| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Un-neighborly, yes. In The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon wrote that if the Muslims had won the Battle of Poitiers, "the Arabian fleet might have sailed without a naval combat into the mouth of the Thames. Perhaps the interpretation of the Koran would now be taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits might demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mahomet." Well, this may come to pass after all, before too long.
From the Daily Mail (thanks to all who sent this in):
Muslim plans to broadcast a loudspeaker call to prayer from a city centre mosque have been attacked by local residents who say it would turn the area into a "Muslim ghetto".Dozens of people packed out a council meeting to express their concerns over the plans for a two-minute long call to prayer to be issued three times a day, saying that it could drown out the traditional sound of church bells.
But a spokesman for the Central Mosque said that Muslim's also have the right to summon worshippers.
Dr Mark Huckster, who lives in Stanton Road and works at East Oxford hospice Helen House, told the Oxford Mail: "The proposal to issue a prayer call is very un-neighbourly, especially in a crowded urban space such as Oxford.
"I have lived in the Middle East and a prayer call has a very different feel to church bells and I personally found the noise extremely unpleasant, rather disturbing and very alien to the western mindset."
He added: "If an evangelical Christian preacher proposed issuing sermons three times a day at full volume there would be an outcry.
"There could be a sense of ghettoisation of East Oxford. Cowley Road would have a Muslim flavour and could become a Muslim ghetto which is contrary to what we want in a multicultural society."
Posted by Robert at December 24, 2007 10:18 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Dozens of people packed out a council meeting to express their concerns over the plans for a two-minute long call to prayer to be issued three times a day, saying that it could drown out the traditional sound of church bells.
Well, just let the churches invest in more, and larger, bells. Let the dreaming spires be "alive with the sound of music."
Posted by: ebonystone![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 24, 2007 10:47 AM
Or encourage the Oxfordshire branch of Hell's Angels to cruise around the mosque three times a day, with exhausts at full cut-out. Thus:
mosque: aaalliiilaaallaaa, aalliiihaahaa, aaalliiimmaaammaaa . . .
HA: VROOOOOOOOOOOM, RRAPPP, RRAPPP, RRAPPP . . .
And allow a tax break for double-glazing.
at December 24, 2007 10:54 AM
"There could be a sense of ghettoisation of East Oxford. Cowley Road would have a Muslim flavour and could become a Muslim ghetto which is contrary to what we want in a multicultural society."
Brits, sort it out, grow a pair and end this nonsense.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 24, 2007 10:55 AM
If Muzlims don't like the way we live, why don't they go back where they came from...
Posted by: The Resistance at December 24, 2007 11:04 AM
tell the Muslims if they want their call to prayer to go back home to the Muslim ghetto known as the middle east and same middle east that is a drain on western resources because it does not produce any of the items needed for modern civilization though it does just fine at producing the items needed for the seventh century its pedophile founder dreamed up Islam in
Posted by: grizlybear at December 24, 2007 11:09 AM
This has already happened here; in Hamtramck, Michigan:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001658.php
Posted by: Papa Whiskey at December 24, 2007 11:12 AM
Just got through listening to a live report from FNC, from Bethlehem. You could hardly hear the reporter for all the caterwauling.
Posted by: interestinconundrum at December 24, 2007 11:40 AM
Wasn't it Margaret Thatcher who once said that the Muslim call to prayer would be allowed once church bells were allowed to ring in Saudi Arabia? According to the spokesman for the Oxford mosque, the Muslim call to prayer is happening throughout the UK and, of course, Oxford Muslims have their rights too. Is that true, UK readers? Are the Muslims really being called to prayer throughout the country? I hope not.
Posted by: maryrose at December 24, 2007 1:32 PM
The intrusive Muslim call to prayer is just another in-your-face symbol of at least five Islamic sociopathologies: physical domination of society, cultural separatism, contempt of and hatred for The Other, mindless submission to all Mohammedan dogma (however vicious), and triumphalist supremacism.
Other deliberately offensive symbols are minarets, hijabs, and burkas. Since there is no "separation of church and state" in Islam, and since Mohammedan dogma is mainly political and not religious, these symbols are mainly political.
They are disgusting public displays of aggressive barbarism.
Posted by: Stendec at December 24, 2007 1:40 PM
The Resistance
But, that's the problem, they do like it in the UK, they love the fact that your average "nigel" type is bending over backwards for them. They also love the fact that the British are willing to have their ancient laws perverted and warped to accommodate these alien residents.
Muslims will soon have the whipping hand over the British people. Is this what you all want?
If not, then get out and retake your once great nation!
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 24, 2007 2:06 PM
Papa Whiskey
oh hell, and I thought that the UK was the only dhimmi nation. back to the drawing board.
Anyone wanna set up a peaceful anti-jihad cell here in georgia?
we will be responsible for lighting propaganda raids, flooding certain areas with flyers and posters.
Mass publicity stunts involving the media, ie unfurling massive banners on CNN building etc or during ball games.
Im not gonna stand back any longer.
act now or die in slavery later.
Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 24, 2007 2:09 PM
We all knew it would happen one day-what a nice Xmas present. Point is-what are the Brits going to
do about it? Have been to Cambridge which is a pretty place with well to do Collegiate folk aplenty. Imagine Oxford to be the same.
For decades, so called 'working class'Brits have
encountered the Muslim Invasion up close & personal-their cries of anguish ignored by Establishment. But when it hits home,when the Middle Classes & Professors in their Ivory Towers
are affected-this is different. It wasn't the Peasants of France-despite their misery & unjust
treatment-who brought about the French Revolution-
it was the Middle Classes whose support toppled the Monarchy.
If one trawls through comments in Daily Mail,Telegraph,BBC even The Guardian, you get a taste of the anger out there. Brits haven't rebelled on a large scale since Wat Tyler but reckon they're getting close...
at December 24, 2007 2:10 PM
Morgane
Brits rebelled on a massive scale during the poll tax riots, this was a reaction to the conservatives and was really a far left inspired act of violence.
I'm not sure that your average conservative brit is politically motivated enough to get out there on the street. though I could be wrong after watching the pro-huners demonstrations. If push comes to shove Brits will wake up but I'm not sure what the trigger event will be? possibly a massive bomb attack on the england football team or something would likely result in massive riots by the english.
at December 24, 2007 2:14 PM
So much in Islam is intended to flaunt Muslim power. While Christians and Jews must beg permission -- often denied -- to repair their churches and synagoues (the Copts cannot even get permission to repair a church's broken toilet), Muslims have over the past 1350 years deliberately appropriated the religious sites of others -- Christian (the Church of St. John the Baptist in Damascus), Jewish (the Temple Mount in Jerualem), Hindu (as the temple-complex of Rama at Ayodhya), and so on -- and have deliberately built on top of those sites, as in Jerusalem, or incorporating them into a new Muslim strcuture (the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus), or using the very stone taken from the destroyed religious sites of others (see Ayodhya, see a thousand Hindu and Jain and Buddhist temples and temple-complexes, all over India and the East Indies, and Central Asia).
Often when building in conquered territories, the Muslims selected the highest point so that their mosques would tower over the religious sites of non-Muslims. The minaret, too, is a symbol of thrusting power, and it is important to Muslims to build minarets whenever they can. Finally, the call to prayer, five times a day, beginning very early in the day and thus waking up entire populations of non-Muslims -- remindind them of just who is boss. Now that Muslims have been allowed, often using money from abroad, to build mosques all over the Western world, their next demand is for minarets (despite zoning laws about building height) and for broadcasting their Call to Prayer. If that is permitted, such permission is no cause for gratitude, as Westerners may think. It is cause, rather, for triumphalism, for a feeling that Islam cannot be stopped, that it is on its way, and that the Infidels are going to steadily yield, and yield, and yield. It must be stopped, therefore, with each new demand, or each repetition of an old demand that had not been met. Every single demand by Muslims for changes in the institutions, legal, political, social, of Infidel lands, should be understood as connecting to every other such demand, and all such demands are part of a strategy to force Infidels to yield, and to change, to surrender something, and then something else.
And that is why every such demand, no matter how small, should not be met, but soberly, and without much ado, rejected. As a matter of course.
Posted by: Hugh at December 24, 2007 2:17 PM
Notice that one of the protesters who is named, Dr Mark Huckster, is someone who has lived in the Middle East and knows what he is talking about.
I liked his clarifying point: that the muezzin's call, being a verbal statement of Islam and an aggressive summons to conform to its demands, equates, strictly speaking, not with church bells but with a loudly-broadcast sermon. Thus he neatly undercuts the usual 'freedom of religion' argument.
The music of church bells contains no words, thus being able to be appreciated purely as music; also, it is less disturbing for the neighbours, since it normally does not happen as often as the muezzin's call, and is not amplified to the nth degree (and - how many parish churches ring their bells for two minutes at 3 or 4 am, every single day? Not many!).
Other Christian, and non-Christian, communities attempting to keep their neighbourhoods muezzin-free, while also keeping their church bells etc, might do well to pursue Dr Mark Huckster's line of argument; together with some of Hugh's final points as made above.
Note also that Dr Huckster 'works in a hospice' - one wonders if the hospice would be within earshot of the 'Central Mosque' - if so, I would imagine Dr Huckster is concerned for the peace of his patients, not wanting people who are seriously ill, who probably have difficulty sleeping, to be disturbed by the Muezzin's arrogantly-amplified caterwauling.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at December 24, 2007 3:52 PM
Dumbledoresarmy says "one wonders if the hospice would be within earshot of the 'Central Mosque'".
I live 20 miles from Oxford though I don't know the exact area, but from internet maps it will be closer than 200 yards. Helen House was the world's first children's hospice, and it provides respite and end of life care for children and young adults with life-shortening conditions.
Yes, I have no doubt that it will be very disturbing.
Posted by: Paul at December 24, 2007 5:34 PM
"...contrary to what we want in a multicultural society..."
Could there possibly be more perfect and delectable example of buyer's remorse than this??? This pompous git is getting exactly what he bargained for, he's just unaware as yet...
Attn., Dr. Mark Huckster:
Muslim calls to prayers is exactly what you bargained for with your ludicrous "multicilultural society". I surmise you just didn't read the small print about the finer subtlties in that Marxist deal with the Devil you signed. It's a tad late and a shilling short now the facts and details in the deal are coming to light to make such a stink!
So sorry, old chap!!!
Suck it up.
Stiff upper lip, and all that.
STFU.
at December 24, 2007 7:11 PM
I surmise you just didn't read the small print about the finer subtlties in that Marxist deal with the Devil you signed.
Posted by: jsla at December 24, 2007 7:11 PM
.. where, "Islam is Peace" means "Islam is (after your blood until you convert and repeat the Islamic propoganda "Islam is") Peace (or you die).
.. where, "innocent" means a muslim.
.. where, "there is no force in religion" means "your choices are either accept Islam or pay-up the jizia or die.. see you have choices, no compulsion.
.. where, Muhommad is to be projected as an ideam man, no matter he pilllaged, plundered, raped murdered and ofcourse, lied to decieve.
Then again, you wanted to look nice appeasing to barbarians. Well, like jsla said, Muslim calls to prayers is exactly what you bargained for with your ludicrous "multicilultural society". And another thing.. this is just the begining. Wait until your women are raped and you are robbed (if you are not murdered) by "youths" of your "multicilultural society", you bargained for.
Posted by: Alert at December 25, 2007 5:30 AM
A public statement about the superiority of Allah is an insult for other faiths.
This is the main reason the Muezzin call should be forbidden.
Posted by: FreeSpeech at December 25, 2007 1:46 PM
An alternative to prohibiting the Muezzin would be to allow for all faiths and confessions to broadcast by loudspeaker corresponding statements of the superiority of their God.
Posted by: FreeSpeech at December 25, 2007 2:03 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)