Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Topics on the News-Argus opinion polls.
Forum rules
The Goldsboro News-Argus reserves the right to delete any posts deemed inappropriate or off-topic.

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby pullen978807 on Sat Aug 21, 2010 11:20 pm

You probably already know that I’m part of that first America. The America “where it doesn’t matter what language you speak, what god you worship, or how deep your New World roots run. An America where allegiance to the Constitution trumps ethnic differences, language barriers and religious divides. An America where the newest arrival to our shores is no less American than the ever-so-great granddaughter of the Pilgrims.”

I think that the second America taps into the spirit of nativism, which in a moderate form is acceptable. There is nothing wrong with wanting to preserve one’s cultural heritage and religious tradition. Nevertheless, several words and phrases in the piece by Douthat caught my attention.

“It draws its social norms from the mores of the Anglo-Saxon Diaspora – and it expects new arrivals to assimilate themselves to these norms, and quickly.”

I’m aware of the commonly propagated notion that immigrants groups should assimilate and assumed views and traditions more in line with mainstream America; however, I disagree with this belief. I’m a rising junior at a university that is more diverse than one can imagine. I’m a friend of at least 2 dozen 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants from Haiti, Nigeria, Italy, and Ghana. Moreover twelve percent of the student population (approximately 700 students) is international students. I work with kids from Pakistan, India, Zimbabwe, Canada, and London. I can’t imagine asking any of my friends to abandon their unique cultural traditions in order to assimilate and assume traditional American norms. Being good friends with someone who practices Hindi or rooming with a Muslim, in no way threatens the Judeo-Christian values that my grandparents instilled in me. I’m actually lucky to be placed in an environment that allows me to have so many enriching experiences with individuals from backgrounds and cultures entirely different from mine. My freshman year roommate was an atheist from Eastern Europe; we did not get along (although it had nothing to do with cultural differences).

Should everyone living in the U.S learn English? Definitely yes. Should everyone who immigrates to the U.S renounce his or her religious tradition to practice Judaism or Christianity? I'm biased to Christianity, but I believe religion is a personal matter. I know individuals from several religious traditions who are all great human beings. Is it OK for immigrants to maintain their traditional cultural heritage while finding a niche within the broader American society? I think so. Should Muslims give up the Mosque and Ramadan? No. The statement above, by Douthat is not an xenophobic statement; however, the sentiments expressed above can lead to the kind of xenophobia that has led some politicians to challenge the 14th amendment rights of current and future born American citizens; the same kind of xenophobia that produced the Chinese Exclusion Act during the late 19th century because Chinese immigrants were not assimilating to the desires of American politicians. To me a U.S citizen is a U.S citizen no matter what religion they practice if any, no matter what building structure they worship in if any. As long as a citizen is acting within the rules and regulations of the United States, I’m perfectly fine with them maintaining and exhibiting their native cultural traditions, so long as they are willing to respect mine.

“The second America begs to differ. It sees the project as an affront to the memory of 9/11, and a sign of disrespect for the values of a country where Islam has only recently become part of the public consciousness. And beneath these concerns lurks the darker suspicion that Islam in any form may be incompatible with the American way of life.”

Again I recognize how some may view the location of the mosque as insensitive and inappropriate. A lot of people view Islam as inherently un-America. I have been debating this with a friend on my personal website. As I told him, it is a matter of interpretation.

“Too often, American Muslim institutions have turned out to be entangled with ideas and groups that most Americans rightly consider beyond the pale. Too often, American Muslim leaders strike ambiguous notes when asked to disassociate themselves completely from illiberal causes.”

I agree that a lot of people consider the silence of Muslim leaders regarding terrorism and attacks on liberty as tacit approval of extremists who claim to represent Islam. Although I think it would be nice, and a great gesture for Muslim leaders to forcefully condemn terrorist activities; I don’t view silence as proof that they condone it. I mean in America, Muslims who hate American’s have a constitutional right to speak to that hate. So if someone is not making hate speech, why assume that they hate? I don’t. Analogy: Wild things happen at college. Individuals within a particular clique (group) have different levels of moral and spiritual development. Someone of high moral and spiritual development may be aware of a friend’s engagement in risky, perhaps immoral behavior, but opt not to condemn our speak out against it. Deciding not to speak out is not an endorsement of the behavior; the person may simply be minding his or her own business. For some Islamic leaders it may be a matter of safety. They may have family abroad who can potentially be targeted by the minority (extremists) residing in the region. I personally think a lot of Muslim leaders speak out, but the media doesn't cover it. It doesn't sell or boost rating. Most of my friends (although not Islamic leaders, future leaders perhaps) have spoken out. We had a prominent yet controversial speaker at our university a few months ago named Nonie Darwish. She was born Muslim in Cairo Egypt and has since converted to Christianity. She spoke for about an hour focusing on the extreme aspects of the Islamic faith; touching on all of the stereotypes about Muslims and placing her stamp of approval on those stereotypes. She angered many students including myself and a lot of my Muslim peers because she made gross generalizations about those who practice Islam. Generalizations that should be confined to the more extreme elements of the religion and not moderate, peace-loving, followers of Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonie_Darwish

Sticking to the same issue of denunciations, below is a website documenting denunciations of terrorism by Muslims as well as vigils held in American and abroad by Muslims who were as sad and grief-stricken as most Americans were following the tragic attacks on 9/11.

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm
pullen978807
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby Lucy on Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:43 pm

My own mother emigrated here from Germany in 1956; speaking very little English, yet she applied herself to learning the English language and many of the customs of our country without sacrificing her own culture and heritage. My brothers and sisters and I had the best of both worlds and her desire to “assimilate” certainly made it easier making friends and becoming accepted. Not only did she retain the richness of her heritage, but she freely opened herself up to all the wonderful customs and traditions of America. People today focus so much on their diversities that they miss the opportunities that unity offers.

You ask, “Should everyone who immigrates to the U.S renounce his or her religious tradition to practice Judaism or Christianity?” Of course not. “Should Muslims give up the Mosque and Ramadan?” Who’s asking them to? I’m not in favor of forcing them to move. I only ask that they consider the intensity of the hurt and pain that so many victims and their families suffer. If they decide not to relocate it, I certainly will not hate Muslims. I will question the sincereity though of those who say they want to aid the healing process.

I know you don’t view silence among Muslim leaders in condemning terroristic violence as proof that they condone it but unfortunately, many in America do. I have at times thought that. Silence at times can be deafening. As for Muslim leaders being afraid to speak out for fear of their family members living abroad, what are you then saying about Islam? Should not the light be turned on to reveal all the ugliness so it can be addressed and corrected? I wish the link you gave of denunciations by Muslim leaders after 9/11 included more recent additions. They all seem to have been given in 2001.

I have heard of Nonie Darwish and don’t know that much about her. Are you dismissing everything of what she spoke to? Why? She gave her life’s history on her website and it would seem she would know something of what she is talking about. Did your peers who were angered grow up in a Muslim country or were they raised here in America? Are all negative things voiced about Islam just to be considered stereotyping and generalizations and therefore; should it all be discarded?
Lucy
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 6:42 pm

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby pullen978807 on Sun Aug 22, 2010 8:43 pm

“People today focus so much on their diversities that they miss the opportunities that unity offers.”

I’m not sure if the statement above is factual or not; it would be interesting to try to see if that is the case. I do believe that the diversity that America has to offer would be a tremendous waste if immigrant groups form their own unique cliques, and have little to no interactions with individuals who comprise the mainstream American culture. I think this happens at times, but for the most part, by virtue of residing in America, immigrant groups take time to familiarize themselves with America culture, adjust, and fit in as well as those who are direct descendants of individuals who came over on the Mayflower. I do think that it is possible to maintain native traditions and customs, and still be acceptable to many Americans. I think the point that I was trying to make in my previous post is that America, which is home to individuals from several distinct cultural and religious traditions, is a place where intercultural competence is required. I believe, and you probably do to, that intercultural competence between those who practice Islam (in America and abroad) and Americans in general is lacking. I’m not sure who is at fault. I guess both sides could do better at extending an olive branch to the other.

You ask, “Should everyone who immigrates to the U.S renounce his or her religious tradition to practice Judaism or Christianity?” Of course not. “Should Muslims give up the Mosque and Ramadan?” Who’s asking them to?

Those rhetorical questions were not directed at you. I was just writing them for effect. I think that some people’s answers to those questions would surprise you, although they probably are few and far between. The American Family Association has condemned the creation of further mosques in the United States, comparing them to terrorist training centers. I know that this group is not in the majority, but given these sentiments no one knows what people will be thinking years and decades down the line.

As for Muslim leaders being afraid to speak out for fear of their family members living abroad, what are you then saying about Islam? Should not the light be turned on to reveal all the ugliness so it can be addressed and corrected? I wish the link you gave of denunciations by Muslim leaders after 9/11 included more recent additions. They all seem to have been given in 2001.

I am not saying that all Muslims are peaceful, moderate adherents of Islam. There are a large number of Muslims (who represent a small percentage of the 1.5 billion who practice Islam) who do view Americans as the enemies, as Nonie Darwish pointed out in her speech. Let’s throw an arbitrary number as small as 1%. 1% of Muslims interpret the scriptures of Islam in such a way that they are inspired to become terrorists. That 1% of 1.5 billion is 15 million (a very large number and the U.S should strategize and implement ways to combat this large group, but not by placing restrictions on moderates). So yes there are people who claim to represent Islam that do have the desire to carry out violent activities against American and other Western societies; there is no reason to argue against it. The problem, in my opinion, is that individuals are not doing, but should do, a better job in distinguishing between who the enemy is and who the enemy is not. We have a presumption problem, that is many Americans presume Islam and its followers to be violent in nature, when statistically speaking they should not be doing so. The presumption should not be that a Muslim is violent for the simple fact that a small percentage of Islamic adherents subscribe to violence and terrorism. None of us were angry with Nonie Darwish for pointing out that there is a large group of terrorists who practice Islam. We were not mad at Nonie Darwish for pointing out some of the antiquated, undemocratic, and unjustified policies of Sharia law. The problem that we had with Nonie Darwish and some Americans is that they presume that 25% of the world's population is violent, or fundamentally anti-American solely because of the religion that they practice. Mrs. Darwish is assumed to speak with authority for the simple fact that she was born in Cairo, and raised in a traditional Muslim family. When she goes on the lecture circuit indicting Islam instead of the “extreme elements that profess violence in the name of Islam” she is only contributing to the generalizations and stereotypes about Islamic people. I have no problem talking about violence done in the name of Islam. Nor do I have a problem talking about Sharia law. I would guess that my peers don’t either. The problem again is about making distinctions, recognizing that only a small percentage of the 1.5 billion followers of Islam interpret the text in way that condones violence, and that the majority of Muslims do not. We must not act as Glenn Beck did when he interviewed Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to United States Congress. Beck implored that Ellison prove to him that he is not working for the enemy. Why?

Violence in the name of Religion

"It is important that we study the religious texts in their proper context. When these texts are not read in their proper textual and historical contexts, they can be easily manipulated and distorted. It is true that some Muslims manipulate these verses for their own goals. But this is not only with Islamic texts; it is also true with the texts of other religions. I can quote dozens of verses from the Bible, which seems very violent, if taken out from their historical context. Many violent Jewish and Christian groups have used these Biblical texts. Crusaders used them against Muslims and Jews. Nazis used them against Jews. And recently, Serbian Christians used them against Bosnian Muslims. Now, Zionists are using them against Palestinians on a daily basis (Islamic Leader)."

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Sate ... 3758859025

To be honest I was just reading scripture from the Quran and I was like wait? What? Did this scripture really just say this? I was reading the scriptures out of context. Violence in the name of religion is less about the religion and religious text, and more about the way individuals interpret the religious text to justify their own selfish aims whether it be slavery, racism, sexism, war, and jihad. As the Muslim leader said, we see this in all religions including Judaism and Christianity. We have to recognize that there are good and bad apples in all religions. We must recognize that bad goes against the norm, and we should presume about others what we want them to presume about us. I agree that islamic and Western society alike, cling to unwarranted assumptions about the other and that leaders from both religious traditions must work to remove these assumptions.

http://www.christianaggression.org/item ... e=articles
pullen978807
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby GKCWANNABE on Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:22 pm

Pullen 978807, you seem to be working on a rather interesting assumption in regards to the Islamic faith. There are two versions of Islam: the moderate version that your friends practice and the extreme version practiced by the perpetrators of 9/11 and the numerous attacks on Western civilization since. Your assumption is that your friends’ moderate interpretation of Islam is the correct one, but how do you know? Now I don’t know your friends or their backgrounds, but if they were raised in this country it seems possible that the version of Islam they practice has been westernized. On the other hand someone like Nonie Darwish, who was raised in Egypt and experienced Islam in the context of the culture from whence it came, is more qualified to make judgments on Islam than you or I and quite possibly your friends as well. To dismiss her statements of the Islam she grew up with as “gross generalizations” seems a bit naïve.

You also state that, in regards to religious violence, “we must recognize that bad goes against the norm.” If by ‘norm’ we mean the majority of people who practice Islam, you would be correct. But why assume the majority is the norm. Perhaps the violent interpretation of Islam is the proper one, and the moderate Muslims are wrong. “Violence in the name of religion is less about the religion and religious text, and more about the way individuals interpret the religious text to justify their own selfish aims whether it be slavery, racism, sexism, war, and jihad.” I can’t say I agree with this statement either. The fact that a text is religious does not automatically make it peaceful. I do agree that we must interpret religious texts in context, but we must also interpret religious practice within the context of its culture of origin. If you were writing a research paper on the religion of Islam, wouldn’t someone like Nonie Darwish, who grew up not just in the religion but also in the culture, be a more credible source than a Muslim who has spent the majority of his life in western civilization.

Understand that I am not attacking Islam or assuming that it is violent. I merely refuse to accept that any violent interpretation of a religion is wrong simply because it is a religion. And I see no reason to dismiss the generalizations of someone like Nonie Darwish because she of all people has the right to make them. Now if moderate Muslims are truly interested in showing that not all Muslims are violent then the Islamic community must demonstrate that they are committed to peace by denouncing the actions of the extremists, unlike Imam Rauf (considered by many a moderate Muslim) who said America was “an accessory to the crime” of 9/11. Statements like this are tantamount to saying the Jews are partly to blame for the Holocaust. How does any of this relate to the location of the mosque at ground zero? The fact that relocating the mosque would go a long way to demonstrating to skeptical America that the Islamic community in this country is willing to work to better relations with their fellow US citizens and change the perception of Islam as a religion of violence.
GKCWANNABE
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:45 pm

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby drarnold on Mon Aug 23, 2010 9:56 pm

Let me tell you why it matters, the building that you are calling a Mosque is actually a Community Center and place of worship, saying where one can and cannot build a place of worship is directly against this group of Americans rights even if the people of the neighborhood don’t support that particular religion. This is not freedom of religion or tolerance toward a group of people and it is a direct violation of their Constitutional Rights.
What we should be more concerned about is the actions of the Republican minority.You might think that our Government takes “Care”of the the rescuers of the 9/11 tragedy, but once again the Republican Congress has shown just what they think of the struggling middle Americans, and not even the rescuers and their families are exempt. The Republicans voted down a bill to increase the amount of Health Care allowed for the 9/11 heroes. This would cover the medical bills incurred due to the inhalation of smoke and chemicals directly related to the tragedy , maybe we should think about this atrocity that has a genuine effect against real people with real problems- not just a small group of people trying to build a Community Center.
drarnold
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:32 pm

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby Glen Davis on Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:58 pm

It may hurt some peoples feellings, but some things are bigger than our feellings. No one can stop it so why worry. My Bible says don't worry about anything pray about everything. I don't believe anger and shouting shows God's love. Blessed are the peace makers. Shalom
Glen Davis
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2010 1:46 pm

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby pullen978807 on Wed Aug 25, 2010 2:40 am

GKCWANNABE: We seem to be at odds on a number of issues. So I’ll address several points of contention that I have with your post. You and any other responders can feel free to refute any of the arguments that I make. It is going to be long, maybe a couple of posts. Here goes…

“You seem to be working on a rather interesting assumption in regards to the Islamic faith. There are two versions of Islam: the moderate version that your friends practice and the extreme version practiced by the perpetrators of 9/11 and the numerous attacks on Western civilization since.”

To assume is to suppose something to be the case without proof. I do not assume, I assert that there are moderate and extreme forms of Islam. Not all Muslims are moderate and not all Muslims are extreme. Do you not agree?

“To dismiss her statements of the Islam she grew up with as “gross generalizations” seems a bit naïve.”

I disagree. When an individual uses faulty logic to mischaracterize an entire group of people it is not naïve to state that the individual is making gross generalizations. She may have been raised in a town or village where radicalism was the norm, but can we say this about all Muslims? No. To characterize a religion based on the actions of a few is the very essence of generalizing. It perpetuates stereotypes and encourages xenophobic sentiments amongst those with relatively no understanding of the Islamic tradition. Should individuals make similar generalization about Christians based on the actions of a few? (I list several Christian terrorists organizations in my last post) As a Christian I renounce the actions of these groups and believe them to be unrepresentative of the Christian faith and the beliefs of moderate Christians. Many Christians will do likewise and acknowledge that these Christian extremists are unrepresentative of the religious tradition. Disappointingly they are unwilling to do the same for moderate Muslims.

“You also state that, in regards to religious violence, “we must recognize that bad goes against the norm.” If by ‘norm’ we mean the majority of people who practice Islam, you would be correct. But why assume the majority is the norm.”

Norm is not a quantitative term, but rather qualitative. A norm is something that is usual, typical, or standard. It refers to social behavior that is typical or expected of a particularly group. When I say Islamic terrorism goes against the norm, I am saying that terrorism is not a typical or expected behavior of individuals who profess the Islamic faith. Do you not agree that terrorism is not a typical or expected behavior of those who profess the Islamic faith?

“Perhaps the violent interpretation of Islam is the proper one, and the moderate Muslims are wrong.”

This statement is completely unfounded. Are you suggesting that a majority of Muslims are interpreting their religious text incorrectly? Are you saying that moderate Muslim scholars (see link below), are interpreting their religious text incorrectly?
http://www.famousmuslims.com/scholars.htm

“The fact that a text is religious does not automatically make it peaceful.”


True. But this applies to all religions including Christianity and Judaism. Peaceful is a subjective term. No one can complete an objective study or experiment to conclude that a religion is peaceful or not.

“If you were writing a research paper on the religion of Islam, wouldn’t someone like Nonie Darwish, who grew up not just in the religion but also in the culture, be a more credible source than a Muslim who has spent the majority of his life in western civilization.”


Not really. Nonie is not a scholar, nor does she bring to her discussions any since of impartiality or objectivity. Individuals who engage in scholarly academic writing generally run from sources like Nonie. Nonie is like Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, individuals who profit off of racism and xenophobia. I would never use her as a source in any of my papers. There are far too many real Muslim scholars who bring to the table not only personal life experiences, but rigorous, thorough, and unbiased academic study of Islamic culture and religious text. This link pretty much sums it up…
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/02/nonie- ... l-of-lies/
pullen978807
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby pullen978807 on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:03 am

“Understand that I am not attacking Islam or assuming that it is violent. I merely refuse to accept that any violent interpretation of a religion is wrong simply because it is a religion.”

By not ruling out that the violent interpretation is wrong, are you saying the violent interpretation of the Islamic text is the correct interpretation? If so, may I ask why?

“And I see no reason to dismiss the generalizations of someone like Nonie Darwish because she of all people has the right to make them.”


So you have no problem accepting notions that are completely false and unfounded?

“Now if moderate Muslims are truly interested in showing that not all Muslims are violent then the Islamic community must demonstrate that they are committed to peace by denouncing the actions of the extremists.”

They do. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Americans who are unaware of these denunciations can easily become aware after a simple Google search. All one has to do is type Muslim leaders denounce terrorism in a Google search menu; it only takes seconds. Americans must educate themselves. You can’t depend on only traditional media sources for information; you have to be an active seeker of information via non-traditional media/news outlets.
http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

Using Partial Quotes to Prove a Point?

The Imam said, “"I wouldn't say the United States deserved what happened on 9-11, but the United States' policies were an accessory to the crime that happened." Secretary Hillary Clinton agrees, see the videos below. The staff at our Center for Defense Information agrees as well. During the 1980s the CIA trained Afghanistan rebels referred to as the mujahidin in guerilla warfare tactics, so that they can fight the Soviet Union in the region. After the Soviet withdrew in 1988, the rebels toppled the existing government in Afghanistan. Shortly after the rebels were factionalized and out of that division arose the Taliban regime. A former mujahidin member Mullah Omar, who was a CIA-trained commander, played a large role in the creation and growth of the Taliban. The Taliban regime harbored and trained members of Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks. I agree that accessory is the wrong term to use, but it is a fact that United States policies enabled some of the individuals who we are fighting today; we trained individuals who are training the individuals whom we are fighting.

http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/afghanistan-history-pr.cfm
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=A__vw5V ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0Q4em739_Q

“The fact that relocating the mosque would go a long way to demonstrating to skeptical America that the Islamic community in this country is willing to work to better relations with their fellow US citizens and change the perception of Islam as a religion of violence.”

I disagree with the notion that it is the responsibility of members within a stigmatized group to help someone who carries prejudice, racist, or xenophobic sentiments to rid themselves of such sentiments. It is not the responsibility of the moderate Muslim to prove to anyone that he or she is not violent. We don’t place a similar responsibility on Christians or any other groups, so why single out Muslims? I am an African-American male, one who grew up in the inner city at that. I know a little about stigmatization. Everything is questioned/challenged...

The way we talk (I speak a mixture of African-American vernacular/Standard English when not in a classroom, although ebonics is viewed as an inferior language)
The way we walk
The way we dress (I wear urban clothing, but keep my pants at or above my waistline)
Our intelligence (I go to college and will be going to law school in a few years)
Our criminality (I never had a run in with the law although I was racially profiled a couple of times)
And at times even our humanity (Oscar Grant, Sean Bell, and justifiable homicides).

It is not my duty to prove to someone with negative perceptions of African-Americans that I am a “good Negro.” Nor is it the responsibility of any Muslim in the United States to help rid some Americans of their own problem of Islamophobia. Some Americans are really showing their xenophobia over the entire mosque affair and in the process they are projecting their problem of Islamophobia onto Muslims by arguing that Islam is un-American, and inherently violent when that its not the case.
pullen978807
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:44 am

Re: Building a mosque a couple blocks away from the 9/11 site

Postby pullen978807 on Wed Aug 25, 2010 3:27 am

Good and Bad in ALL Religions

Below is a list of Christian terrorist organizations who I find to be unrepresentative of the Christian faith. The point I am trying to make is that there is no reason to be fearful of a Muslim when you see them at a grocery store, when your ride on a train with one of them, when they build a mosque in your neighborhood. They are ordinary Americans like anyone else. They should not be presumed to be violent because someone else, who professes their religion, has committed acts of terrorism. We should not assume that they cling to hate, because someone else, who professes their religion, cling to hate. There are good and bad apples in ALL religions and bad goes against the norm. I hope we all can agree.

1. Christian Identity Movement
http://www.religioustolerance.org/cr_ident.htm

2. Huratee
http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion ... _kopp.html

3. The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord (CSA)
http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/america ... enant.html

4. Phineas Priesthood (Phineas Priests)
http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/an_phineas.asp

5. Concerned Christians
http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/308099

6. Russian National Unity
http://www.start.umd.edu/start/data/top ... sp?id=3674

7. The Lambs of Christ
http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion ... _kopp.html

8. Aryan Republican Army
http://www.start.umd.edu/start/data/top ... sp?id=3412

9. Bosnian Genocide
http://www.hmh.org/la_Genocide_Bosnia.shtml
pullen978807
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:44 am


PreviousNext

Return to News-Argus Poll Topics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests

cron