All posts in the topic olympics mega mosque (Short link)
Summary
- There are 82 posts — by 17 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by John McNeill at 2006 Nov 17 10:55 UTC
Dear All,
I have copied the text below for you all to have a look at. It is quite
topical!
John McNeill
For Immediate Release: 19 September 2006
Row on Newham Council as executive mayor
refuses to back call for investigation into Muslim group behind Olympics
mega-mosque
Bluster and personal abuse “is smoke-screen to divert attention from
stitch-up by authorities” says Cllr Alan Craig
Cllr Alan Craig, leader of the Christian Peoples Alliance group on Newham
Council, said last night that the boroughÂ’s executive mayor was
“irresponsible” to refuse to request an independent government investigation
into allegations that Tablighi Jamaat, the Islamic group behind the Olympics
mega-mosque at West Ham, may have terrorist links.
“There have been increasing reports from Intelligence Services, academics,
Islam-watchers and the media that Tablighi Jamaat is a fertile breeding
ground for terrorists and suicide bombers around the world. Therefore we
must find out the truth,” said Cllr Craig. “It is extremely foolish for
Newham Council, the London Development Agency and the London Thames Gateway
Development Corporation to push on with the mosque project without first
checking up on Tablighi JamaatÂ’s peaceable credentials. What happens if
these reports are right?”
Alan CraigÂ’s comments followed a row over the mosque at a full meeting of
Newham Council last evening (18 September), when the executive mayor Sir
Robin Wales delivered a torrent of personal abuse at Cllr Craig accusing him
among other things of being “anti-Muslim”.
“That’s simply nonsense and a smoke screen,” said Alan Craig. “We have a
responsibility to ask questions about the mosque as it will have a huge
impact on Newham and east London. West Ham UnitedÂ’s football stadium at
Upton Park holds 35,000, while this mosque may eventually hold 40,000 or
even 70,000 people. It will be the biggest mosque in Europe so IÂ’m sorry Sir
Robin gave abuse instead of answers.
“But in fact Sir Robin was attempting to divert attention away from the
nod-and-a-wink agreement taking place between Newham Council, the London
Development Agency and the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation,”
Cllr Craig continued. “The clear evidence is that they have decided – behind
closed doors – that they are in favour of the mosque. They have not
consulted local people at all but in due course, when the mosque master-plan
is submitted, they intend to give it their formal approval.
“They are doing a typically undemocratic stitch-up,” said Cllr Craig. “So
our campaign to bring the matter into the open will continue. In fact, our
campaign is hardly out of the starting blocks.”
- Ends -
Queries: Alan Craig 07939 547198
What about democracy? What about the concerns of the common people who are
going to be affected by this?
Are the funds being made available for this project open to public scrutiny?
No one consulted the people about this. Can we have a refrendum?
Banti Singh
On Sep 21, 2006, at 10:31 AM, Khyberman wrote: > What about democracy? What about the concerns of the common people > who are > going to be affected by this? First of all, it might be helpful to understand - what is the local council role in this? What, if any, financial obligations is the council taking on - or is the only council role that of granting permission to build. I'm not sure that it was clear in the previous emails. Also - I wondering, what the justification would be to have a referendum on this particular mosque? Its seems to me that there are any number of major developments taking place in Newham around the Olymics and I don't recall referendums on any of them. By what critera would one expect to have a referendum on this particular project? Or, is the call for referendum on all major development projects? I did a quick google search for info, this is what I found: See the council agenda, with Councilor Craig's questions: http://mgov.newham.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.Asp?CId=295&MID=4849&J=1 Mega-mosque Dec 1, 2005 http://www.leytonguardian.co.uk/display.var.656622.0.megamosque.php Giant mosque for 40,000 may be built at London Olympics Nov. 27 2005 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1892780,00.html Christian Peoples Alliance - press release http://www.cpalliance.net/news.asp?ID=213 ** Here is a link to some BLOG that supposedly outlines the terrorist connections to this group. There are quite a few blogs with entries on this issue. Just google "newham mega mosque" for more. Giant Mosque Planned By Extremists For London Olympics Site http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/001072.html Tim Erickson St. Paul, Minnesota <email obscured>
Re Criteria for a Referendum
This country is run by duly elected people in whatever level of government they
operate. We use the "first past the post" system. We are not ruled by
referenda.
Therefore there can be only two criteria whereby a referendum could be
justified.
1 If the matter was never included in the winning party's manifesto - in
which case they have no mandate without a referendum.
2 If all the parties in the election had an item in their manifestos thereby
refusing any choice from the electorate without a refenrendum.
As a non-resident of the borough I do not know whether the MegaMosque decision
falls into either the above but, seeing that none of us were told of the cost
to the public purse of the Olympics themselves before a decision was made, I
very much suspect that it does.
Alan smith
West Sussex
Alan is right about referenda and about "first past the post" in most
instances in the UK but there are exceptions in the devolved
administrations, in European elections and in special cases such as some
constitutional changes and whether to have elected mayors. However, the
present prime minister has shown that a parliamentary majority is all that
is needed to change the constitutional role of the upper house, the
judiciary, local authorities and any other potential curb on the executive
power of the leader of a government. We have no constitution but are
constrained by some international treaties. (Contrast the USA which can
ignore international agreements but not its own Constitution.)
Winning parties are not constrained by their manifestos, which are in no
sense contracts with the electorate. We elect individuals, not parties, and
the parties usually enforce discipline through patronage and the power of
appointment, most visibly through the whips. Only when the leader looks like
leading his party to defeat do the elected representatives rebel. Between
elections, party conferences and pressure of events - even occasionally
public opinion - reverse many of the "pledges" in the manifesto. Watch the
governing party's conference in a few days time and you will see the
comrades jostling to get the next leader to promise policies which appeal to
their faction and secure their support, whatever they signed up to in the
manifesto for the last election.
If we get a hung Parliament or Council, the horse-trading required to build
a viable coalition starts with a bonfire of the manifestos, just as it does
in Italy or Israel.
Fortunately, we have a vast majority of elected representatives who try to
balance the demands of parties and supporters against the claims of honour
and integrity, and try to behave honourably by their lights. Unfortunately,
honourable men and women can make wrong decisions, particularly by putting
sectional interests ahead of the common good.
Ask yourself when the elected representative of Newham should put local
interests above those of other Londoners, the rest of England, the UK,
Europe, the world.... e.g. by diverting an unprecedented flood up river or
environmental pollution down river ... or even sabotaging the Olympics. When
should a section or faction use a local or temporary grasp on power to
impose its views on those who disagree?
Hard questions, I fear, which cannot be addressed by referenda or manifestos
(neither of which is an English word).
Will there be plans for mega
Protestant/Catholic/Non-Comformist/Jewish/Buddist/Sikh etc. places of worship?
Sorry to post the obvious and the question is not meant to be flippant but if
Newham and its environs is going to try and show the World a multi-cultural,
well integrated society is this the path to take?
Forget referenda and political stand points, I always believed that the Olympic
ethos was above all this and about unity through sport. Unity of all races,
creeds and colour.
That is a valid arguement Barry and not at all flippant. One thing
encourages another and instead of being cohesive, it ends up dividing
people. You are very right when you ask if this is the way to a well
integrated society.
I for one, don't think it is. But then I am not looking for votes from a
gullible population who haven't learned from divide and rule either. It's
been a while since the last census, and things have changed dramatically in
5-6 years. Maybe the powers that be know more about demographics than we do
- of course they do - we complete Equal Opps forms for everything from
buying a postage stamp to applying for a passport. They know where the votes
will come from.
We may forever debate the ins and outs of the political process, the
consititution and protocol and write endless emails arguing about this, but
the fact remains that East London, with all its squalor and skills vs jobs
mismatch aren't being dealt with. £100 million on a place of worship or £100
million into projects that will do something to address Newham's problems.
Does anyone have any idea what £100 million can do for the most deprived
boroughs in the country?
Here are some of the things you can do with the money:
Buy 500 to 600 3-bedroom houses for homeless people or
Hold 100,000 Level 3 NVQs in any field or
Hold 150,000 intermediate to advanced ESOL courses or
Hold over 500,000 Citizenship courses or
Train 50,000 Community Police Officers or
Open 50 Activity centres in local areas to engage young people at the risk
of offending
OR
We could build a place of worship that would be only available to adherents
of a certain faith, spend more money on monitoring and safeguarding the
investment, policing the area, run the risk of providing a fertile breeding
ground for subversive activities and change the face of West Ham and Newham
as we know it.
I know someone will come up with: ' But there are funding streams that exist
to address those issues' Yes there are, but they're not enough, they're not
working because of the sheer volumes involved.
With all the opportunities coming into the Borough, there is a lot to be
done if Newham residents are to benefit in any way. Newham needs much much
more than a prayer. Or a prayer hall. The sooner we get real about this, the
better.
The real issues are being buried in the debate about politics, processes,
etc. These are:
ONE: The extent of the public purse's involvement - taxpayer's money - MY
money - people who want better services for a third of their income and the
ever increasing council tax bill.
TWO: The possibility that the backers of this could be tainted with links to
undesirable elements. People say there is no evidence of it, but then we've
gone to war on less flimsy evidence. I do not buy the 'but there's no
evidence' arguement. Nobody does.
THREE: How does a stadium sized place of worship help the wider community?
Would I as a non-adherent be welcome there? What does it do for the economy?
What does it do for social inclusion? What does it do for the upskilling and
upgrading of our workforce? How does it help us be more competitive? How
does it help Newham be better off? Wouldn't a park be better?
Tim: I do not think this compares on any scale with any of the other
developments going on in the area and most will agree with me. All other
developments are inclusive and this one is exclusive. Major difference that.
Why don't we all get our eyes back on the ball please.
Banti Singh
Barry asks:
"Will there be plans for mega
Protestant/Catholic/Non-comformist/Jewish/Buddist/Sikh etc. places of worship?"
I'm not that keen on mega stuff but some kind of focus on faiths would be no
bad thing. All religions, as practised by their best advocates, are about human
unity. Here are some happy thoughts:
"I came to the conclusion long ago Â
that all religions were true and also
that
all had some error in them, and whilst I hold by my own, I should hold others
as dear as Hinduism. So we can only pray, if we are Hindus, not that a
Christian should become a Hindu Â
But our innermost prayer should be a Hindu
should be a better Hindu, a Muslim a better Muslim, a Christian a better
Christian." - Gandhi
"There is only one God and He is God to all; therefore it is important that
everyone is seen as equal before God. I've always said we should help a Hindu
become a better Hindu, a Muslim become a better Muslim, a Catholic become a
better Catholic." - Mother Teresa
On Sep 22, 2006, at 1:58 AM, Barry Reynolds wrote:
> Will there be plans for mega Protestant/Catholic/Non-Comformist/
> Jewish/Buddist/Sikh etc. places of worship?
My understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, is that an independent
Islamic organization has plans to build a very large mosque in
Newham. I do not have the impression that this project is being
driven by local or national government in the UK. According to the
articles that I read, the mosque will be funded by private donations
from inside and outside of the UK.
Some of the posts in this discussion seem to imply this project is
part of the government sponsored Olympic plans and that it will be
paid for with tax money. It does not appear to me that this is true.
I understand, that a mosque of this size will put pressure on council
services and have a huge impact on the community. However, it seems
to me - that if there is going to be debate about the council
involvement with this project, its important to be clear about
exactly what the councils involvement actually is.
It seems clear to me, that no level of government can plan a mega
protestant/catholic/jewish/buddist churchs, unless there is someone
willing to pay for them.
What is the issue here?
Are folks suggesting, that if an Islamic organization raises the
funds to build a mega mosque in Newham, that the public council
should prohibit this?
Or - are folks simply suggesting that the local Council should not be
providing extra support for this effort?
If its the latter point, then I ask - Is there any real "EXTRA"
council support going into this project? I could not find anything
about the mosque on the council web site, other than some references
in the minutes of one meeting in regard to Councilor Craig's questions.
Best wishes,
Tim Erickson
St. Paul, Minnesota
<email obscured>
1. The public council cannot prohibit any faith based organization from
doing anything - we have ample evidence of that in the UK. However, I
believe that the public council should act in the wider, longer term
interests of the community as opposed to one part of it.
2. The council's support, debating over the implications, sanctioning
resources - all have an an effect on the public purse. Of course there are
financial implications for the local authority. Whether they invest a penny
or not.
3. Allowing or disallowing is besides the point, but should it be allowed to
continue of the very sources of the funds are questionable?
4. Does the council not have the responsibility to ensure communities do not
get lop-sided? This will ensure West Ham and its surrounds will turn into a
ghetto in 10 years or less. Not because of the structure, but because
nothing is being done to upskill the workforce in the area and the proposed
centre will do nothing but increase the divide in the communities. The
cracks are already there.
5. The fact that it could become a recruitment centre for those
disfranchised by the 'system' is a frightening possibility.
The costs of this to the government and the general public will exceed the
£100 million in Saudi money. I saw Craig's questions too. It's a pity no one
has answers to them.
Britain is a democracy.
We are a free country, where you have freedom of speech, expression and
worship.
If those of islamic faith wish to build a "mega" mosque, then they are
perfectly entitled to do so. Provided it satisfies the planning criteria,
health and safety and so on.
If some group allied to some branch of islam is, supposedly, connected with
somehow a terrorist organisation, then it is up to the moderate muslims to deal
with that, if necessary by involving the police.
To simply prevent the mosque being built on these grounds is, frankly,
ridiculous and shows the real motive behind it, nimby-ism.
As for the "flippant" comment below, come on, you lose count how many churches
there are in Newham, all for the christian community, there used to be many
synagoges but they left when 99% of the jewish community up sticks from Newham.
Lets be serious and adult about this.
What would the reaction be if we had mass English emigration to major Muslim
countries and stated that it was our intent to convert them all to Christianity
and build the biggest Church they'd ever seen in their part of the World?
Lifted from another site I frequent and posted in reply.
So lets be serious and adult about this and discuss what the real implications
and impact on the area would be.
In reply to:
As for the "flippant" comment below, come on, you lose count how many
churches there are in Newham, all for the christian community, there used to be
many synagoges but they left when 99% of the jewish community up sticks from
Newham.
How many mosques are there in Newham. Not enough for the current moslim
population?
How many buildings have been converted for muslim use?
Why do you not hear the other non-christian religions continually banging on
about these subjects, jehads, infidels etc?
A cartoon causes riots, the pope deserves the death sentence etc.
O.K. This ONCE proud country of mine is a christian, western one so what about
the clown from the Finsbury mosque being burnt at the stake or hung, drawn and
quartered as was the custom here.
Easy, we have grown out such barbaric customs and gave up with the religious
wars in the name of god bit, years ago.
Barry
About 500 years ago, the Chinese closed themselves - the world's greatest
power - off from the outside world. The Ottoman empire spread in all
directions, carrying its knowledge across Asia, Africa and into Europe.
Constantinople fell. The Moors were forced out of Spain. The Portuguese
developed ships capable of global voyages of exploration. New ideas spread
across Europe, undermining traditional religion and enabling European
imperialism by sea. Chinese, Mogul, Persian, Roman, Mongol, Ottoman and all
previous vast empires were created by marching armies, as was Russia's at a
later date.
From the 16th century, religion followed the flag at the jack staff from
Europe to the Americas, Indies, Africa and a myriad islands. Their intent
was:
"to convert them all to Christianity and build the biggest Church they'd
ever seen in their part of the World".
They also carried their sectarian quarrels - the "wars of religion" - round
the world, along with plagues. Millions died as a result, and millions more
were never born. But many big churches were built and "the lesser breeds
without the law" were exposed to the doctrines of the prince of peace so
their souls could be saved.
I won't attempt to summarise the 18th to 20th centuries, during which
science both debunked religion and enabled more destructive, industrialised
warfare initiated primarily by totalitarian regimes.
The risk with the mega-mosque is that it might enshrine obsolete ideas which
could justify the imposition of 16th century religious attitudes, including
in particular the suppression of dissent. But if it is a modern Al Hambra
where, in 13th and 14th century Granada, scholarship meant debate and
research, and the conflict of ideas was non-violent, then it could be a
symbol of hope and tolerance. And non-muslims would use it too for
community events.
What would the reaction be to mass English emigration to a major muslim
country? Who knows, who cares, and frankly what has that to do with a mosque in
West Ham?
Britain is a democracy, and is a christian country, yes we know that. As a
democracy you are free to air your views and opinions. Just as followers of
Islam are entitled to theirs, and are entitled to propose a place of worship,
regardless of the size/location and it will be subject to UK planning law.
(Something of the size proposed will be out of the hands of the local authority
anyway, and be referred to City Hall at the GLA).
Your arguments belong in the past, maybe when you left Newham in 1966 they were
all the rage, but in todays Newham we have moved on somewhat.
David
Newham, 1979 - present
Barry wrote:
> What would the reaction be if we had mass English emigration to major Muslim
> countries and stated that it was our intent to convert them all to
> Christianity and build the biggest Church they'd ever seen in their part of
> the World?
Of if we bombed major Muslim countries and stated it was our intention to
convert them all to our form of secular representative democracy and build
permanent military bases in their part of the world?
> O.K. This ONCE proud country of mine is a christian, western one so what
> about the clown from the Finsbury mosque being burnt at the stake or hung,
> drawn and quartered as was the custom here.
Would you call that 'Christian' custom?
> we have grown out such barbaric customs and gave up with the religious
> wars in the name of god bit, years ago
Most wars 'in the name of god' were tribal and for land, resources and the
personal ambition of rulers. 'God' like 'democracy' and 'freedom' are concepts
conscripted by war makers. We do not burn people at the stake but we burn them
in cities with bombs and chemicals. We drop or sell cluster bombs, we ally
with those who re-define torture so that they can practice it and our own
soldiers torture and beat prisoners to death. Let us take the log from our own
eye before trying to gouge the mote out of someone else's. None of our cultures
is perfect, we all have to dig our way out of barbarism and recognising that is
probably the first step.
Incidentally, no Muslim has ever tried to convert me but Christians of various
sorts, Scientologists, Hari Krisnas and of course Jehovah Witnesses have all
had a go. A Jehovah Witness, after I explained that I took something from all
religions, remarked that it was 'religion a la carte'. Given as a bit of a put
down but taken as a compliment.
As an atheist, I thought this would be an opportune point in this "spirited"
debate to plug Richard Dawkins' new book "The God Delusion" - a good read.
Enjoy.
Let them have their Mosque. And then at least the R.A.F. will know where to
look..............Ray
I think this has now got out of hand.I am all for freedom of speach and
democracy but I find this contribution particularly offensive.
Sarah
You're right Sarah; this is getting out of hand and a bit childish now...
I'm reposting an earlier email in the hope that we can get back to the
subject...
On 27/09/06, Michael Law <mikelaw_per@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > As an atheist, I thought this would be an opportune point in this "spirited" debate to plug Richard Dawkins' new book "The God Delusion" - a good read. > Even in Newham there must be a significant minority of atheists as well large numbers who don't really believe in deities but are willing to play along with the theists for cultural reasons. Perhaps we deserve a dedicated building as well, dedicated to promoting a naturalistic world view, free from superstition and irrationality. It might be built in Plaistow and named after Professor Dawkins. http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0593055489/ukcider-21 Synopsis: Richard Dawkins was recently voted one of the world's top three intellectuals (alongside Umberto Eco and Noam Chomsky) by "Prospect" magazine. As the author of many, now famous, classic works on science and philosophy, he has always asserted the irrationality of belief in God and the grievous harm it has inflicted on society. He now turns his fierce intellect exclusively on this subject, denouncing its faulty logic and the suffering it causes. While Europe is becoming increasingly secularized, the rise of religious fundamentalism, whether in the Middle East or Middle America, is dramatically and dangerously dividing opinion around the world. In America, and elsewhere, a vigorous dispute between 'intelligent design' and Darwinism is seriously undermining and restricting the teaching of science. In many countries religious dogma from medieval times still serves to abuse basic human rights such as women's and gay rights. And all from a belief in a God whose existence lacks evidence of any kind. Dawkins attacks God in all his forms, from the sex-obsessed, cruel tyrant of the Old Testament to the more benign, but still illogical, Celestial Watchmaker favoured by some Enlightenment thinkers. He eviscerates the major arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of a supreme being. He shows how religion fuels war, foments bigotry and abuses children. In "The God Delusion" Dawkins presents a hard-hitting, impassioned rebuttal of religion of all types and does so in the lucid, witty and powerful language for which he is renowned. It is a brilliantly argued, fascinating polemic that will be required reading for anyone interested in this most emotional and important subject.
Raymond,
I agree with Sarah, and it needs to be said publically, your remark verges on
the racist or crosses that line. It is unworthy of you and must be considered
unacceptable in this forum. Disrespect of communities or individuals has no
place here and its manifestation can seriously damage the forum. I trust that
this is an aberration and one that will not be repeated by anyone.
I akso, as a confirmed atheist agree with Michael and suggest that Richards
Dawkin's "The God Delusion" is a good read.
At the same time, I would recommend a vist to a Web Site published by my Nephew
Kenneth Humphreys who attended Hilda Road school in Canning Town and went on to
SWHT in the Barking Road and finally to Essex University a True East Ender.
The Site www.jesusneverexisted.com
I agree with Sarah, it is precisely these kinds of ill thought of comment
that foster greater misunderstanding break down communities and engender
mistrust. It is dangerous and irresponsible, particularly in the current
climate we are in. Mr Savory may very well inhibit a them and us planet
like the extremist on all sides, but the vast majority of people from all
communities and all faiths have worked and continue to work on building
mutual understanding and respect and greater community cohesion.
Gavin.
My posting was done in a fit of temper,caused by the release in the
press today, that one of our Muslim Brothers is advertising on the internet for
three new wives ..The same person who told us to wake up and smell the
coffee.....
Perhaps for a few moments I smelled the coffee I dont know.
Normally I would not make such a remark but I was seeing through a red
haze....................The above was sent to Gavin .
Ray and All
I don't see why you need to apolgise.
The original posting on this topic was actually a quoted allegation by one of
the Borough's elected representatives that the executive were trying to hush up
the fact that the building was being promoted by a religious group with
possible terrorist connections.
In all the polemics that have followed that posting I have not found one that
actually addresses that allegation. Instead we have descended into an
incomprehensible discussion about "religious" freedom.
Now, until the allegation is addressed, I do not see why our Security Forces
should not know where any alleged terrorists mmay be based.
Alan Smith
(I may be Agnostic but I'm not sure)
Dear Adrian,
Your comments about imperialism are interesting but a bit too brush stroke.
I feel I should remind you that Europe has been subjected to Muslim
imperialism which led to conversion at the point of the sword and 400 years
of slavery for millions of Europeans.
Not all religiously driven imperialism is the same. I am advised that the
Muslim Holy Book does specifically condone conversion at the point of a
sword and I think that it was this "article of faith" that the Pope was
reminding us about when he quoted Manuel 2nd Paleologos.
I am pretty sure that there is no clause in the New Testament that
encourages conversion at the point of the sword. Therefore we can all say
that Christian motivated imperialism is wrong as it has no foundation and I
think we all do. Are we not therefore free to ask that all other religions
do the same and not be happy until they do?
On the subject of the proposed mosque. Having been assured that the sect to
develop it do not adhere to the above mentioned "article of faith" (and I am
sure they do not and can show it) I think it becomes a simple cultural issue
or rather one of how such an institution would impact on the local
community.
John McNeill
All
I must admit, as someone who has no religion myself, that I had kept out of
this one - although I have read the posts. But I do find some of the 'them and
us' underlying theme, and religious discussion in some of the posts somewhat
bizarre, in what should be a planning ap discussion. Sadly, someones retort
regarding the RAF was both offensive and judging by their previous posts here,
out of character too.
Regardless of purpose, any large venue attracting large numbers of people does
need a proper planning impact assessment in its locale.
Sincere
Lane Taylor
Yes David you have moved foreward into abject poverty, filth everywhere, a
complete lack of pride in the area, mini ghetto's and sub states of other
countries.
Why do you think so many people left the area in the 60's, 70's and 80's.
Also please get off the free speech bit in this country. It's an urban myth
now.
I am frankly appalled by your reply to Ray Savour's post.
This thread is SUPPOSED to be about an alleged group with terrorist connections
building a closed meeting area in order to "educate" their disciples.
I don't care what their race or religion is. I would feel the same if the
structure was to be used for militants of any persuasion. Attributing Ray's
remark to an "attack on communities" actually says more about you racial
prejudices than it does about his as I see nothing about any community in his
post.
I have no strong religious faith and I am happy for all people to worship (or
not) in whatever manner gives them comfort. However, if anyone threatens my
Country or my Kinfolk then I was the matter discussed and investigated in a
robust manner.
This site is obviously not the "E Democracy" it claims to be and I see not
point in its continued existence. Feel free to slag me off like you did Ray as
I shall not be reading any more posts.
Alan Smith
P S I wonder whether you would have allowed the scathing attacks that have
been made on the elected mayor of the borough had he been of an ethnic minority
background?
As a
democracy you are free to air your views and opinions.
Some interesting questions have been raised on this thread, among these is the perennial one of what can be appropriately said in open debate. In my view, open debate means that I am free to raise any issue and support propositions about it with empirical evidence and by sharing and examining my subjective feelings about the issue; it does not mean that I am free to express any view I have in any way I wish. Some expressions of feeling or views or humour can be seen as insultive and result in slagging matches rather than debates. It can result in people feeling alienated from debate and chosing to leave. Respect for individuals and communities and for their sensitivities is fundamental to the facilitation of open debate. Although the discussion has ranged far beyond the local issue of the mosque, I think it has been appropriate because it raises questions with regard to the nature of the multi cultural community in which we live. It would be good to have more Muslim voices in this forum. Recently there has been a lot of negative press about Islam. I know little about that faith but I do know that there is, as in all faiths, a continuum from conservative, orthodox views to liberal more heterodox views. Anyone who has been to a service in a mosque cannot fail to be moved by the devotion and sense of solidarity. I know devout Muslims whose grace, discipline and humility are moving; I know 'Muslims' who are in fact secular and who do not associate their virtues or vices with religion; I do not know any fundamentalist extremists, though the obviously exist. Religions evolve, for better or worse, beyond the precepts of their founders. Jesus, Mahavira and Buddha were pure pacificists, Mohammed, Guru Nanak, and the patriarchs of Judaism were not. Krishna said that if war was your calling you should follow that. You can find pacifists and 'holy' warriors in all religions. Coming back to the mosque and it's sponsoring organisation, have a look at the Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablighi_Jamaat, it presents Tablighi Jamaat as a sort of Opus Dei equivalent in the Muslim world. Finally I want to share a post that appeared on another e-democracy forum that is addressed to Muslims from a Muslim but I would like to think it has wider application: ....................................................................................... PRESS RELEASE: AN OPEN LETTER TO INSURGENTS IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN Dear Muslim Brothers and Sisters, God forbid if any one of our near one and dear one is killed then the killer is evil, a beast and what not and should get penalty but if one among us kills anybody then he is not evil and we start lying, denying or even justifying the killing.... double standards? Being Muslims, many of our brothers and sisters are not working for peace. They are misguided, mistaken and spreading the virus of hatred and revenge through telling deliberate lies, disinformation and false accusations, which is resulting in death and miseries for number of innocent people living around the world at the hands of merciless KILLER MUSLIMS and also bringing bad name to Mohammed (PBUH) who never killed anyone in his life time. Instead of teaching about Good & Evil, certain Radical Muslim Clerics are only "Trading in Religion". They teach us about accusing, abusing and killing the non-Muslims. They try to hypnotize us to Hate and Kill the non-Muslims and brethren of other sects or be killed and without using any common sense, we readily believe in whatever is being said by these Hate Mongers. Actually, they are "Agents of Satan" who is paying them heavily and in return they are cutting at the very roots of the Ummah. Instead of "Mourning" most of the Muslims are rejoicing on the brutal killings of the non-combatant innocent civilians and "The Murderers" have always been "Our Great Heroes". Before it is too late and the Curse Of God falls upon us, we should use common sense, find out the TRUTH and must change ourselves to save Muslims from becoming the most "Hated, Isolated, Discredited and Suspicious" people in the world. We must start working for promoting "Sectarian Harmony and Religious Tolerance" in the society and should prove to the WORLD through our deeds that Islam is not a religion of Zero Tolerance and Mohammed (PBUH) teaches "Love & Peace" and not Gangsterism, Terrorism, Barbarism, Extremism, Sectarianism, Cruelty, Inhumanity and "Hatred & Killing" of the innocent civilians. Islam is a religion of peace. Islam teaches respect and love for all even the animals. But many narrow-minded Muslims have so far failed to learn anything good from the teachings of Mohammed (PBUH) who preaches love for the peoples of all religions. We are far away from the basic principle of Islam i.e. "Enjoining the people to do Good and forbidding them from Doing Evil" and thus, possess no quality of the civilized society. Unfortunately, many of us show Zero Tolerance towards others and have wrongly learnt few thing to be called as good Muslims and those are "hate" the non-Muslims and ÂAccusing, Abusing and Cursing the non-Muslims. ...act of madness? The killing of others in the name of religion is a Sin. Can a FATHER ever teach his Children to be the permanent Enemies of each other? The time has come for us to stop readily believing in whatever is being said, read and written by the LIARS / Hate Mongers. Unfortunately, some misguided-Muslims believe that the Holy Koran and Holy Prophet (PBUH) both have instructed Muslims that the opponents be KILLED and that they are simply following the orders. We should use our own common sense and only believe which is logical, convincing and in the best interest of the humanity. Why do we hate others so much, may be they are better humans then what we are. My feeling is that the Muslims should unite to discredit and deactivate the fringe mullahs (Preachers of Hate) who promise a quick trip to paradise to people who have little and sacrifice themselves with bombs strapped to their bodies. If the mullahs (THE LIARS) thought that it really was a way to paradise they would be strapping bombs to themselves! Their followers are kept too ignorant to see this for themselves and enlightened Muslims should educate them. We must promote understanding and peace. We are all watched by the same God and need to help one another, not Hate and Hurt. Our contention is that the WORLD should resolve the conflicts facing the Muslim World to stop the terrorism. Unfortunately, all the disputes facing the Muslim World are our self created. The root causes of all the disputes are based on the Muslim Philosophy of Hate against the non-Muslims. The Muslim literature, teachings and preaching are spreading and injecting this hatred in hearts and minds of the Muslims. Our intolerant behavior is further proved by the root causes of all the pending conflicts that we (Muslims) cannot live side by side in peace with the non-Muslims. All the disputes facing Muslim World can be resolved easily, only if we (the Muslims) are able to condemn the ÂPhilosophy of Hate created in us by our past and present elders who have divided the peoples of the world in the name of ÂReligion, Cast and CreedÂ. Fellow Muslims! if God is one and he loves mankind, we should value each others life and strive to protect each other than thinking that if we kill we shall have reward. God looks at human beings not as belonging to different religions, that is why the rain falls to all, the sun shines to all and we all breathe the air freely. We are all created or given life in the very same way- whether Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Jew etc. Let us learn to love each other sincerely. The change of heart and mind is possible to achieve if we keep up our relentless efforts for a violence free and peaceful world. We need to preach love, kindness and humanity with extremist devotion and mission. The mullahs (THE LIARS) and the preachers of HATE must be excommunicated at every level and we should stop giving them donations as it is our money which is being used by them to spread HATRED for killing of the innocents. We must also stop dividing the World into Muslim and non-Muslim blocks. Our political leaders and religious teachers must offer positive ideas. Without the ability to imagine a better world, we cannot build anything together. Tolerance of the beliefs of other peoples in the world, warmth and friendship across racial cultures MUST be the objective of all peace loving people worldwide. What is being offered today through religion is ÂDeath, Destruction and SufferingsÂ. MY PRAYER FOR PEACE: Merciful God, please give to peoples of the world, the required wisdom and determination, to Forgive and Forget the bitterness of the past and learn to live in peace like brothers and sisters, by condemning the divisions and hatreds created in us by our past and present elders. (Amen) Please Read And Circulate this Message For Peace. Thank you. S.A.Rehman Peace Activist PAKISTAN .............................................................................................. An Open Letter To Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri. (Wherever You Are) Aslam-o-Alaikum! Do you know what degree of shame, abomination, misery and wretchedness is being heaped on the innocent and peace-following Muslims all over the world because of this so-called and self styled Jihad of yours? Do you know how many innocent, unsullied people are being daily butchered as result of this professed Jihad of yours? How many children are being orphaned and women being widowed precisely for the same reason. And do you know, killing one faultless human being is like killing the entire humanity. You must definitely be knowing that you will surely be held accountable for this all bloodshed. Will you, then, be able to face your God? I challenge, no! Then, why have you become an agent of some hidden hand. Why are you taking the responsibility of the murder of entire humanity to yourself on his behest. Why are you dragging the Muslims down? Why are you demeaning Islam by presenting it as a terrorist religion? Acting like this, which religion are you rendering a great service to? Are you raising the standard of Islam high or you (if you reflect on it) are causing the heads of the followers of the path of the righteous bow down with shame in-front of the entire humanity. Today most of the Muslims believe that you are not a true Muslim but planted by the enemies to destroy the image of Islam. For GodÂs sake, take recourse to sense, and announce an Unconditional Ceasefire at-once so the inhabitants of world may be introduced to that divine aspect of the Muslims at whose hands no soul suffer, whose words and actions bear no tinge of dichotomy, whose speech, when uttered, conveys to others the message of love and protection, whose thoughts, when thought, are devoted to the well being of others. Herein lies the true success, and herein lies the victory of the true religion of Allah. S.A.Rehman (Peace Activist) PAKISTAN CC:- Dear Muslims, All those who connived with Osama must forswear. The people, who still cooperate with Osama etc, will be the equal partners in the sin of terrorism. All the criminal elements and their supporters cooperating with Osama Bin Laden and other dissidents, who want to spread lawlessness and anarchy in the fortress of Islam, have gone astray from the righteous path of Islam and are terribly mistaken. They and their supporters, who are the copartners in their hideous crime, should recant for the sake of the glory of Islam. They should abjure this path of evil and try to atone for all the repercussions of all the wrongdoings they have committed so far.
To quote Elbert Hubbard:
"Religions are many and diverse, but reason and goodness are one."
He also said:
"To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing."
The credo of Newham's Labour councillors...
Ray Savorys comments about the RAF are clearly racially offensive. Whether or
not they are in character is entirely irrelevant.
Barry Reynolds comments are also racially offensive. You mention people leaving
the area - obviously you are free to do so yourself. Further, here are two of
his recent comments. The first: Also please get off the free speech bit in
this country. Its an urban myth (sic), and the second, in his next
contribution: As a democracy you are free to air your views and opinions (sic).
Some confusion there, perhaps? Could it be that your complaint about freedom of
speech is rooted in your wanting the opportunity to air your views whilst
suppressing those of others?
Alan Smith says both I dont care what their race or religion is. and I wonder
whether you would have allowed the scathing attacks that have been made on the
elected Mayor of the borough if he had been of an ethnic minority (sic). So,
you obviously DO care, Mr Smith. Your own words betray you.
Conflating the views of extreme individuals within a group of people with
everybody in that group reveals impoverished thinking. By definition,
stereotyping and generalisations are redundant. Would you feel fairly treated
if someone suggested you were indistinguishable from Hitler or Nick Griffin?
Murray Hatcher
Racially offensive???
Barry Reynolds comments are also racially offensive. You mention people
leaving the area.
What's offensive about making a factual statement?
Also please get off the free
speech bit in this country. Its an urban myth (sic),
Surely another fact? The concept of free speech translates to being able to
say. What one likes, when one likes and where one likes.
As a democracy you are free to air your views and
opinions (sic).
A copy and paste from another posters contribution.
Classic "selective editing"
Am I a racist? Yes. The human race. All people on this little Planet of ours
have the right to as good a life as possible and that includes a belief in
whatever entity they desire or none if they so wish. No one and I mean no one
should have the right to impose their ideals on anv other by any means, fair or
foul.
One problem that seems to always rear its ugly head on this type of thread is
highlighted above.
Freedom of speech as long as I agree and when I don't, shout it down as sexist,
racist, non-PC etc.
Racist, any comment that may actually border on the truth but offends, as it
refers to a group to which I belong albeit a small or large section of the
community.
I feel that more has been done to build barriers by the likes of the so called
groups for racial equality practically inventing problems and coming up with
bright ideas like Chalk Boards, Winter Festivals to replace Christmas, St.
Georges Cross is offensive. Why not St.Patricks or St. Andrews?
Integration will come in time hopefully but for this to happen all parties must
want it to happen and at the moment it appears a large section of the local
community in Newham have little or no interest in doing so and wish to remain
isolated from those whose beliefs, lineage, backgrounds are differant. Is it
any wonder that it has all ground to a halt, if not even moving backwards?
As a last comment, I wish you could ask my West Indian, East African, Sri
Lankan, Indian and Pakistani neighbours and drinking pals how racist I am. At
the moment that is. I will only be pushed so far in my own country and I feel a
lot of others, of all creeds, colours, perhaps 3rd. or 4th. generation new
comers feel the same about the militants.
Khyberman writes:
To remind everyone, what Alan Craig simply asked was along the lines of:
>>Is there or is there not going to be an investigation into the funding of
the organization behind the structure? If an entity as powerful as the US
claims that the organization is tainted, should we not even take a look for
fear of offending the (exponentially) growing segment of voters?
Is there going to be an independant study of the organization to ascertain
whether it is or could become a possible source for the recruitment of
future fanatics?<<
If anyone knows the answers to these questions perhaps the will enlighten us.
British intelligence agencies seem to keeping a close eye on such matters at
present and I suspect that if here was any real question of Tablighi Jamaat
having terrorist links or aspirations they would not be allowed to set up such
a high profile construct. Powerful as the US is it is not always accurate in
it's claims.
With regard to the question of free speech being a myth, free speech of the
wholly unconstrained sort Barry describes is not only a myth it is
self-defeating as it leads to the breakdown of communication.
If you will indulge another expression of my tendency to long (possibly
irritating) quotes. Here is what Buddhists have to say about 'Right Speech',
which is possibly a more helpful ideal to which to aspire.