by LittleToe 25 Replies latest social current
I'm puzzled. Need more info, please. Is this the same proposed mosque as in this article ( http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1879728,00.html ) ?
If so, then it is not for the Olympics but near the Olympics area, it appears.
And is Britain actually being asked to pay for it now? Funding sources were uncertain in the above article but there was no mention at all of British tax-payers being a possible source.
~Merry
If not a penny of taxpayers' or Olympic money go into it, and the Muzzies spend their own hard-earned, then go for it!
Brooklin is already in line and asking for a fully funded Branch Office.
Merry:
Great minds think alike. I was puzzled and doing a little more background research and I just came up with the same Observer article, as well.
I have the following lines of investigation:
I'd hate to think I'd been duped by some anti-islamic propaganda (and apologise in advance of the remote possibility of that being the case), but either way there are some significant questions on both sides.
LT: there are some significant questions on both sides
Yes, there do seem to be.
I first heard about this a while back on BBC America news (I think), and they were interviewing various people on both sides of the question.
From what I understood, the land has already been purchased by the Muslim group that wants to build the mega-mosque. They just need permission to build. I don't know it they have the money to do so yet or not, but they may well be having to wait on that until they get the go-ahead to build.
I will be interested to see if you find any of the answers to the questions you listed, or if there are any concrete answers yet to be had.
~Merry
If they're building it with taxpayer money, they should make sure it is part mosque, part synagogue, part UU fellowship hall, part Catholic church and part every other religion, denomination or non-denomination that taxpayersbelong to. You know, make everybody happy. Can't you see it now? . . . Catholics next to JWs next to hippydippy Unitarians next to jihdists next to atheists next to agnostics next to Buddhists, next to everyone . . .Now wouldn't that better represent the purposes and goals of the Olympics anyway:
"According to the Olympic Charter, established by Pierre de Coubertin, the goal of the Olympic Movement is to contribute to building a peaceful and better world by educating youth through sport practised without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play."
what sport are they intending to play there... Bobbing for virgins.
Put the money into healthcare!
Ian
A £100 million Kingdom Hall would be better.
I was going to say what Ian said. Let's have a hospital instead. If only they'd built a "Millenium Hospital" with all the money, instead of the pointless crappy Dome.
Clam
By the phrasing I understand 'with piublic money', in which case yes, but only if I get a Gylosque; a structure erected in rural solitutde for spiritual pursuits comprising a Mansion house in 100 acres with a swimming pool, a menage and twenty loose-boxes, all surrounded by a 12' wall with raor wire on top.
So no then. A silly idea.
With private money? None of my business, no more than should the next church, Gudwara, Synagoge, Mithratic Cave or Santa's Grotto be built. That's what planning laws are for.
