Minneapolis submits voluntarily

[Derec]

Very telling error, mistaking common decency for adherence to Islam.

Common decency would be not to blast religious propaganda when people are trying to sleep.

 

[bilby]

Very telling error, mistaking common decency for adherence to Islam.

Common decency would be not to blast religious propaganda when people are trying to sleep.

Wake me up when that happens in Minneapolis.

You are responding to something that might happen as though it has happened. That's the definition of insanity.

 

[Jarhyn]

Very telling error, mistaking common decency for adherence to Islam.

Common decency would be not to blast religious propaganda when people are trying to sleep.

Wake me up when that happens in Minneapolis.

You are responding to something that might happen as though it has happened. That's the definition of insanity.

The funny part is that Derec isn't going to know if it does or does not happen.

I might know.

LD might know.

Derec will not know because Derec is not from Minneapolis or the Twin Cities, or even Minnesota.

I doubt they care about Minnesota. They are just using us as a prop in their "slipping jimmy" act "oh look at how badly they are hurt by this thing, let's attack someone over it!"

I think it's pretty fucking disgusting, if you ask me.

If I had to choose something to be angry about when it comes to Minneapolis, it would be the fact that the city still hasn't sorted moving the exits to North Minneapolis from Dowling and Lyndale to Webber, Lowry, and Broadway.

 

[scombrid]

The fact that none of the people wringing their hands over MN "submitting voluntarily" are expressing any opposition to christofascism in Texas is taken as tacit approval.

 

[laughing dog]

Your conjectures and fears reflect on you, not the Minneapolis city council members or the community at large.

You are wrong. They reflect on the city council and the quisling mayor.

Your opinions and confectures reflect your frame of mind, not theirs, nor thereflect the reality of the situation.

Speaking of the city council, one of the members is Jamal Osman, a Somali Muslim. As well as an anti-semite and homophobe.
Minneapolis Councilman Jamal Osman apologizes for anti-gay, antisemitic posts

Osman, who was elected in the 6th Ward in a special election in 2020 and is up for re-election in 2023, took to Facebook in October 2012 to argue in favor of a proposed constitutional amendment that would have banned gay marriage.
He also wrote, “Voting yes means you against this discussing (sic) act” and said gay marriage “will invite end of days.”The following month, Osman wrote in Somali, “May god damn these non-Muslims” and CNN for “kissing Israel’s a**. Jews will never be pleased unless you follow their ways.” After someone agreed with him, Osman replied in Somali, “Where’s Hitler when you need him?” In September 2011, Osman wrote on Facebook, “We live in the United States of Israel” and said former President Barack Obama shouldn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize, calling him a “slave of the Jewish lobby, AIPAC. LONG LIVE PALESTINE!”[...]In January 2013, Osman posted a video from a pro-Palestine website about “Israeli Jews assaulting Africans in Tel Aviv” and wrote “I can see why Palestinians don’t want (to) share land with these dogs.”

Note that the DFL party did not pressure him to resign or anything of that nature. Imagine the outcry if a white Republican wrote something even a fraction this nasty.

Not only is it totally irrelevant to the issue, but you clearly did not bother to read your own link:

“Over a decade ago I made comments about the Jewish community, Israel, and the GLBTQ+ community on social media. I explicitly and absolutely repudiate and disavow everything about these comments. It does not reflect how I feel about Jewish people or faith or the GLBTQ+ community. The friends and allies I have in the both of these ommunities expect more of me, and I am sorry to them.”communities expect more of me, and I am sorry to them.” .......

Osman said he’s grown and passed through several life stages since he wrote the posts. He graduated from college, got married and was exposed to diverse communities.


“Our neighbors deserve dignity and respect in all forms,” he said. “I have been shown countless examples of that in the years since these comments. These comments could not be further from how I hope to conduct myself every day on the council.”


He apologized to his constituents and his colleagues, particularly Mayor Jacob Frey (who is Jewish), Council President Andrea Jenkins (a transgender woman), Council Member Lisa Goodman (who is Jewish), Council Member Jason Chavez (who is gay) and to his aide Sean Broom (who has a Jewish family member).


“The things written hurt them individually and I am sorry for any ignorance I had and hope my growth since is evident to them and that they will continue to help me grow and learn,” he said.

For the reading impaired, Mr Osman clearly repudiated his previous views and apologized. It is true Mr. Osman was an anti-semite and a homophobe, but he claims he no longer is.

Unless you have proof Mr. Osman's repudiation and apology are lies, your attempted smear is untrue.

 

[Toni]

Minnesota has a large population of Catholics and of Lutherans. Especially Catholic Churches love to ring bells.

Not at 3:30 in the morning. Not at unlimited dB levels.

Does it not occur to you that by accommodating the Muslims’ request to be able to have their calls to prayer that this also strengthens precedent for other religious sounds?

I doubt that had anything to do with why they voted for the Muslim noise ordinance. I think it's a mixture of left-wing ideology (the Minnesota city council is known for being far left) and fear of being called "racist" and "Islamophobic" if one dare oppose the measure.

I strongly suspect you know absolutely nothing about any of the Minneapolis city council members,

I do. I just posted some interesting facts about one of the Muslim councilors.

aside from the fact that three are Muslim, much less what issues and ordinances they support or how they vote on matters that come before the council.

So what do you know about them? I remember this:
Minneapolis City Council members intend to defund and dismantle the city’s police department

Calling 9 non-Muslims useful idiots because they voted a way that you disagree with—in a city located in a state where you do not live and likely have never even visited is hardly evidence of your own thoughtful open mindedness.

That is a good descriptor of what they are: they are being manipulated into advancing Islamist agenda.
As to it being about a different city and state from my own - so what? We often discuss matters from other place on here. How many of us live in Mississippi? And yet there is a thread about the anti-trans law there.

It's kind of interesting that you think you know so much about the people serving on the Minneapolis city council. Seven have only served since 2021. They were not part of that vote you so despise.

 

[barbos]

There is no doubt that people pushing for islamic noise pollution are for islamization of America, otherwise they would be content with using alarm clocks.

Based on comments I've seen from Muslim immigrants on this topic, what they appear to be for islamization of isn't America; it's their own kids. The call of the muezzin is a nostalgic memory from their home countries and a lot of them are unhappy about their kids growing up deprived of it. Of course call-to-prayer phone apps exist, and they're heavily used here; but why would a parent be content with that when it means having to have a fight with his teenager to make him turn the app on every night? So much easier and less confrontational when the call comes from outside and none of them have a choice about it and it isn't the parent imposing it.

I am not talking about ordinary muslims from the street. I am talking about activists who really push this.

 

[Rhea]

If the Muslim call to prayer becomes a problem, then the city council will have to come up with a limit on decibel levels and a curfew for all the houses of worship doing their worship thing, and the cops will have to enforce them.

It doesn’t seem like a good idea to wait for something bad to happen and then try to backtrack and undo the permission for it.

If a chemical plant were to come in and have a toxic chemical that they say they’ll never accidentally release, but they want a law that says they don’t get in trouble if they accidentally release it, I would be stridently against their request. “If you’re not going to release it, you will not mind this law against relase of it.”

I honestly do not understand why Minneapolis would approve this. I would prefer to see, “NO ENTITY, whether individual, municipal, business or religious, may broadcast amplified sounds audible more than one block away (or above a certain dB) between 10pm and 6am except for the case of emergency alerts such as rescue vehicles and civil alarms.”

To me, the request is outside of religion. It is not about religious freedom. It is about any and all creators of amplified sounds, regardless of the content of the amplified sound.

And I am truly surprised that a densely populated area would expand the right to make noise in the middle of the night.

Obviously it’s not my neighborhood, so it won’t affect me, but it really does surprise me. And from the comment posted about one Muslim person’s opinion that it could have a negative effect on the perception of his religion, I think he’s right and I can’t fathom why they’d be willing to risk that ESPECIALLY when it is absolutely true that cell-phone alternatives, Alexa alternatives, etc all easily exist and could be effortlessly implemented.

 

[Derec]

For the reading impaired, Mr Osman clearly repudiated his previous views and apologized. It is true Mr. Osman was an anti-semite and a homophobe, but he claims he no longer is.
Unless you have proof Mr. Osman's repudiation and apology are lies, your attempted smear is untrue.

I do not have to accept any bigot's apology as genuine by default.
The point is that he has made some really nasty statements - his backtracking now does not change that. These statements that would have been attacked much more fiercely if he was a non-Muslim white guy. Similar to how House Dems treated Ilhan Omar's antisemitic statements.

 

[Derec]

Derec will not know because Derec is not from Minneapolis or the Twin Cities, or even Minnesota.

I guess you or ld etc. should never comment about any issue from Georgia then.

I doubt they care about Minnesota. They are just using us as a prop in their "slipping jimmy" act "oh look at how badly they are hurt by this thing, let's attack someone over it!"

I care about "camel inside tent nose" style creeping concessions to Islamism no matter what US or European city they happen to be in.

I think it's pretty fucking disgusting, if you ask me.

Why? Noise pollution is a legitimate issue. As is the religious favoritism of the Minneadishu city council.

 

[Rhea]

I do not have to accept any bigot's apology as genuine by default.
The point is that he has made some really nasty statements - his backtracking now does not change that.

One does not need to accept them by default. One should read them and look for words and actions that support the change of behavior.

As apologies go, this one rings more authentic than many. Looking up his actions will help fill out the picture. But his apology does indicate enough that it’s worthwhile, IMHO, checking further.

Unlike some apologies that make it clear no further looking would change the image of bigot in any way.

 

[Derec]

Wake me up when that happens in Minneapolis.
You are responding to something that might happen as though it has happened. That's the definition of insanity.

The activists pushed for lifting of time and loudness restrictions. Why do you think they would not actually use it?

This is a political discussion forum. We routinely discuss proposed laws and ordinances well before they are put in effect. Why should this one be any different?

 

[Derec]

One does not need to accept them by default. One should read them and look for words and actions that support the change of behavior.
As apologies go, this one rings more authentic than many. Looking up his actions will help fill out the picture. But his apology does indicate enough that it’s worthwhile, IMHO, checking further.

Perhaps. Perhaps not. I think he will most certainly be more careful about what he posts, no matter how he feels about gays, Jews and Hitler these days.

 

[laughing dog]

For the reading impaired, Mr Osman clearly repudiated his previous views and apologized. It is true Mr. Osman was an anti-semite and a homophobe, but he claims he no longer is.
Unless you have proof Mr. Osman's repudiation and apology are lies, your attempted smear is untrue.

I do not have to accept any bigot's apology as genuine by default.

No, you don't. Nor do I have to accept your mischaracterization of his position as an honest mistake, but I will.

The point is that he has made some really nasty statements - his backtracking now does not change that. These statements that would have been attacked much more fiercely if he was a non-Muslim white guy.

We will never know about the validity of your conjecture. It reveals much more about your frame of mind than the situation.

 

[laughing dog]

Derec will not know because Derec is not from Minneapolis or the Twin Cities, or even Minnesota.

I guess you or ld etc. should never comment about any issue from Georgia then.

It is one thing to say "It is a bad idea to allow such noise pollution early in the morning or late in the evening". Frankly, I would not want to live near any institution that would routinely wake me up early in the morning or keep up late at night. I get that. An OP that pointed that out without your bigoted rhetoric would have probably caused the discussion to go in a different direction. In other words, it isn't your bringing up the issue but the blatantly bigoted manner in which it is brought up.

I doubt they care about Minnesota. They are just using us as a prop in their "slipping jimmy" act "oh look at how badly they are hurt by this thing, let's attack someone over it!"

I care about "camel inside tent nose" style creeping concessions to Islamism no matter what US or European city they happen to be in.

I think it's pretty fucking disgusting, if you ask me.

Why? Noise pollution is a legitimate issue. As is the religious favoritism of the Minneadishu city council.

There is no evidence of religious favoritism on the part of the Minneapolis city council.

I realize you think you are being clever with "Minneadishu" crack, but is simply reinforces the appearance of bigotry and intolerance in your position.

 

[Bomb#20]

Because if the Muslim leaders don't intend to be excessive, why would they have asked the council to remove the limits?

Project much?

Um, yeah, the government has done away with limits so many times when I asked them to accommodate my plans.

The fact these Muslims used the proper civic procedures to request a change suggests to a non- reactionary alarmist that they intend to be respectful of their neighbors.

Does it? Most people who intend to respect their neighbors ask the government to repeal laws requiring them to respect their neighbors, do they?

After all, they could have blared away and instituted a lawsuit against the infringement against the violation of their 1st amendment rights. Regardless of the merits of such a case, it would be an expense to the city and socially divisive.

Whereas a lawsuit would have been much cheaper for the mosques than asking in advance?

As a number of posters have pointed out (and that the reactionaries seem unable to grasp) that if there is a resulting noise issue, the city council can revisit the change and make alterations.

Can does not equal will. Based on my personal experience, having been involved in two anti-noise-pollution community efforts, governments do not give a rat's ass about noise when a special interest is lobbying for it and the people it bothers are only those within a localized area. Unless the calls to prayer are a problem all over the city and a significant percentage of the electorate will vote against them over it, the city council will almost certainly not revisit the change.

 

[Bomb#20]

The fact that none of the people wringing their hands over MN "submitting voluntarily" are expressing any opposition to christofascism in Texas is taken as tacit approval.

The christofascism in Texas hasn't even been enacted into law -- so far it's just posturing by blowhards. And if an actual law ever actually gets passed it will be overturned in the courts.

 

[Toni]

The fact that none of the people wringing their hands over MN "submitting voluntarily" are expressing any opposition to christofascism in Texas is taken as tacit approval.

The christofascism in Texas hasn't even been enacted into law -- so far it's just posturing by blowhards. And if an actual law ever actually gets passed it will be overturned in the courts.

Check out the new laws regarding abortion, trans care, and the requirement that the words In God We Trust be prominently displayed in every public school classroom. And of course, the posting of the Ten Commandments: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...-required-public-schools-texas-bill-rcna80936

 

[Bomb#20]

The fact that none of the people wringing their hands over MN "submitting voluntarily" are expressing any opposition to christofascism in Texas is taken as tacit approval.

The christofascism in Texas hasn't even been enacted into law -- so far it's just posturing by blowhards. And if an actual law ever actually gets passed it will be overturned in the courts.

Check out the new laws regarding abortion, trans care, and the requirement that the words In God We Trust be prominently displayed in every public school classroom.

Plenty of opposition to the new christofascist abortion laws has been expressed. Labeling it "christofascist" to disagree with TRAs about whether children are capable of informed consent to irreversible body modifications of dubious medical benefit and established medical harm is itself fascist. The In God We Trust law is same-old-same-old -- people get bored of refighting losing battles against "ceremonial deism" -- but it's a stupid and evil law and you may consider this our expression of opposition to it.

And of course, the posting of the Ten Commandments: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...-required-public-schools-texas-bill-rcna80936

And that's just a senate bill, not a law. Vast numbers of idiocies are passed by one house and disappear into committees in the other house, never to emerge. And Ten Commandments bills that become law usually lose in the courts to First Amendment challenges.

Scombrid's "tacit approval" accusation is an ad hominem argument, and one without factual basis.

 

[Toni]

The fact that none of the people wringing their hands over MN "submitting voluntarily" are expressing any opposition to christofascism in Texas is taken as tacit approval.

The christofascism in Texas hasn't even been enacted into law -- so far it's just posturing by blowhards. And if an actual law ever actually gets passed it will be overturned in the courts.

Check out the new laws regarding abortion, trans care, and the requirement that the words In God We Trust be prominently displayed in every public school classroom.

Plenty of opposition to the new christofascist abortion laws has been expressed. Labeling it "christofascist" to disagree with TRAs about whether children are capable of informed consent to irreversible body modifications of dubious medical benefit and established medical harm is itself fascist. The In God We Trust law is same-old-same-old -- people get bored of refighting losing battles against "ceremonial deism" -- but it's a stupid and evil law and you may consider this our expression of opposition to it.

And of course, the posting of the Ten Commandments: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...-required-public-schools-texas-bill-rcna80936

And that's just a senate bill, not a law. Vast numbers of idiocies are passed by one house and disappear into committees in the other house, never to emerge. And Ten Commandments bills that become law usually lose in the courts to First Amendment challenges.

Scombrid's "tacit approval" accusation is an ad hominem argument, and one without factual basis.

Opposition may be expressed but law is law and it's not likely to be overturned by this USSC. Also, I believe a Federal judge in TX tried to remove mifepristone from FDA approval. That case is pending and I'm not holding my breath.

Do I think everyone in TX is a fascist? Of course not. But too many are, and hiding behind the christo part, which, actually has nothing to do with the fascism.