Opinions about the naming of an Islamic center

[Gota]

What do you guys think about the Islamic center about to be built near ground zero?

I read that many Americans oppose this action(of course the land is private and the owners can do whatever they want with it even if its against the will of many).
Now,this is not news but i just read that this Islamic center for tolerance is gonna be called "Cordoba".
I got interested and i am pretty sure that when they decided to call it Cordoba they did so because of the Spanish Cordoba that was conquered by Muslims during the dark ages.
This city was taken and all Christians and Jews eventually were either killed, expelled out of it,forced to convert or live as dhimmis(taxed heavily,suffered very strict rules and punishments and forced to physically show they are not Muslim at all times).
It than became a capitol of an Islamic caliphate....

So an Islamic TOLERANCE center built near GROUND ZERO,where Islamic fundamentalists carried out the biggest terror act in human history, is gonna be called "Cordoba" as homage to the Islamic capitol conquered from the christian Spanish....
all i can say about this is:


I wonder how many Americans actually know about why it is gonna be called Cordoba...

P.S.
there is another Cordoba in Argentina but i see no possible connection between the Argentinian Cordoba and Islam so i am pretty sure they meant the Spanish one.

[knorke]

how near is near?
From what I've read its 2 streets to the north and there is no line of sight.

[Peet]

I support the principle but your embedded image certainly does suit the nomenclature, if that fact is indeed true.

[hoijui]

surely is related to the spanish cordoba, but the rest you said is bullshit.
it is bush quality talk, frankly. just saying what is pro your argument, and ignoring the other 95% of reality.

i tried to read some about cordobas history, and found not a single resource stating what you said about the christians and jews at the conquering through muslims. not saying that makes it wrong, but i hardly doubt it is true, as it is not the way they generally acted when conquering. independent of that being true or false, all sources i found clearly state, that under muslim rule, the city became something like the capital of the known world in the dark ages (eg, what new york is today). christians, jews and muslims living together peacefully. well working economics, lots of culture stuff, high literacy, ...
until today, the muslim influence in spain from back then is generally seen as something that enriches the country in many ways (architecture, culture, technology, ...).

if you had used just a second of brain-time, you would have realized that the only rationality behind such a thing (the center), from a the standpoint of the muslims, is to enhance their image with the others. So if you had used your brain, your anti-muslim argument would have had to be: "they are slimy pigs!"
a pro argument would be: "they are trying to work towards peace!"

"so kids, what did we learn today?"
"NOTHING!"

edit: fixed typos, added one sentence

[Gota]

I have no idea how close but i assume its close enough so as to start such a discussion in the first place...
Maybe some Americans can enlighten us about it.

[Peet]

The Moors engaged in battle with Visigothic soldiers, eventually killing their monarch, King Roderick. The Muslim invasion, and subsequent administration of Iberia, freed the major Spanish population of Jews from Visigothic oppression.

"Side by side with the new rulers lived the Christians and Jews in peace. The latter rich with commerce and industry were content to let the memory of their oppression by the priest-ridden Goths sleep" (Hume 23).

Both Muslim and Christian sources tell us that Jews provided valuable aid to the invaders [6]. Once captured, the defense of Córdoba was left in the hands of Jews, and Granada, Málaga, Seville, and Toledo were left to a mixed army of Jews and Moors.

The first period of exceptional prosperity took place under the reign of Abd ar-Rahman III (882-942), the first independent Caliph of C├│rdoba. The inauguration of the Golden Age is closely identified with the career of his Jewish councillor, Hasdai ibn Shaprut (882-942). Originally a court physician, Shaprut's official duties went on to include the supervision of customs and foreign trade. (...) Hasdai benefitted world Jewry not only indirectly by creating a favorable environment for scholarly pursuits within Iberia, but also by using his influence to intervene on behalf of foreign Jews, as is reflected in his letter to the Byzantine Princess Helena. In it he requested protection for the Jews under Byzantine rule, attesting to the fair treatment of the Christians of al-Andalus, and perhaps indicating that such was contingent on the treatment of Jews abroad (Assis, p. 13; Mann, pp. 21ÔÇô22).

...uh huh.

[Gota]

surely is related to the spanish cordoba, but the rest you said is bullshit.
it is bush quality talk, frankly. just saying what is pro your argument, and ignoring the other 95% of reality.

i tried to read some about cordobas history, and found not a single resource stating what you said about the christians and jews at the conquering through muslims. not saying that makes it wrong, but i hardly doubt it is true, as it is not the way they generally acted when conquering. independent of that being true or false, all sources i found clearly state, that under muslim rule, the city became something like the capital of the known world in the dark ages (eg, what new york is today). christians, jews and muslims living together peacefully. well working economics, lots of culture stuff, high literacy, ...
until today, the muslim influence in spain form back then is generally seen as something that enriches the country in many ways (architecture, culture, technology, ...).

if you had used just a second of brain-time, you would have realized that the only rationality behind such a thing (the center), from a the standpoint of the muslims, is to enhance their image with the others. So if you had used your brain, your anti-muslim argument would have had to be: "they are slimy piggs!"
a pro argument would be: "they are trying to work towards peace!"

"so kids, what did we learn today?"
"NOTHING!"

edit: fixed typos, added one sentence

Ill get back to you about this.
But you must understand that there could not have been equality and peaceful coexistence in Muslims controlled lands because non Muslims in a religious Muslim state must by law be second class citizens.
What a Muslim would mean as equality under the Muslim caliphates is that Jews and Christians were allowed to stay and were not killed off but they were always penalized and they were always second class citizens if they lived under Muslim rule.
Fact is Cordoba,as all Andalusia,was conquered in the same jihadistic manner as jerusalem.
Chruches turned into mosques etc etc
It later prospered as a cultural center for the Islamic caliphate,no doubt about that.
But spain was CONQUERED by the muslim caliphate.

[Peet]

Also, they changed the name.

[hoijui]

wow.. sounds like you lived there!
how comes you know better then all the references stated here so far, and better then the consensus of spain?
(tip: spain is not ruled by muslims anymore, and they still have little bad to say about them ruling spain back then...)

[AF]

This is ever a troll thread if ever I saw one

[Gota]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_o ... _peninsula

there you go:

713 - Abd al-Aziz ibn Musa, Musa ibn Nusair's son, takes Ja├®n, Murcia, Granada, Sagunto.

* The Christians of Seville and Toledo revolt, but are put down by Abd al-Aziz ibn Musa's troops. Toledo is pillaged and its notables are beheaded.

After another revolt in Toledo, 700 men, women and children are beheaded by the Muslims.
818 - The revolt in C├│rdoba against the Muslims is punished by three days of massacres and pillage, with 300 notables crucified and 20,000 families expelled.

All christians and jews were living under dhimmi law with land being seized and them paying more taxes and treated as second class citizens.
they had a certain dress code to show who they were and were not allowed to wear certain types of clothes and many more rules just read dhimmi in wiki.

I don't know what Spanish people report nowdays hoijui(id like to see your references about it though) but Spain and Cordoba were conquered from the Christians violently and all the none Muslim population was subjected to dhimmi law.

I'm not saying the Visigoths,after the roman empire fell were better for Spain or jews but fact is cordoba and spain were christian kingdoms conquered by the Muslim caliphate,they did not revolt against the visigoths or called the caliphate to rule them,they were conquered.

Also, they changed the name.

Ok, this is news to me, thanks.
but,why do you think they changed the name?
Cause Cordoba is an obvious in your face statement no matter how cosmopolitan and liberal and humerous you are.
Question is if being suspicious and feeling weird about such a name is only paranoia than what is the explanation for such a name?
What were they thinking when they called it Cordoba.


P.S Christians and jews living under dhimmi law were the lucky ones,other people with non monotheistic believes were treated much worse,of course not sure if anyone treated those with any respect but neither that or dhimmi law can be viewed as peaceful nowdays,which is what matters since the naming of the center is a contemporary event.
Anyway these are my thoughts on the matter...

I wanted to know what americans think since they are closer to this and are more exposed to the discussions taking place inside the US about this.

by the way,Jews lived peacefully and quietly anywhere where someone was not killing them (since they were always the small minority) this includes all areas around the world not jsut the peacfull time in spain.
They also had a "golden age" in Germany prior to the 20th century,or in poland,or the ukraine...

[MidKnight]

Ooh deary, this is just like the CA renaming debates.

It's just a name. You can connote it with all sorts of things, it doesn't mean that those connotations affect the entity the name refers to.

Calling CA "Open Conflict" doesn't make it more open. Calling the Islamic community center near ground zero "Cordoba" doesn't make it more like a Spanish city.

Also, could the thread title be edited to be more descriptive?

[Gota]

Ooh deary, this is just like the CA renaming debates.

It's just a name. You can connote it with all sorts of things, it doesn't mean that those connotations affect the entity the name refers to.

Calling CA "Open Conflict" doesn't make it more open. Calling the Islamic community center near ground zero "Cordoba" doesn't make it more like a Spanish city.

Also, could the thread title be edited to be more descriptive?

Renamed to be more descriptive.
Of ocurse its only a name....
I assume it only really matters to the families of those that died in the trade center who think this name is inappropriate.
It in no way reflects on muslims as a whole or matters significantly from any possible other point of view,it does, however, reflects on the muslims who are building it.

[Forboding Angel]

Americans by and large oppose it, as it's pretty much a slap in the face.

[hoijui]

Cause Cordoba is an obvious in your face statement no matter how cosmopolitan and liberal and humerous you are.
Question is if being suspicious and feeling weird about such a name is only paranoia than what is the explanation for such a name?
What were they thinking when they called it Cordoba.

if you had used just a second of brain-time, you would have realized that the only rationality behind such a thing (the center), from a the standpoint of the muslims, is to enhance their image with the others. So if you had used your brain, your anti-muslim argument would have had to be: "they are slimy pigs!"
a pro argument would be: "they are trying to work towards peace!"

they choose the name for the flourishing, inter-cultural image the city had, not for it being conquered by muslims. that is the rational explanation, no matter whether you are "paranoicly" against muslims, or "hippie like" pro them. you can interpret it as them being bad or them being good.

"so kids, what did we learn today?"
"NOTHING!"

[bobthedinosaur]

I could care less. Why give one group preferential treatment than another? The only ones complaining are racist, biggots, and the general ignorant uninformed sensational media followers.

end thread

[Gota]

I could care less. Why give one group preferential treatment than another? The only ones complaining are racist, biggots, and the general ignorant uninformed sensational media followers.

end thread

It's like asking why Nicholas II of Russia should have given the Bolsheviks preferential treatment instead of treating them like all other fringe groups...
Well he didnt, and he got his and his family's heads cut off and plunged russia, that was about the become a constitutional moarchy, into 70 yeard of ruthless dictatorship.
You give preferential treatment when the subject posses a bigger threat.

[Sabutai]

Get your facts straight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_age ... _Peninsula

[JohannesH]

Maybe they shoould name it Bagdad

[Gota]

Get your facts straight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_age ... _Peninsula

From same page:
"The treatment of non-Muslims in the Caliphate has been a subject of considerable debate among scholars and commentators, especially those interested in drawing parallels to the coexistence of Muslims and non-Muslims in the modern world. It has been argued that Jews (and other religious minorities) were treated significantly better in Muslim-controlled Iberia than in Christian western Europe, living in a unique "golden age" of tolerance, respect and harmony. Though Al-Andalus was a key center of Jewish life during the early Middle Ages, producing important scholars and one of the most stable and wealthy Jewish communities, there is no clear scholarly consensus over whether the relationship between Jews and Muslims was truly a paragon of interfaith relations, or whether it was simply similar to the treatment Jews received elsewhere at the same time."

In any case it matters not if jews were treated better in Iberia than somewhere else at that particular time.
The caliphate was just a very powerful and rich entity at that time in history it was in its own golden age regardless of the presence of jews.
The fact stays that Cordoba is a symbol of a city conquered by a Muslim empire from a christian one and made into a muslim capitol and it is certain that you cannot view that time as some sort of unique paradise when it comes to equality or humane treatment of those that are different.

The muslim caliphate was not a humane liberator like say Naploean was or even how the roman empire was, pre christianity, for it's time(not completely sure about Rome but i think im right).