Vote against a SuperMosque at the Olympics site

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 14:25

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ScrapMegaMosque/

Ken Livingstone is planning to use tax payer's money to build an enormous mosque costing an estimated 100M in the docklands.

Wouldn't it be better to spend the money on a new hospital or improved transport facilities??

The plan is for the mosque to be so big that people flying in from all over the world for the 2012 Olympics will it see it as the biggest landmark in London , bigger than St Paul's, Westminster Abbey or Wembley Stadium.

If you don't want international tourists to see a Mosque as an lasting image when they come to London in droves in 2012 then vote...

EDIT: After Bunka kindly did some investigative journalism I found that the Evening Std poll was fixed so I've edited the link to the PMs petition site. We made him take notice with road tax, now let him know how we feel about this...

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 14:43

just a mile or so from where the mosque is due to go up, the Kingsway International Christian Centre, the biggest evangelical church in Europe with 12,000 worshippers on a Sunday, is coming down to make way for the Olympic stadium.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/09/25/ixopinion.html

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 14:44

Raymond Lin said:
That vote is seriously flawed, you can just click back and vote again and again.

And interestingly enough the vote hasn't changed for days... I'm wondering if its fixed considering that the telegraph comments suggest 90% against the Markaz

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 21:31

Visage said:
Hitler masscred 6 million jews. Does that mean it would be ok for us to do the same?

Is that not what we did to the Nazis?

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 22:16

zain said:
Ah yes, things have been too peaceful for Muslims I was waiting in anticipation for something to come up.

How does protesting a potential build = 'no peace for Muslims'?

Why should a the issue even be about Muslims given that we are focussing on a building for which there are many reasons to object to?

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 22:28

The percentages haven't changed, i think its fixed

cleanbluesky · 30 Mar 2007 at 22:40

Bunka said:
Surely that has to be fixed, as the numbers are static!

I think I owe an apology here, I didn't know enough about code to check such things... I'm going to change the OP

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 09:57

zain said:
Well a mosque serves the purpose of worship for Muslims right? Is there not issue after issue being shown in the media about Muslims? Regardless of small or big?

There has been peace from the media and Muslims, I am just stating it was only a matter of time before some form of bash the muslims would come up again.

Fair enough, you can do your bit to stay on good terms with the house if by signing the petition if you like...

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 10:26

Tablighi Jamaat
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/20/ntablig20.xml

The opposition has been assisted by revelations that some of the suspected terrorists who wished to use liquid explosives to blow up US-bound planes, which was revealed on August 10 (Operation Overt) had been followers of Tablighi Jamaat, such as 26-year old Assad Sarwar, as we mentioned on August 15. Another of the suspects, Waheed Zaman was head of the London Metropolitan University's Islamic Society and a member of Tablighi Jamaat.

In France, this group has been active since 1972, and is regarded by the French General Intelligence Agency (RP) as a negative influence within French prisons, recruiting incarcerated criminals into extremism.

There are other reasons to be cautious about such a large venue in London's capital for the group. There is another "Markaz" belonging to the Tablighi Jamaat which is based in Savile Town, in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. Built in 1980 the Markazi mosque was built in part with Saudi funding. And two of the people who were visitors there were Mohammed Sidique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, who ended up blowing themselves up on July 7, 2005. With their co-religionists they killed 52 people traveling on London Transport.

Tablighi Jamaat is said to have sent hundreds of British young men to madrassas in Pakistan every year. Khan and Tanweer had visited madrassa in Pakistan, though there is nothing to suggest Tablighi Jamaat organised their trip.

100m of taxpayers money

The 100m of taxpayers money is based on assumption from various factors, and an explanation is quite curious... the Markaz project itself is expected to cost about 300m (this figure has been put forward by the proposed developers but seemed ignored) yet strangely Tablighi Jamaat don't actually have 300m according to their accounts. A large amount of this sum is expected to come from Saudi Arabia (who seem to like funding Mosques) and is a cause from concern in itself but if we examine another HUGE mosque that was built... http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/268 (BBC link including nice picture of what we can expect worshippers to look like) We'll find that a large portion of the funding will come from various taxpayer funded organisations. So whether we pay for it, or Saudi pays for it - either way we lose.

Choice quotes from those who disagree with the Mosque

In a skeptical piece on the London Markaz, "The shadow cast by a mega-mosque," a town councillor representing the Christian People's Alliance who lives about a mile from the 16-acre site on which the Markaz is to be built, Alan Craig, notes two developments: Even though formal permission for the Markaz has not yet been given, "Muslims are moving into the area in preparation. The Savile Town area of Dewsbury where Tablighi Jamaat is currently based is now more than 90 per cent Muslim." Second, close to where the mosque location, the Kingsway International Christian Centre, Europe's biggest evangelical church, accommodating 12,000 worshippers, is being torn down to make way for the Olympic stadium.

Asif Shakoor, chairman of Sunni Friends of Newham, says that 2,500 Muslims living near in the area where the mosque is slated to be build have signed a petition against it. The petition text states: "We propose that when and if planning permission is granted . . . that all Muslim groups be equally represented at the proposed place of worship that is to celebrate the 2012 Olympic Games in London." Shakoor adds that Tablighi Jamaat, the group behind the mosque, "is radicalising the younger generation. We have to make a stand." Tablighi Jamaat also faces a technical problem: the permission for its temporary mosque on the site expired on Nov. 2. A spokeswoman for the Newham council confirms that the organization is now in breach of the planning laws.

As moderate Muslim opposition to the Markaz builds, the Times (London) quotes Irfan al-Alawi, Europe director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, at a recent seminar hosted by the Policy Exchange think-tank saying he is "extremely concerned" about the spread of Tablighi Jamaat. "Tablighi are not moderate Muslims, they are a separatist movement. If this mosque were to go ahead it will be strictly run by the Tablighis; there will be no room for moderates."

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 11:46

Erazor said:
Funny, I never heard the Americans making any complaints about their well integrated muslims, the term Little Englander springs to mind

I don't know if that's meant to be ironic although those same 'well integrated' Muslims killed 2000 people about 5 years ago

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 12:25

The Edge said:
A partial contribution from public funds I have less of a problem with - though i still think it would be irregular - as Muslims do pay taxes the same as anyone else, why shouldn't they get something back from what they put in?

Seeing as they aren't barred from car ownership, that roads for the streets in which they live are maintained, that their rubbish is taken away and they have access to healthcare perhaps the question should be why should Muslims/Islam be given specific facilities and investment that the rest of us are not?

And besides, immediate financial outlay (whilst relatively shocking) is the least of the concerns with this mosque. It is worthy of note that other Muslim organisations are firmly against this mosque simply because of who is funding it and where much of the money is coming from. It would also serve as a final nail on the coffin of integration and allow Tablighi Jamaat and their Suadi Wahabist/Salafist sponsors to exercise an intellectual and communal level of control upon the Muslim in London that would be greater than possibly any other Muslims enclave in the world - the minority status of the Muslims would enhance the social cohesion and sense of identity, and the rally them around the Markaz.

If I were an Islamist nation wanting to destabilise a country without openly declaring war, this would be the best way to do so. Create loyalty and political uniformity amongst an existing diaspora with a religious/political value system whose legitimacy in the eyes of its followers could not be superseded by any political reasoning. With the strengthening of their identity would come greater degrees of separation, and a greater degree of separation would increase the communal desire for separate access to resources and therefore independent political control.

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 14:42

Erazor said:
No idea, it is an original piece by me Why, who else uses it?

I think Mr Poole's suggestion that you are a returnee is because many of those who are banned and make an attempt to return often do so by making trolling or insulting comments and generally offer little content when they hit 'reply'

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 15:00

dirtydog said:
I fear you have missed the point

I did tell him that it was 1939, and he called me on it.

I don't see what's wrong with his comment :confused:

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 15:01

FrK said:
wouldnt like to imagine the smell in that place.

Comments such as this dont help arguing against the mosque

cleanbluesky · 31 Mar 2007 at 15:11

dirtydog said:
Now I'm confused :/

Sorry, dry sarcasm. I actually have not claimed that the year is 1939.

cleanbluesky · 20 Jul 2007 at 10:30

@if ®afiq said:
The people do not support either government.

Care to define that proposition, unless I am mistaken it is a sweeping statement.

cleanbluesky · 20 Jul 2007 at 10:58

@if ®afiq said:
There is a wealth of information out there, but of course as it is not reported in our mainstream media you will not beleive it, so I think it is futile.

Futile for what purpose?
You believe that the information you are 'privy' to is somehow more representative than the information in the 'mass media'?
Why do you see such a significance in what is reported in the mass media?

I have posted many links previously pointing to the distrust of the general population with both governments etc - but they always seem to disappear down the memory hole.

You use Orwellian references despite living in a country that allows you the freedom of religion and politics?

EDIT:
@if, could you explain how terrorist militia groups with a habit of attacking civilians are in fact representative of the Iraqi People?