Saturday, October 14, 2006

LONDON MOSQUE, ANYONE?

A poster alerted me to this rather unusual readers' poll by The Evening Standard.

20 comments:

  1. Rocky!

    Its funny you posted someting on mosque in London, my friend Ioannis sent me his article which appeared on Asia Times.Com about so many Muslims in Grece and not a single mosque for them to pray even on Friday! People have a lot to learn from one another, I personally feel relations between Muslim and Christiandom, East and West have deteriorated over the decades. Remember when a Greek Orthodox priest offered me a place to sleep in his house during my wandering days! Rocky I hope you can post this in your blogsite!

    ----------------------------------

    Greece trying to assimilate migrants
    By Ioannis Gatsiounis




    Greece represents Europe's eastern gateway. With Muslim immigration to Greece soaring, Athens is having to learn how to assimilate its minorities, with their different cultures, religions and traditions.
    With almost 99% of the population Greek Orthodox Christians, Greece may seem like an unlikely destination for immigrant Muslims.
    Its 11% unemployment rate ranks near the highest among European Union countries and it is one of the less developed member states.

    Nevertheless, some 200,000 Muslims, representing a quarter of all immigrants in Greece, now live in the capital Athens alone, up from 5000 in the early 1990s.
    The first wave came mostly from neighbouring countries such as Albania, following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the governments it supported in Eastern European states.
    The second wave arrived after 1995 and included Muslims from farther abroad - the Middle East, South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.
    From a geographic point of view, their arrival in Greece makes sense as the country straddles Asia and the West and represents Europe's eastern gateway.
    It is the only EU country in the Balkans. And its seas bordering Turkey make for a porous border.
    Cheaper destination
    Greece is also the cheapest point of entry for many immigrants.
    Ali, 21, paid an illegal trafficking network €3000 to smuggle him last year from Iraq to Greece - half of what it would have cost him to fulfil his aim of entering Germany.


    Many immigrants in Greece work
    in construction
    Ali, who declined to give his last name, makes about €30 a day in construction jobs, when he can find them.
    More often than not, he cannot, he says, because supply outstrips demand, making it difficult to send enough money home to support his five siblings and mother. His father was killed in 2004 by an explosion.
    However, immigrants in Greece, as elsewhere in Europe, are finding themselves a vital component to the work force, taking low-wage jobs - mostly in construction, agriculture and domestic help - that many Greeks decline.
    And yet this should not be understood to mean that Greece welcomes their presence, said Nassos Theodoridis, director of Antigone, a human rights group.
    "There has been a great deal of resistance to incorporating immigrants into Greek society," Theodoridis told Aljazeera.net.
    Prohibitive laws
    Laws in Greece make it difficult for minorities and even minority children born in Greece to obtain equal status.
    And work permits remain elusive due to high costs, bureaucracy and ambiguities in the law.
    A study by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia found that the presence of people from minority groups created higher insecurity in Greece than in any other European Union country.
    Political gestures of goodwill towards minorities are often met with resistance.
    The most recent proof of this came in early May when Socialist party leader George Papandreou's decision to nominate a Greek Muslim lawyer for prefecture in northern Greece sparked an outcry.


    Pakistani immigrants protest in
    Athens in January over abductions
    Political rivals in turn feed on the "traitorous blunders" of their opponents, so that the public and politicians reinforce xenophobic tendencies among each other, Theodoridis says.
    Alexandros Zavos, chairman of the government backed Hellenic Migration Policy Institute (IMEPO), pointed out that the government is designing a programme that will bring political parties, unions and the influential Greek Orthodox Church together to advance relations between Greeks and immigrants and produce a harmonious multi-cultural and multi-religious society.
    He said the government's response to immigration so far was not one of neglect and resistance. Rather, he said, immigration is a new phenomenon in Greece.

    Inter-community relations
    Munir Abdelrasoul, an imam from Sudan who has lived in Greece for 30 years and speaks fluent Greek, said relations between mostly immigrant Muslims and mostly Christian natives in Greece are good.
    And political attitudes seem to enhance that sentiment: Greece has maintained good relations with most Arab countries, while many Greeks are staunch supporters of the Palestinian cause.

    But Abdelrasoul said those feelings of goodwill are being challenged by the absence of a mosque in Athens - making it the only European capital without one.

    The Greek government backed a plan to build an Athens mosque in 2000. But a change in government and opposition from locals and church officials saw to it that the proposal never materialised.
    While officials continue to make statements that support the building of a mosque, little has been done to actually build it.
    The ministry of national education and religious affairs "has the right to give all the necessary permits for religious places of worship", said the ministry’s press officer Charidimos Caloudis.
    But Marietta Giannakou, the minister involved, declined to comment when asked to provide a time frame as to when the government would formally approve construction and what the cause for delay has been.
    Political risk
    Some analysts say it is politically risky to push for the construction of a mosque. Greeks were brutally oppressed during 400 years of Ottoman rule and many have come to associate Islam with that painful period of their history.

    "Some Greeks equate Turkish rule with Islam," said Marios Begzos, professor of comparative philosophy of religion at the University of Athens. "But Greeks and the Greek government must learn to distinguish between Turks and Muslims."

    "Good relations between Muslim and Greeks are ancient. But I hope officials will come to understand that when people feel respected and accepted in a society they feel more satisfied and inclined to honour that society"

    Munir Abdelrasoul,
    an imam from Sudan who has lived in Greece for 30 years
    To some extent they have. Some 150 mosques exist in Greece, mainly in the northern region of Thrace, where an estimated 150,000 Greek Muslims live, and the Orthodox Church has donated 300,000 square feet worth an estimated $20 million in west Athens for the purpose of a Muslim cemetery.
    But the symbolic void of a mosque in the capital threatens to overshadow these gestures.

    The absence has drawn international attention. Leading up to the 2004 Olympic Games there was talk in the international Muslim community of boycotting the games.
    And the Saudi government has pushed strongly to fund the construction of a mosque and cultural centre.
    Mosque location
    The construction of the cultural centre raised concern among the Greek community, given the Saudi government's reputation for promoting a strict interpretation of Islam.
    The Greek government has since promised to fund and oversee construction of the mosque, sans the cultural centre.
    Location is said to be the last main sticking point. A spot near the airport was once being considered but few Muslims live there. There was talk of renovating a mosque leftover from Turkish rule in the shadow of the Acropolis that has since been turned into a folk art museum.
    But it is very small - not suitable for a Friday prayer - and a symbol of oppression to many Greeks. Land adjacent to where the cemetery will be constructed is now said to be the most likely candidate.
    In the meantime Muslims in Athens pray at 20 non-official prayer centres around the capital, most of which can hold no more than a few dozen people.

    Abdelrasoul said Muslims in Greece are likely to remain patient on the issue. "Good relations between Muslim and Greeks are ancient. But I hope officials will come to understand that when people feel respected and accepted in a society they feel more satisfied and inclined to honour that society."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:37 pm

    100 million british pound mosque is about RM700 million.

    Fully sponsored by British government? That generous indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:46 pm

    wow pasquale its sad the greek muslims dont have a place of worship (reportedly). now how about allowing a church or temple here? it goes both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous1:06 am

    wow anonymous,
    you mean there's no church nor temple in Malaysia yet?
    There's plenty even in Kota Bharu.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous4:33 am

    Saudara Rocky,

    Saya tidak nampak ada sebab mengapa sebuah masjid berharga 100 juta pound sterling tidak boleh dibina di London atau perlu menjadi suatu kontroversi.

    Pertama, Ibu Negara Inggeris itu mempunyai bilangan penduduk Islam yang ramai. Penduduk Islam UK kini dianggarkan 1.6 juta (perangkaan CIA/Ajensi Perisikan Pusat Amerika);

    Kedua, penduduk Islam UK adalah antara yang paling maju di segi ekonomi di kalangan penduduk bukan Anglo Saxon negara itu;

    Ketiga, London adalah antara pusat kewangan dan percutian yang digemari oleh pelabur dan pelancong Islam dari seluruh dunia, khasnya dari Timur Tengah;

    Keempat, sejak berkurun lamanya Empayar Inggeris mengaut kekayaan tanah jajahan Islamnya dari Timur Tengah hingga ke Asia Tenggara untuk membina institusi Kristiannya; dan

    Kelima, sebagai kuasa penjajah British memperkenalkan (atau memaksakan) sistem/tradisi kepelbagaian agama di negara-negara Islam yang dijajahnya.

    Justeru itu, adalah wajar bagi UK hari ini mengamalkan dasar tolerensi terhadap pelbagai agama, khasnya Islam yang berupa agama kedua terbesar selepas pelbagai dominasi Kristian.

    Terima Kasih.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rocky!

    Anonymous said:" Wow pasquale its sad the greek muslims dont have a place of worship (reportedly). now how about allowing a church or temple here? it goes both ways."

    You really should stop posting from idiot like this "anonymous" who is missng a point, and Rocky you by allowing such posting there will be other idiots who will actually believe there are no churches or temples in Malaysia. The biggest sleepng Buddha is in Kelantan and not Penang, by the way!
    Anonymous please take note that there are no mosques, not even one in Greece where there are a lot of Muslims there, that is all I am saying!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Rocky!

    I paste a posting from Aisehman.org blogsite (hope he does not mind) for your perusal, while it has nothing to do with mosque, but it has a lot to do with discrimination, institutional discrimination to be specific, as practiced by sanctimonious Singapore which its leaders claim does not discriminate but infact marginalised non-Chinese:
    -----------------------------------




    October 13, 2006
    The Charade
    I know I said we should mind our own business, but I couldn't resist this.

    It is from an article in the latest Far Eastern Economic Review, which is basically at war with the Singapore government.

    It's written by Michael D. Barr, a lecturer at the University of Queensland:

    In our forthcoming book, Constructing Singapore: Elitism, Ethnicity and the Nation-Building Project, Zlatko Skrbi┼í and I present evidence that the playing field is hardly level. In fact, Singapore’s system of promotion disguises and even facilitates tremendous biases against women, the poor and non-Chinese. Singapore’s administrative and its political elites — especially the younger ones who have come through school in the last 20 or so years — are not the cream of Singapore’s talent as they claim, but are merely a dominant social class, resting on systemic biases to perpetuate regime regeneration based on gender, class and race.
    ... As Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong put it when he spoke on national television in May 2005, “We are a multiracial society. We must have tolerance, harmony. … And you must have meritocracy … so everybody feels it is fair….” His father, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, was making the same point when, in 1989, he told Singapore’s Malay community that they “must learn to compete with everyone else” in the education system.

    Yet if Singapore’s meritocracy is truly a level playing field, as the Lees assert, then the Chinese must be much smarter and harder working than the minority Indians and Malays. Consider the distribution of the top jobs in various arms of the Singapore government service in the 1990s (based on research conducted by Ross Worthington in the early 2000s):


    Of the top 30 GLCs only two (6.7%) were chaired by non-Chinese in 1991 (and neither of the non-Chinese was a Malay).


    Of the 38 people who were represented on the most GLC boards in 1998, only two (5.3%) were non-Chinese (and neither of the non-Chinese was a Malay).


    Of the 78 “core people” on statutory boards and GLCs in 1998, seven (9%) were non-Chinese (and one of the non-Chinese was a Malay).

    A similar outcome is revealed in the pattern of government scholarships awarded after matriculation from school. Of the 200 winners of Singapore’s most prestigious scholarship, the President’s Scholarship, from 1966-2005 only 14 (6.4%) were not Chinese. But this was not a consistent proportion throughout the period. If we take 1980 as the divider, we find that there were 10 non-Chinese President’s Scholars out of 114 from 1966-80, or 8%, but in the period from 1981-2005 this figure had dropped to four out of 106, or 3.8%. Since independence, the President’s Scholarship has been awarded to only one Malay, in 1968. There has been only one non-Chinese President’s Scholar in the 18 years from 1987 to 2005 (a boy called Mikail Kalimuddin) and he is actually half Chinese, studied in Chinese schools (Chinese High School and Hwa Chong Junior College), and took the Higher Chinese course as his mother tongue. If we broaden our focus to encompass broader constructions of ethnicity, we find that since independence, the President’s Scholarship has been won by only two Muslims (1968 and 2005).

    If we consider Singapore’s second-ranked scholarship—the Ministry of Defence’s Singapore Armed Forces Overseas Scholarship (SAFOS)—we find a comparable pattern. The Ministry of Defence did not respond to my request for a list of recipients of SAF scholarships, but using newspaper accounts and information provided by the Ministry of Defence Scholarship Centre and Public Service Commission Scholarship Centre Web sites, I was able to identify 140 (56%) of the 250 SAFOS winners up to 2005.

    Although only indicative, this table clearly suggests the Chinese dominance in SAFOS stakes: 98% of SAFOS winners in this sample were Chinese, and about 2% were non-Chinese (counting Mikail Kalimuddin in 2005 as non-Chinese). Furthermore I found not a single Malay recipient and only one Muslim winner (Mikail Kalimuddin). A similar picture emerges in the lower status Singapore Armed Forces Merit Scholarship winners: 71 (25.6%) of 277 (as of late 2005) scholars identified, with 69 (97%) Chinese winners to only two non-Chinese—though there was a Malay recipient in 2004, and one reliable scholar maintains that there have been others.

    The position of the non-Chinese in the educational stakes has clearly deteriorated since the beginning of the 1980s. According to the logic of meritocracy, that means the Chinese have been getting smarter, at least compared to the non-Chinese.

    Yet the selection of scholars does not depend purely on objective results like exam scores. In the internal processes of awarding scholarships after matriculation results are released, there are plenty of opportunities to exercise subtle forms of discrimination. Extracurricular activities (as recorded in one’s school record), “character” and performance in an interview are also considered. This makes the selection process much more subjective than one would expect in a system that claims to be a meritocracy, and it creates ample opportunity for racial and other prejudices to operate with relative freedom.

    Is there evidence that such biases operate at this level? Unsurprisingly, the answer to this question is “yes.” Take for instance a 2004 promotional supplement in the country’s main newspaper used to recruit applicants for scholarships. The advertorial articles accompanying the paid advertisements featured only one non-Chinese scholar (a Malay on a lowly “local” scholarship) amongst 28 Chinese on prestigious overseas scholarships. Even more disturbing for what they reveal about the prejudices of those offering the scholarships were the paid advertisements placed by government ministries, statutory boards and GLCs. Of the 30 scholars who were both prominent and can be racially identified by their photographs or their names without any doubt as to accuracy, every one of them was Chinese. This leaves not a shadow of a doubt that those people granting government and government-linked scholarships presume that the vast majority of high-level winners will be Chinese.

    The absence of Malays from the SAFOS scholarships and their near-absence from the SAF Merit Scholarships deserves special mention because this is an extension of discrimination against the admission of Malays into senior and sensitive positions in the SAF that is officially sanctioned. The discrimination against Malays has been discussed in parliament and the media, and is justified by the assertion that the loyalty of Malays cannot be assumed, both because they are Muslim and because they have a racial and ethnic affinity with the Malays in Malaysia and Indonesia. Current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has historically been a vocal defender of this policy.

    This discrimination hits Malay men hard, first because it deprives many of promising careers in the army, and second—and more pertinent for our study of the elite—it all but completely excludes potentially high-flying Malays of a chance of entering the scholar class through the SAF. A Chinese woman has a much better chance of winning an SAF scholarship than a Malay man.

    Yet even before the scholarship stage, the education system has stacked the deck in favor of Chinese, starting in preschool. Here is the heart of Singapore’s systemic discrimination against non-Chinese. Since the end of the 1970s, the principles of “meritocracy” and “multiracialism” have been subverted by a form of government-driven Chinese chauvinism that has marginalized the minorities. It was not known to the public at the time, but as early as 1978, then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew had begun referring to Singapore as a “Confucian society” in his dealings with foreign dignitaries. This proved to be the beginning of a shift from his record as a defender of a communally neutral form of multiracialism toward a policy of actively promoting a Chinese-dominated Singapore.

    The early outward signs of the Sinicization program were the privileging of Chinese education, Chinese language and selectively chosen “Chinese values” in an overt and successful effort to create a Mandarin- and English-speaking elite who would dominate public life. Two of the most important planks of this campaign were decided in 1979: the annual “Speak Mandarin Campaign” and the decision to preserve and foster a collection of elite Chinese-medium schools, known as Special Assistance Plan (SAP) schools.

    The SAP schools are explicitly designed to have a Chinese ambience, right down to Chinese gardens, windows shaped like plum blossoms, Chinese orchestra and drama, and exchange programs with mainland China and Taiwan. Over the years the children in SAP schools have been given multiple advantages over those in ordinary schools, including exclusive preschool programs and special consideration for preuniversity scholarships.

    For instance, in the early 1980s, when there was a serious shortage of graduate English teachers in schools, the Ministry of Education ensured there were enough allocated to SAP schools “to help improve standards of English among the Chinese-medium students, in the hope that they will be able to make it to university” —a target brought closer by the granting of two O-level bonus points exclusively to SAP school students when they applied to enter junior college. By contrast, neither Indians nor Malays received any special help, let alone schools of their own to address their special needs. They were not only left to fend for themselves, but were sometimes subjected to wanton neglect: inadequately trained teachers, substandard facilities and resources and the “knowledge” that they are not as good as the Chinese.

    This account of discrimination against non-Chinese might lead the reader to assume that the quarter of Singaporeans who are not Chinese must form a festering and perhaps even revolutionary mass of resentment. Such an assumption would, however, be a long way from the mark. Non-Chinese might be largely excluded from the highest levels of the administrative elite, but just below these rarefied heights there plenty of positions open to intelligent and hardworking non-Chinese—certainly enough to ensure that non-Chinese communities have much to gain by enthusiastically buying into the system, even after the glass ceilings and racial barriers are taken into account.

    There are many grievances and resentments in these levels of society but the grievances are muted and balanced by an appreciation of the relative comforts and prosperity they enjoy. For most, any tendency to complain is subdued also by knowledge that it could be worse, and the widespread assumption among members of minority communities that it will be if they seriously pursue their grievances.

    As long as the Singapore system continues to deal such people a satisfactory hand, if not a fair one, it should be able to cope with some quiet rumblings in the ranks. [FEER]


    There you go. Welcome to Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore. Not unlike Malaysia, actually. You just have to switch around the players.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous11:42 am

    The subject on mosque reminds me of a conversation between several nine year olds recently. Two malay boys were insisting that their ustaz claimed the 'Kemenyan' used by Hindus during prayers and the ringing of the bell are ways to call the devil. This is not the first time I have heard of such thing. Sekolah Agama's are teaching their children that 'orang kafir akan pergi ke neraka' and men who wear bangles or chains are animals and Malay girls who don't wear the head scarf (tudung) will join their 'kafir' friends in hell as well.
    Sad but true. Why have we stooped so low to hurl unfounded accusations towards those around us.
    No point building expensive mosque's or places of worships if what is taught within its four walls are nothing but lies.

    Note: The author maintans utmost respect towards all religions. This is in no way belittling any particular section of the society.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous12:45 pm

    Saudara Rocky!

    I am an ex-cop involved in football since I was in Maxwell School everytimne we play football at our school field we always see the road name as Jalan Tun Dr Ismail and for some reason it is called Jalan Tun Ismail minus the "Dr", I agreed with pasquale the government must put back the "Dr" on Jalan Tun Ismail near the Mall and PWTC. For the uninformed Tun Dr Ismail was a deputy prime minister and home affairs minister much respected by all races, I dont want my grandchldren to grown thinkng the nake of this road is named after TDM Brother In law Tun Ismail! Below is what pasquale sentmin another posting in your blog and I took this opp to post it to you. We cannot just change things to suit anyone whims and fancies! Please put the "Dr" ack to the name of the road!
    -----------------------------------
    "Rocky!
    Now that I have the avenue to vent out my anger and frustration I have one for you!

    Did you know that Jalan Tun Dr Ismail behind the Mall near PWTC has now been changed to Jalan Tun Ismail for many years now! This is not right, now everyone will think that the road is named after Tun Mahathir's brother-in-law who was the governor of Bank Negara at one time. I know the road since I was in primary school at Princess Road School, Batu Road School and when I attended Maxwell School, the road is known ad Jalan Tun Dr Ismail! Can someone put the "Dr" back on to the road SVP! This happened under Tun Mahathir regime and it must be corrected, just to be on the record!

    Happy Deepavali!"
    -----------------------------------

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous1:31 pm

    Instead of one 100 million pound mosque, why not ten 10 million pound mosques? Instead of one location, why not ten locations and reach out to community and neighbourhood easier? Just a thought...

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous2:13 pm

    Great posting above from Pasquale. Just to comment on FEER article, if you breakdown the number of chinese getting Singapore scholarships, you will get quite a number of chinese originating from neighbouring countries. In other words,to LKY Govt. they are more deserving than the local Singapore home born Malays.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous2:14 pm

    found some interesting pieces on the london mosque.

    Battle to block massive mosque

    Project for 40,000 worshippers 'has links with radical Islam'

    Jamie Doward, home affairs editor
    Sunday September 24, 2006
    The Observer

    A plan to build a 'mega mosque' in east London has become mired in controversy with allegations that it is being bankrolled by Islamist groups in Saudi Arabia. Opponents say it would promote a radical form of Islam. They accuse its backers of not consulting local people.

    Tablighi Jamaat, the controversial Islamist sect that has applied for planning permission for the multi-million-pound mosque, has been described by French intelligence as 'an antechamber of fundamentalism'. This evangelical movement, which has gained a strong following among young male Muslims, is a Deobandi Muslim organisation that has close links with the Wahhabi fundamentalist form of the religion promoted in Saudi Arabia and practised by the Saudi royal family.

    The sect, which bought the brownfield site in the early Nineties, has sent hundreds of British Muslims to madrassas - religious schools - in Pakistan each year. There are concerns within British intelligence that these trips may have radicalised some of them. Followers have also attended the sect's Saudi-financed UK headquarters in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. They include Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, two of the bombers who struck London on 7 July last year.

    Those backing the project vigorously defend Tablighi Jamaat, saying it has been misrepresented because it declines to talk to the media. They say the mosque will transform a heavily polluted region in West Ham, close to where the Olympic village is to be built.

    With a planned capacity of 40,000 worshippers, to be expanded to take 70,000 if demand grows, the proposed Abbey Mills Islamic Centre would be Britain's biggest religious building. The largest mosque now in Morden, south London, holds 10,000 people, while Liverpool's Anglican cathedral, the largest Christian church in the UK, holds 3,000.

    'The mosque would bring a radical transformation of the local community,' said Patrick Sookhdeo, international director of the Barnabas Fund, a charity set up to 'defend Christianity'. It has called for an inquiry into the funding of the project. 'The mosque is the centre of the community and people gravitate to it. You would end up having a completely Muslim community... It would create a separate district, a parallel society.'

    Accounts filed with the Charity Commission show Anjuman-E-Islahul Muslimeen, the Tablighi Jamaat charity seeking the permission, receives donations of around £500,000 a year, suggesting it will need huge extra financial support to fund the project.

    Designed by the acclaimed architects Mangera Yvars, the mosque, which will cost between £100m and £300m, depending on how big a scheme is approved, would become a landmark in east London. There are plans for wind turbines and solar panels: the architects want the mosque to offer a modern vision of Islam that observes the religion's emphasis on sustainability.

    'We've tried to develop a concept mosque that's inclusive,' said Ali Mangera. 'It will be not just for Muslims but for non-Muslims. In the present political climate it's important to create dialogue between different groups. This will be a radical new approach. Islamic architecture, philosophy, maths and science have been at the forefront of ideas and we're trying to go back to that idea.'

    Mangera declined to talk about how the mosque was being funded. 'The funding will come from a variety of sources,' he said, 'some from the UK, some from abroad'. It is not known whether the Saudi royal family will contribute.

    He defended the sect from its critics. 'If Tablighi Jamaat was anything like some people say they are, they wouldn't go for a building like this: it wouldn't make sense.'

    Murad Qureshi, a member of the London Assembly and himself a Muslim although not a member of the sect, said it was important to establish where the money for the project was coming from. 'I would be concerned if the financing all came from Saudi Arabia because of the strong Wahhabist influence that comes from there,' he said. 'As for the planning application itself, l would like to see 50 per cent of the floor space given to women who normally don't get a look-in at mosques, let alone facilities.'

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous2:27 pm

    Daniel Pipes has written pieces on the "Markaz". Visit his blog.
    http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/541

    ReplyDelete
  14. What about having a poll to building a church/temple in Mecca or Jeddah?

    Why is it that the muslims think they are special people that they have a right to build a mosque in any place they wish but others cannot build church or temple in muslim lands. One of the reasons Osma bin Laden gave for his atrocities against the americans was because the americans were in Saudi Arabia, the holy land. The americans were invited there by the Saudi government.

    For that matter, there are even enough problems to build a church or temple in K.L. or P.J. What about the history of the over 20 years attempt to build a church in P.J.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Pasquale,

    There's more about Red Dot Com:

    http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/
    0610/free/p013.html -
    Singapore's founding myths vs freedom.

    http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/
    0610/free/p023.html -
    Financial center pipedreams.

    Plus Mr Andy Xie's (former chief economist in Asia for Morgan Stanleys) damning post-IMF remarks contained in part within the 2nd article although you can find the putported full text on 'mrbrown' under the comments section.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous12:23 pm

    prl,
    This is not muslim land as you say. This is Malaysia,founded and built by Malays, Indians, Chinese and a lot of orang asli....so only the former PM had to go and screw it for all by claiming this as a muslim country and ungratefully forgeting that the other races and religion have a fair share to practise their faith here( as enshrined in our constitution pls. )... but alas how quickly the morons forget !! and yes it took them 20 years and an isolated place was allocated. What rubbish is this ???
    Talk about fairness?? Bullshit !

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous3:04 pm

    I wonder why the plan to build place or worship has becoming political.

    can someone very to me (someone who actually been there and saw it for fact) is there any church or tample for the Jews in Mekah or Saudi Arabia?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous9:03 pm

    If Saudi Arabia doesn't build church in Mecca, why should the Greek build mosque in Athen?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous4:13 pm

    It doesn’t matter much if, in principle, churches are allowed in Mecca. There are no Christians in Mecca, and none or virtually none living (as opposed to staying) in Saudi Arabia. Christians are not moving into the Middle East, so there is no market for new Christian churches. Muslims are moving into Europe. Encouraging mosques in Rome is not equivalent to theoretically allowing churches in Mecca, which the Saudis would never agree to anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous4:35 pm

    A church in Mecca? You mean they'd agree to a Buddhist temple in the Vatican? Hey, two can play the fool!

    ReplyDelete

Anwar’s de-dollarisation: Will it hurt Malaysia?

D edollarisation is a process of substituting US dollar as the currency used for (i) trading oil and/or other commodities, (ii) buying US do...