Another miscomprehension. I only scanned it initially, because I thought it was some kind of bizarre off-tangent argument. It was only after phlogistian pointed out it's actual significance that I realized it was indeed a confirmation of my suspicion.
So you trolled until someone else pointed out your blindness?
"We"? How many moderators are you? Still, I wonder what would happen if you complained about me on basis of this new tack. Maybe you should complain retroactively. In fact, I insist. I'll start the process for you, if you're not interested in pursuing it immediately. Let me know ASAP.
Contrary to what you may believe, you do not factor into what I discuss on the Mod forum. I think the only time I ever discussed you as an indvidual was when I recommended you for a post on this forum a fair while ago.
But your behaviour has brought up a valid point to what is important to the moderation and administrators of this site as a whole. What should we do with members who keep asking for proof but refuses or can't be bothered to read what has been provided? In a time when we are trying to determine what constitutes intellectual dishonesty, what should we do with those like you who keeps demanding proof but can't be bothered reading the links provided or quotes provided from articles, or accuses the other of lying because they simply can't be bothered to read the links provided to them?
As a member, what should we do with posters who consistently exhibit this kind of behaviour?
Fascinating, but not related to my discussion of this issue; Rauf is receiving foreign funding, after insisting he wasn't, and from Saudi Arabia of all places. That the GOP are funded via the same source is also very disturbing.
Actually, I think it has a lot to do with this issue.
But what this debate has shown is that the Right will grasp at any opportunity to spread fear and hatred in the community, while accepting millions from the very Saudi they accuse Rauf of accepting $300,000 from, for pure political gain. What this debate has shown as in entrenched fear, hatred and suspicion of Muslims, who are expected to provide their sources of funding while any organisation would never have faced such a requirement. What this debate has shown is that people are willing to attack anyone they suspect is Muslim on the street. And what this debate has shown is that the supposed extremist have remained
dignified and peaceful compared to the opposition who have taken to attacking black people on the street in their zeal against Islam.
For avoiding my point by resorting to personal insult, which is, incidentally, a violation of forum rules. I will repeat: I even want Catholic priests vetted for paedophilic tendencies. How does this fit into your myopic condemnations of me? Answer: it doesn't. Instead, it's astounding fair. What will you do now for an argumentative point? I'd like to hear an answer to my points in this paragraph, please.
You want priests vetted for paedophilic tendencies?
*Snort*
I called you a "tard", because that is what your response and the way it was worded deserved.
Again: this is a lie. I wanted to see the sources of funding that Mr Rauf has been seeking. (Mind, you and phlog have confirmed those suspicions.) I will quote an earlier response to Joe:
Which was linked to you. Several times and which you admit you didn't bother to read or pay attention to.
In short, you were dishonest and you trolled.
Enraged moderators threatening spurious moderation against posters?
I am not you. I don't attack people on mere suspicion.
I like to have enough proof before I take moderator action.
In all seriousness, I was interested and saddened by those stories; it is regrettable that an important social issue results in this kind of thing. It's a consequence of a lot of social change. It's also worth noting that intolerance works both ways. From the estimable good Sir Christopher:
Intolerance does work both ways. And it is not "regrettable" but disgusting. To have people attacked in the street because of a suspicion that they are Muslim is what the suspicions about his Centre has led to. That kind of suspicion is now spreading across the US and other Mosques are being protested against and Muslims attacked for being Muslim. Just as cab drivers who refuse passage to blind people with guide dogs for religious reasons is disgusting and vile.
It's not "regrettable". It is a god damn joke that we are going back to an era where people are attacked on the street for a mere suspicion against their religious beliefs.
Perhaps by both parties making real accomodation - Hitchens describes the process as necessarily "two-way" - we can make concrete social gains. Give and take. Hitchens' article is interesting and - as per norm - well-written, although he focuses more on the approbation Rauf gives the likes of Khamenei. The latter is startling and eerie, but international rather than domestic.
As I linked above, Rauf and his wife have been overly polite and dignified during this whole issue. Rauf has been dragged through the mud, his reputation destroyed because of racist and bigoted suspicions that he is an extremists. We have seen people like you attempting to brand him as something without proof and gleefully calling him a liar because he received $300,000 in donations from a Saudi Prince, the same Saudi Prince who donates millions and millions to the GOP and News Corp, which they failed to disclose to anyone. News Corp is partly owned by this very Saudi.. And again, they failed to disclose that and the multi billion dollar value of those shares to the public. But a $300,000 charitable donation is now used as a basis to attack Rauf because he failed to disclose it, when he has no obligation to disclose it.
What this debate has shown is that the right and its supporters will do anything and overlook anything to attack a Muslim for being a Muslim, even though that Muslim has proven repeatedly to be peaceful and has worked in the community to help bring peace between the factions. What all this has shown is that mere suspicion is leading to people being attacked and threatened on the street for appearing to be Muslim.
I'll keep you posted on confirmation.
