right?

 

[IamJoseph]

Similarly most academic scholars say Judaism evolved in part out of the older Zoroastrianism.
This site http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/jud_zor.htm and others say Jews were not even monotheist until they absorbed monotheism from Zoroastrianism.

Judaism is older than zoroastrianism and never worshipped the sun. These two never met till much time after Judaism evolved. There is a difference between real monotheism and monopaganism, or at least how these two belief systems operate. If you look closely, only of thse systems have no head bashing dieties battling for supremecy.

OK IAmJoseph, here is a test for you. When did Muslims start praying facing towards Jerusalem and when did they stop.

When Islam emerged, they first prayed facing Jerusalem, as an inducement to Jews. When this was rejected, Mohammed ordered an about face turn to Mecca. That is the facts of it. This also says where Muslims today got their ritual of praying facing a sacred place. It is the nature of the beast of religions, to deny anything unfavourable.

The other overiding fact is the pre-Islamic Arabs at no time followed the Abrahamic belief, nor were they even around at the time of Abraham. As an identifable group, the Arabs emerged in Arabia after 500 BCE. Today, we see Moses and Abraham presented as Muslims throughout the Islamic world - without even a mention of the true Hebrew source of these figureheads. One cannot boast of being Godly and also harbour terrible historical falsehoods. Nor can one horde Hebron, the birthplace of Judaism, and claim DOGS & JEWS FORBIDDEN: there is no sch thing as sacred islamic soil based on robbery and denial. You leave out the best bits.

 

[nirakar]

You omit the best parts.

I don't hate arabs or any group. I hate those who claim it is a blessing to kill others, then dump mosques on other peoples' known sacred sites, then deny it with impudence: is that still hate? Then I am guilty. But I won't let you blame God here - the hand that does the robbing and killing is the guilty party. That allah is great, does not also mean the one beheading a man on open TV by 50 hooded muslims with guns pointed to his brain - are also great. This is true even if they scream allah akbar in F minor while performing their murder.

By the way you portray things it looks like you hate to me, though I can't tell where your pride in or identification with Judaism ends and where your hate begins.

You also claim my statements are false. I don't see any confusion in saying the Quran is an amalgamation of the Hebrew and Christian bibles, and I gave reasonable historical grounds to assume this and say nix to any semblance of revelation being applicable here.

One point where I don't disagree with you is that Islam borrowed from Judaism. The Quran is original but it is very much affected by Judaism.

You surely never got the same rituals practiced by Jews - for 2,600 years before you - from any revelation! If someone says the sun will shine tomorrow - it is not revelation. If you say the Quran is not taken off from a pre-existing writing and belief, then please show us which part is revelation?

Of note is that I don't care what you believe in - as long as you don't use your belief to rob and commit mass murder. Of note I don't go around pointing the finger at Buddhists or Hundus - they did not claim it a blessing to kill all infidels, rob their lands, dump mosques - than deny it. Muslims do these things, and there is a right to confront such doctrines.

Some other thread you said Jews never stole land. Jews seemed proud to have stolen land from the Canaanites. Jews also stole land from the Palestinians.

People are not very nice particularly to weaker people from other tribes. Muslims and Jews and everybody else share in this shameful behavior. Can we stop behaving badly any time soon?

The rule I follow is simplistic:

WHAT IS HATEFUL TO YOU - DO NOT UNTO OTHERS.

You don't follow that rule.

How would you like a temple or church dumped on Haj square, and then it is denied?

Dumped? Forcing things upon other people is bad. Buying land a few blocks from the trade center is not forcing anything and the trade center is not Haj square.

How would you like a temple or church (was built) on Haj square

I would not care if a temple or church was built on Haj square but obviously the Muslims could not handle that. There is no such place as "Haj Square" but I know what you mean .