The Bishop of Oxford has rejected another senior clergyman's fears that broadcasting the Muslim call to prayer in East Oxford could create a "no-go area" for non-Muslims.

Mark wrote:
I am a Christian but not C.of E. and the Bishop of Oxford does not represent me. I don't want intrusive noise pollution just because he doesn't live in the area but wants to make a Politically Correct gesture of some kind. Let him have it in his own non-ghetto back yard and see how he likes it. It's bad enough that we seem to have the star and crescent things on the lamposts seemingly all year round. Does the council really want to complete the ghettoisation of the area? Muslims and non-muslims are not treated the same by the law either. I remember when the police raided that muslim landlord (with loads of rented properties in Oxford) for charges of fraud, etc, and for the 'raid' the police removed their boots after knocking on the guys door and didn't bring their alsations into his house so they wouldn't offend his religious sensibilities: apparently he thought it was OK to swindle but lets not put police dogs in his house or dirty his carpet with boots. If he was not a muslim, that mans door would have come off at the hinges at dawn and the dogs would have been everywhere and the boots would have stayed on. Politically Correct Policing.

I.A wrote:
I Live next to a church. If people argue about noise pollution the call to prayer will make, then can you not state that the ringing of church bells also causes noise pollution and should they be staoped?? Im sure if you were to compare the different levels of noise between the two then you would find that the bells are much louder!

The One, Oxford wrote:
The fact that they don't allow churches etc in Saudi should not bare any relevance to what we have here. 2 wrongs etc. If this goes ahead then fine, the only reason to appose this is planning reasons, i.e noise, not simply because they are not tollerant in Saudi. Also, I doubt it would be 5 times a day and certainly not at 5am or whatever it is.

Mike Hock wrote:
Yeah Pat, the man was "successful" in swindling a lot of money. That is success, until they caught him. I have looked at my dictionary and I can't find "SUSPISTION" in there at all. You must be one of those (partially illiterate) 9/11 conspiracy theorists who think that the whole thing was CGI. Go to Pakistan and vote for Bhutto. Oh sorry, it's not possible, is it? Why is that? OK, go to Saudi Arabia and pay in a church. Erm maybe not. Well, go to Afghanistan and try and live a normal life. Or Iran where you might enjoy the attentions of the 'cultural police'. Wake up and smell the coffee. It is feeble minded P.C. people like you that allow ghettos to come into being. "Successful man" my foot! Thief and swindler would be a suitable description.

Old Ben wrote:
As a committed Jedi Knight I would love to play the Stars Wars theme to everyone down the Cowley Road to celebrate the birthday of Yoda. May the 4th.

Oxford Crusader wrote:
These CofE cocktail political careerists - with a large dash of Marxism - such as the dhimmi Bishop, are the only sort who can afford to talk such rubbish. Why in this day and age should disproportionate weight be given to their views? They should try to pay more attention to improving the parlous state of their faith, than to naively meddling in practical politics. I'll bet all England to a china orange, the Bishop couldn't give one solid example of Christian-Muslim partnership.

Thomas Cruz wrote:
Dear Alan, Why are you blaming white people? Who has mentioned race/racism? Apart from you. It is religion being put in the faces of people who don\'t want it and who don\'t want to live in a ghetto. Saudi\'s problems are religious and not political. Next time Western workers are targetted in their housing compounds by Wahhabi terrorists with guns (it has happened a few times in the past and will reoccur), and the Saudi Police have the building surrounded, the leaders always escape by some \'blind spot\' that wasn\'t covered by teh Police. How? Religious connections of the Wahabbi\'s who might be there with guns and their relations who tell the police not to nick them. Mark my words: next time this happens in Saudi Arabia, some ringleaders will escape. Wait and see.

Mike Hock wrote:
Yeah Pat, the man was \"successful\" in swindling a lot of money. That is success, until they caught him. I have looked at my dictionary and I can\'t find \"SUSPISTION\" in there at all. You must be one of those (partially illiterate) 9/11 conspiracy theorists who think that the whole thing was CGI. Go to Pakistan and vote for Bhutto. Oh sorry, it\'s not possible, is it? Why is that? OK, go to Saudi Arabia and pay in a church. Erm maybe not. Well, go to Afghanistan and try and live a normal life. Or Iran where you might enjoy the attentions of the \'cultural police\'. Wake up and smell the coffee. It is feeble minded P.C. people like you that allow ghettos to come into being. \"Successful man\" my foot! Thief and swindler would be a suitable description.

Usama wrote:
Thank you Alan. You tell those infidels. One day they will all convert to Islam and believe! Allahu Akbar! Cowley will be ours! Allahu Akbar! Everything for Islam! Allahu Akbar!

DanOxford wrote:
Oh dear! Once again, Alan wades in on behalf of the \'underdog\', turning the tables in an Orwellian display of \'doublespeak\' where the Immans become the oppressed, the Oxford residents are those forcing their views upon others, Saudi Arabia\'s religious intolerance becomes \'political\' and when residents found Birmingham City Council\'s attempts to stick individual religious events into a blender and create a \'winterval\' smoothie hard to swallow, they are the ones who are denounced! I find \'Little Englander\' in itself a racist and derogatory comment as it is not applied to any other nationality. When immigrants want to create a little bit of their home Country in Oxford, it is called \'diversity\' . When people who have been here for longer (let\'s not call them \'natives\' or we trigger the whole \'England is a nation of iummigrants\' myth...)want to oppose something that will alter their culture and way of life, they are \'bigots\'. If all else fails (as it inevitably does, given that Alan\'s arguments perpetually put everything down to the \'bourgeoisie\' white drug taking forces of authority oppressing the downtrodden muslims/ illegal street pedlars/ victim of the week, there\'s always sneering at the residents of Oxford for being uneducated, ill-informed, racist, bigotted, inflexible or backward. Frankly, it\'s tiresome.

peries wrote:
Am a British Muslim of Pakistani dissent we have church bells in Pakistan & grave yard for our Christian Pakistani brothers they are elements in Pakistan that speak against this which I hate but now I have realised there are people here that hate the fact that Muslims are part of British society. I have seen people from all over the world practicing there religion peacefully I think my community should do the same

alan page wrote:
Well if Ian Brown was such a great role model he wouldn\'t have been in prison anyway! Suppose if he wanted a salad and posed as a vegetarian, would that make him wrong? As for preferential treatment I suppose you worked all over the Christmas period did you? Or did you pose as a christian and claim it as a holiday?

Penny Drops wrote:
Now I get it! Alan is a VEGETARIAN and COMMUNIST! Kind of people who think they know better than others and who want to impose their ideas on other people and nobody else can have an opinion. Keep tapping away at that keyboard like a demented gibbon Alan coz we can all do with a good laugh!!

Alan Page wrote:

alan page wrote: Well if Ian Brown was such a great role model he wouldn\'t have been in prison anyway! Suppose if he wanted a salad and posed as a vegetarian, would that make him wrong? As for preferential treatment I suppose you worked all over the Christmas period did you? Or did you pose as a christian and claim it as a holiday?

You're not the real Alan Page! Unmask yourself, varlet. Please let's hear something from one of the real Alan Pages.

alan page wrote:

Alan Page wrote:

alan page wrote: Well if Ian Brown was such a great role model he wouldn\'t have been in prison anyway! Suppose if he wanted a salad and posed as a vegetarian, would that make him wrong? As for preferential treatment I suppose you worked all over the Christmas period did you? Or did you pose as a christian and claim it as a holiday?

You're not the real Alan Page! Unmask yourself, varlet. Please let's hear something from one of the real Alan Pages.

Ok, the real Alan Page knows the difference between the work of Anton Webern and the work of Alban Berg? Care to elaborate?

I think it is clear who the real one is.The level of argument contained in the post didnt relate to property values or personal convenience.

It clearly couldn't be the work of anybody in Oxford could it?

alan page wrote:

alan page wrote:

Alan Page wrote:

alan page wrote: Well if Ian Brown was such a great role model he wouldn\'t have been in prison anyway! Suppose if he wanted a salad and posed as a vegetarian, would that make him wrong? As for preferential treatment I suppose you worked all over the Christmas period did you? Or did you pose as a christian and claim it as a holiday?

You're not the real Alan Page! Unmask yourself, varlet. Please let's hear something from one of the real Alan Pages.

Ok, the real Alan Page knows the difference between the work of Anton Webern and the work of Alban Berg? Care to elaborate? I think it is clear who the real one is.The level of argument contained in the post didnt relate to property values or personal convenience. It clearly couldn't be the work of anybody in Oxford could it?

That, and I am gay and proud of it.

Dear oh dear,
Yet more attempts to try and make an Aunt Sally.

I have no problems

Margaret wrote:
And last week it was discovered that they were serving halal meat to children in an Oxford school without even having consulted the parents, most of whom are not muslim and who objected to the meat being prepared in that fashion. Maybe they should serve pork to unwitting muslim pupils to see what happens!

Worried wrote:

Margaret wrote: And last week it was discovered that they were serving halal meat to children in an Oxford school without even having consulted the parents, most of whom are not muslim and who objected to the meat being prepared in that fashion. Maybe they should serve pork to unwitting muslim pupils to see what happens!

Halal meat is not forbidden to Christians or more precisely faux-christians who are now complaining about Halal meant, about which they appear to know very little. Besides which, half of those Rose Hill mothers who are now up in arms probably spend more on booze, fags and junk food than they do on a healthy diet for their kids, so please give us a bloody break and go and get some proper understanding of the issues.

DanOxford wrote:
Brit4life barely merits a response (you have to draw the line somewhere...) but I must take issue with the repeated tendency to label anyone who disagrees with the continued undermining of English culture and social cohesion as ignorant or- in this case as 'hillbillies'. The acceptance of Islam into British life is not a 'natural and needed development' (needed for WHAT and by WHOM ???) it is a MASSIVE step backwards into the pre-enlightenmnet dark ages of reason- comparable with Christianity at around the time of the Inquistion. It is far more accurate to say that until recently, a 'natural and needed' diminishing of religion was underway as science and reason chipped away at the very foundations of religions in all areas of the UK. Religion was about occasional church bells, Christmas carols and social rites of passage- births, weddings, funerals. Then, NuLabour's wonderful immigration policy, political correctness drive and multicultural mishmash approach meant that we suddenly started importing large numbers of people from places that were rather backward in their thinking due to poor communications, rural based economies and oppression and censorship based on religion or Communism. This has resulted in a situation where the conflicting views (mainly of Islam from the middle east and catholicism from Eastern Europe)are once again foisted upon th erest of us, who have little or no interest in these plagiarised fairy tales that have caused so much misery and suffering since their shady beginnings two millenia ago. This call to prayer is not 'progress' - Islam has largely retarded the development of most Islamic countries- hence their fury at the decadent West where (Gasp!) women can be educated, drive cars, and marry who they like, homosexuals are not stoned to death and the naming of teddy bears, the public hugging of a soap star or the drawing of a cartoon does not cause grown men to burn things in the street or women to wail hysterically.

Terry Chandler wrote:

DanOxford wrote: Brit4life barely merits a response (you have to draw the line somewhere...) but I must take issue with the repeated tendency to label anyone who disagrees with the continued undermining of English culture and social cohesion as ignorant or- in this case as \'hillbillies\'. The acceptance of Islam into British life is not a \'natural and needed development\' (needed for WHAT and by WHOM ???) it is a MASSIVE step backwards into the pre-enlightenmnet dark ages of reason- comparable with Christianity at around the time of the Inquistion. It is far more accurate to say that until recently, a \'natural and needed\' diminishing of religion was underway as science and reason chipped away at the very foundations of religions in all areas of the UK. Religion was about occasional church bells, Christmas carols and social rites of passage- births, weddings, funerals. Then, NuLabour\'s wonderful immigration policy, political correctness drive and multicultural mishmash approach meant that we suddenly started importing large numbers of people from places that were rather backward in their thinking due to poor communications, rural based economies and oppression and censorship based on religion or Communism. This has resulted in a situation where the conflicting views (mainly of Islam from the middle east and catholicism from Eastern Europe)are once again foisted upon th erest of us, who have little or no interest in these plagiarised fairy tales that have caused so much misery and suffering since their shady beginnings two millenia ago. This call to prayer is not \'progress\' - Islam has largely retarded the development of most Islamic countries- hence their fury at the decadent West where (Gasp!) women can be educated, drive cars, and marry who they like, homosexuals are not stoned to death and the naming of teddy bears, the public hugging of a soap star or the drawing of a cartoon does not cause grown men to burn things in the street or women to wail hysterically.

I wish i had said that. Excellent post.

David wrote:
Of Course the Bishop of Oxford does not live any where near Cowley Road and will not see the value of his house go down by Thousands if this goes through, can youjust imagine trying to sell a house within earshot of repeated "Allah el Akbar"

M wrote:
I don't give a fig about what stupid religion they believe in. I do care about my children eating halal meat as it is killed in a disgustingly cruel manner. I am fuming that this has happened. If this woman does not change her ways I will remove my children from the school.

Roger wrote:
Hold on a mo\' Brit4Life, isn\'t this the same Turkey that denies human rights standards enjoyed in other countries to its Kurdish minority and who have recently invaded Iraq to kill Kurds? The same Turkey who in this modern day denies the genocide against the Armenians in 1915? The focus of discussion must be on Saudi rather than Turkey because Arabic language would be used for the proposed call to people who don\'t own watches to know what time they should pray.

DanOxford wrote:
Brit4life barely merits a response (you have to draw the line somewhere...) but I must take issue with the repeated tendency to label anyone who disagrees with the continued undermining of English culture and social cohesion as ignorant or- in this case as \'hillbillies\'. The acceptance of Islam into British life is not a \'natural and needed development\' (needed for WHAT and by WHOM ???) it is a MASSIVE step backwards into the pre-enlightenmnet dark ages of reason- comparable with Christianity at around the time of the Inquistion. It is far more accurate to say that until recently, a \'natural and needed\' diminishing of religion was underway as science and reason chipped away at the very foundations of religions in all areas of the UK. Religion was about occasional church bells, Christmas carols and social rites of passage- births, weddings, funerals. Then, NuLabour\'s wonderful immigration policy, political correctness drive and multicultural mishmash approach meant that we suddenly started importing large numbers of people from places that were rather backward in their thinking due to poor communications, rural based economies and oppression and censorship based on religion or Communism. This has resulted in a situation where the conflicting views (mainly of Islam from the middle east and catholicism from Eastern Europe)are once again foisted upon th erest of us, who have little or no interest in these plagiarised fairy tales that have caused so much misery and suffering since their shady beginnings two millenia ago. This call to prayer is not \'progress\' - Islam has largely retarded the development of most Islamic countries- hence their fury at the decadent West where (Gasp!) women can be educated, drive cars, and marry who they like, homosexuals are not stoned to death and the naming of teddy bears, the public hugging of a soap star or the drawing of a cartoon does not cause grown men to burn things in the street or women to wail hysterically.

DanOxford wrote:
Worried- when I was a kid, religion largely WAS tea and cucumber sandwiches- not calls to prayer, halal school dinners and \'honour\' killings. An entire childhood spent in Oxford city and the surrounds left me with few religious memories other than a harvest festival in Jericho, carol services, nativity plays and a \'daily act of collective worship\' tacked on to assembly- none of which me left me with any scars or diverted me from my atheism. (rememeber, Islam is for life- punishable by death if you convert...) Comments such as: \'Every person on this island is a descendant of, or is an immigrant\' are fatuous and are a NuLabour/ Leftie attempt to disguise the fact that a full 90% of UK residents are described as \'white British\'. While I accept that ultimately all human beings are descended from Africans, that is of little relevance when discussing rights in England (or any other Country) today. The fact is, people such as myself whose families have resided in the UK for as long as reliable records began, are NOT a minority and DO have an identifiable sense of national and cultural identity. In my opinion, someone turning up on these recently shores does NOT have the same rights to start saying how things should be done, as I would not expect to turn up in ANY foreign Counry and start demanding that they make fundamental changes to accomodate my tastes, preferences and prejudices. No amount of hand wringing and airbrushing of history is going to change the simple fact that the UK is NOT (yet) a mishmash of immigrants with an equal right to broadcast their views. From migrationwatch: \'Immigration is now on an unprecedented scale. The Asians from East Africa who arrived in the mid 1970s amounted to 27,000. We are now taking more than 10 times that number every year. Indeed, net foreign immigration reached 292,000 in 2005 (of which just 11,000 was accounted for by the net rise in asylum claimants). So it hasn\'t always been this way- look at newsreels of England before the 1950s compared to today and tell me the ethnic and religious mix is the same. I\'m not saying this is a good or bad thing- but no politician is going to tell me nothing\'s changed.

DanOxford wrote:
Alan Page: YAAAAWWWWWWNNNN!! Google Sufism!!Islam was the most noble and tolerant faith whilst Christians were burning each other at the stake!! Past your bedtime Alan? The medieval history of Sufism is of little relevance- this thread was about 21st Century Islam in Oxford, a modern and diverse city in 21st Century England. While I disagree with both the animal lab and Bonn square protests, I hardly think that you can compare them with the scenes in Islamic states I was referring to- apart from which neither are religiously based. Finally, the existence of other groups disrupting life in Oxford does not justify the appeasement of another which proposes to do so. The \'infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters with infinite time\' theory suggests that one day, one of your counter arguments will prove impossible to quickly dismiss. Until then...

DanOxford wrote:
Alan- I clearly said an entire childhood - back to the monkey typing pool with you.

Carl C wrote:
typical "Oxbridge" pomposity -- I dare this Bishop to walk down Cowley Road and say it's "not a no-go" zone. His old Christian butt would get whipped.

Pat Hennings wrote:

Mark wrote:
I am a Christian but not C.of E. and the Bishop of Oxford does not represent me. I don't want intrusive noise pollution just because he doesn't live in the area but wants to make a Politically Correct gesture of some kind. Let him have it in his own non-ghetto back yard and see how he likes it. It's bad enough that we seem to have the star and crescent things on the lamposts seemingly all year round. Does the council really want to complete the ghettoisation of the area? Muslims and non-muslims are not treated the same by the law either. I remember when the police raided that muslim landlord (with loads of rented properties in Oxford) for charges of fraud, etc, and for the 'raid' the police removed their boots after knocking on the guys door and didn't bring their alsations into his house so they wouldn't offend his religious sensibilities: apparently he thought it was OK to swindle but lets not put police dogs in his house or dirty his carpet with boots. If he was not a muslim, that mans door would have come off at the hinges at dawn and the dogs would have been everywhere and the boots would have stayed on. Politically Correct Policing.

I think that you need to get your facts right first of all! The police didnt take off their boots and nor did they require the dogs to go in. I think you might be jealous of a very successful man. As for the treatment, the muslims get alot of stick from the police. You dont see the police picking up any non-muslim person for no reason and whisking them away for SUSPISTION of terrorist activities?? May be you should stop and look in the mirror

alan page wrote:

DanOxford wrote:
Alan Page: YAAAAWWWWWWNNNN!! Google Sufism!!Islam was the most noble and tolerant faith whilst Christians were burning each other at the stake!! Past your bedtime Alan? The medieval history of Sufism is of little relevance- this thread was about 21st Century Islam in Oxford, a modern and diverse city in 21st Century England. While I disagree with both the animal lab and Bonn square protests, I hardly think that you can compare them with the scenes in Islamic states I was referring to- apart from which neither are religiously based. Finally, the existence of other groups disrupting life in Oxford does not justify the appeasement of another which proposes to do so. The \'infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters with infinite time\' theory suggests that one day, one of your counter arguments will prove impossible to quickly dismiss. Until then...

Sorry I have just split my sides laughing at this drivel.

Tell you what go and live in a moslem area like I did for a while. Get some life experience.

Then come back and tell me about how wrong I am on the issue.

You say the disruptive elements in Oxford are not religiously based.

They also owe their existence to irrational dogmas and human credulity.

I would say they were equally dogmatic being based on an IDEALISTIC outlook.

If you are stupid enough to want to equate Islam only with terrorism then why not equate jews with eating babies as well, or catholics with cannabalism, or scientists in animal labs with Josef Mengele? Each of those assertions would be "provable" but they would also be completly innaccurate.

Now go and read some Rumiand actually LEARN something. The Sufi were saying things that put 19th and 20th century psychologists to shame.

They are relevant since the majority of moslems I associated with called themselves "Sufi".

Not that a fanatical atheist like yourself wuill recognise the distinction.

Roop wrote:

alan page wrote:

DanOxford wrote: Alan Page: YAAAAWWWWWWNNNN!! Google Sufism!!Islam was the most noble and tolerant faith whilst Christians were burning each other at the stake!! Past your bedtime Alan? The medieval history of Sufism is of little relevance- this thread was about 21st Century Islam in Oxford, a modern and diverse city in 21st Century England. While I disagree with both the animal lab and Bonn square protests, I hardly think that you can compare them with the scenes in Islamic states I was referring to- apart from which neither are religiously based. Finally, the existence of other groups disrupting life in Oxford does not justify the appeasement of another which proposes to do so. The \\\'infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters with infinite time\\\' theory suggests that one day, one of your counter arguments will prove impossible to quickly dismiss. Until then...

Sorry I have just split my sides laughing at this drivel. Tell you what go and live in a moslem area like I did for a while. Get some life experience. Then come back and tell me about how wrong I am on the issue. You say the disruptive elements in Oxford are not religiously based. They also owe their existence to irrational dogmas and human credulity. I would say they were equally dogmatic being based on an IDEALISTIC outlook. If you are stupid enough to want to equate Islam only with terrorism then why not equate jews with eating babies as well, or catholics with cannabalism, or scientists in animal labs with Josef Mengele? Each of those assertions would be \"provable\" but they would also be completly innaccurate. Now go and read some Rumiand actually LEARN something. The Sufi were saying things that put 19th and 20th century psychologists to shame. They are relevant since the majority of moslems I associated with called themselves \"Sufi\". Not that a fanatical atheist like yourself wuill recognise the distinction.

Islam, tolerant? Barely a hundred years after the death of Muhammad Caliph al-Ma\'mun instigated the islamic inquistion, the Mihna. In medieval muslim North Africa, and for most of the history of muslim Spain, jews in particular were massacred by muslims by the thousand. This isn\'t even to mention the millions of buddhists and hindus massacred in jihads against India. Less of your cardboard history, please. The Sufi of which you write were and are a minority within a minority, and were originally trying to save the insights of buddhist and christian mystics from the oppression and intolerance of invading islam. The more general Sufi orders, from the dervishes to the ottoman sufi guilds, usually organised and perpetrated jihad. Go away and read up on the Sira, the Hadiths, and the interpretation of the Koran, then get some understanding of the barbaric Sharia that was generated from them. Islam is unique amongst the major religions in its inherently warlike, violent and oppressive nature. Good luck to the non-muslims of Oxford in resisting its encroachment in the form of the ugly \"call to prayer\", and two fingers up to all you phoney leftists who give constant support to a religion that denies everything you purport to stand for, you dhimmis.

r wrote:
To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\'ve been tolerant enough.

Mary wrote:
In this country most people have their windows closed in cold weather so the volume would have to be high enough for muslims indoors to hear it. That means the poor souls outside would be subjected to a very loud noise nusiance for it to penetrate muslim homes. Someone mentioned double glazing. Don't muslims have that at all? They won't be able to now or they certainly won't hear the call. It'd be hard enough when the windows are closed but if they're double glazed it'd be nigh on impossible. To have the volume low enough as to not cause a nuisance to those outside in all weathers would mean they probably wouldn't hear it indoors anyway. Muslims will have to use their clocks and watches to see when the call will be broadcast and then go outside to listen to it in cold weather. Muslims will have to be outside most of the time so as not to miss the call so the request is superfluous. Therefore I believe this is all done for a reason, and that is to impose their presence and their religion on the rest of us. This is not Saudi, which is a hot country and where most of the population would be able to hear the call easily. The request for a call to prayer here is not valid.

alan page wrote:

r wrote:
To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it?
I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don't look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed.

That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

Phil m wrote:
Alan, I\'d like to point out in one of your posts, you mentioned \"turbanned maniac\". Do you realize turbans are not even associated with Islam ? That\'s a good point too, we rarely hear from Hindus or the Chinese immigrants for example and that\'s because they do not forcefully shove their culture and religion down into everyones throats. Read this article, http://www.thefirstp ost.co.uk/index.php? menuID=1&subID=1348 More importantly, compare this, Houari Boumedienes speech in 1974 \"One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.\" and this excerpt from the article, \"the party shares the Islamist belief that Europe will inevitably be conquered by the high birthrates of its Muslim inhabitants - and Turkey\'s entry would immediately add some 70 million.\" A lot of moderate Muslims I\'ve encountered would welcome a worldwide Islamic Hegemony and this is from my experience living in South East Asia for over 10 years as well as meeting Muslims in the UK and Europe. I have to point out for the PC left that this is not about race as I myself am half asian, this is about a dangerous ideaology regardless of skin colour and it belongs in the middle ages. Try reading the Koran for yourself, there are many examples of violence, intolerance, etc .... ok, let me share one, Surah 9:5 - So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush ........

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

r wrote: To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it? I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don't look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed. That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

And your rather insulting response explains an awful lot about your attitude. It's no wonder why Im noticing an increasing animosity towards this backward, violent, intolerant religion.

r wrote:
To Alan Page, I'm not a relgouse person. I do not put up with evegalists either. I dont want any religeon imposed on my life. Hence I don't want this overpowering brainwashering, put out of loudspeakers next to my home. Niether can I stand your constant insults to anyone opposed to this idea. As for leaflets, there has'nt been any through my door, maybe their Too scared of the Dog

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

r wrote: To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it? I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don't look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed. That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

And your rather insulting response explains an awful lot about your attitude. It's no wonder why Im noticing an increasing animosity towards this backward, violent, intolerant religion.

Yes I quite agree. Conservative Evangelicalism is rather backward isnt it.
I once played piano for one. I was once cornered by one "spirit filled" guy and told that the return of Christ was imminent. In fact he was due back in Novemeber. 1983.

Perhaps you could explain? After all you are all part of the same Holy army arent you? You know God intimatly don't you so why the **** up? Did he, perhaps, take the wrong train and end up in Neasden?

alan page wrote:

Phil m wrote:
Alan, I\'d like to point out in one of your posts, you mentioned \"turbanned maniac\". Do you realize turbans are not even associated with Islam ? That\'s a good point too, we rarely hear from Hindus or the Chinese immigrants for example and that\'s because they do not forcefully shove their culture and religion down into everyones throats. Read this article, http://www.thefirstp ost.co.uk/index.php? menuID=1&subID=1348 More importantly, compare this, Houari Boumedienes speech in 1974 \"One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.\" and this excerpt from the article, \"the party shares the Islamist belief that Europe will inevitably be conquered by the high birthrates of its Muslim inhabitants - and Turkey\'s entry would immediately add some 70 million.\" A lot of moderate Muslims I\'ve encountered would welcome a worldwide Islamic Hegemony and this is from my experience living in South East Asia for over 10 years as well as meeting Muslims in the UK and Europe. I have to point out for the PC left that this is not about race as I myself am half asian, this is about a dangerous ideaology regardless of skin colour and it belongs in the middle ages. Try reading the Koran for yourself, there are many examples of violence, intolerance, etc .... ok, let me share one, Surah 9:5 - So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush ........

Sorry but Evangelical Christians have been banging on about world domination for decades as well. They also have dodgy views about women, homosexuals etc.

The mainstream catholic church has only recently repented for persecuting Galileo and it was only during the 1960s that the Jews were finally officially cleared of "deicide" by that hierarchy. Are you saying that there is some essential difference between them and some scummy arsehole with a power complex in the Middle East?

Anybody can selectively quote scriptures to suit a prejudice.

The bible advocates the killing of disobediant children, yet nobody but a minority of mouthy fanatics takes biblical literalism seriously.

Why do you assume that Islan is any different in that regard?

Murderous regimes have been set up by various people in the name of various causes for centuries. Until you actually grasp that fact then any form of rational outlook is hopeless.

As for turbans well listening to the crap being posted on here, I cant help but think you views have been gathered from watching "Lawrence of Arabia".

But then arguing the toss with irrational bigots only has a limited appeal. Those who firebomb mosques and synagogues are just as unreachable mentally as those who firebomb abortion clinics and animal labs.

No doubt the residents of Oxford will someday come round to that.

Perhaps its claim to be a centre of learning may then be justified.

At the moment it is not hard to see why it was such a hotbed for Hitler fanatics in the 1940's. Good ol' Diana Mosley.

Farouk Patel wrote:
Alan I have no problem in you in rising to the defence of Muslims, however why are you so quick in which to attack Christianity with the same venom shown towards Islam. However I have found fault with a number of your statements please allow me to highlight them; 1) You juxtapose biblical quotes for the death of the unbeliever against those of the Koran in which to claim equality for the barbarity which encapsulate the Islamic way of life. Sir, that is an excuse used by everybody and anybody who wishes to whitewash the ugliness which has been allowed to creep into our way of life under the remit of religious equality. In the UK we have laws which forbid FGM, Wife beating, Bigamy, Honour killings, discrimination towards gays, sexual equality and the murder of apostates. Yes those ugly chapters can be found in the Bible. However and a big however is that in the Uk (As well as in the vast majority of other Christian countries) those chapters are not given the precedence or even the legality that they are given in Islamic ones. In other words judicial law takes precedence over religious law. 2) You say you have no problem with Minaret’s and the call to pray and that people here are being racist in objecting to their use in the UK The minarets came about not from the call to prayer. But rather the Sharia ruling that no non Islamic building can be as tall as an Islamic ones. The call to prayer came later. In fact in Muslim countries everything stops for the call to pray. In certain countries people not showing observance are beaten, non Muslims are told in no certain terms to remove themselves from the streets by the religious police. Is 3) You claim to have no problem with the Muslims of Birmingham when you lived there. Here is a little snippet yesterday from Birmingham. Muslim representatives in Birmingham yesterday criticised calls for more Christians, Sikhs and Hindus to move into predominantly Islamic inner city areas. They denied that high levels of Muslims in areas such as Sparkbrook and Bordesley were harming community relations, and argued that integration was a natural process that could not be forced. http://icbirmingham. icnetwork.co.uk/birm inghampost/news/tm_h eadline=integration- cannot-be-forced-say -city-muslims%26meth od=full%26objectid=2 0339542%26siteid=500 02-name_page.html Now before you denounce me as a racist, I am dark-skinned and have a Muslim name .Therefore using your own analogy I cannot be one. I have no problem with people defending others, however on the same tone they have to be accurate with the information they hand out. The reason people are up in arms over this, is because for years any attempt to debate Islam has resulted in the race card being drawn and all discussion on the subject stymied. That is an unhealthy approach to any debate, but one in which it appears that the rights of the majority have usurped by the rights of the minority then there can be only an explosive outcome. My problem with this way of debate is than when the balloon does go up I have more to lose than the white fellow simply because of the colour of my skin. Communication is a two-street but for some reason when it comes to Islam it becomes one way only.

Kyle wrote:
I\'m just going to quote the comments of Austin, SF, as I can\'t say it better. This is the logic that Europe is too politically correct to understand. Those on the multi-culti left cry \"racist\" and \"Islamophobe\" at decent people with reasonable concerns, and shut them out of the debate---Fair enough then, but when these issues aren\'t dealt with by centrist, moderate politicians, then don\'t be surprised to see the return of the REAL violent racists, and to see large-scale ethnic violence, even civil wars. Anyways, Austin\'s point: My point is this: integration is a worthy goal. But it\'s complex. You don\'t just allow a massive influx of people from a part of the world that has a completely different mindset, one with little or no history of civil rights, and not expect them to go on as they were before. It\'s human nature, people get stuck in their habits. People want all the benefits of a new life, but don\'t even think of making any other changes unless they\'re pushed to. You\'re not making that clear. You\'re not saying \"This is England, we\'ll respect your beliefs to the same degree in which you respect ours\". And that\'s mostly what I see people asking for here, and your response is usually just to insult them. Leftist intellectuals so often base their national identity on what is essentially -no- identity, and the unwashed native masses are not going to go along with the program. All you\'re doing is opening the door to the REAL bigots when you insult and try to squelch as invalid debates like this one. You leave no room for compromise (like the cell-phone idea). You\'re creating an intellectual culture in which there is no compromise. Be fearful then when the dialectic turns right back around at you, when the nativists really get going and the -real- bigots start to find a voice.

H Carlton wrote:
I seriously can't believe that they introduced the call to prayer in the UK. I hope that we will not be hearing, that noise from any London mosque anytime soon. I have spent time in two Islamic or main Muslim countries. In the last one the recitation of the Koran on the boat over to Spain was for me the limit. The recitation of the Koran in Arabic was piped from everywhere imaginable in that country. Most in the West don't understand the noise those minarets make. When one speaker, sounds off, and is slightly broken and above where you live another one, in about two minutes will go off a short distance away, then another mosque, then another, all sounding off together. But what is more disappointing is that our government is asking for nothing from the Islamic world. WHILE WE HAVE TO BE POLITICALLY CORRECT WITH ISLAM; THE ISLAMIC WORLD GIVES ALMOST NOTHING BACK. I am really truly surprised that these noise boxes are allowed in Britain. There are only 3% Muslims in this country, so there are a lot of other people as well - but where all the special accommodations seem to be going in the way of Islam. Though the Irish never got this, so you have to say bombing while Islamic - pays. DO THE LEFTIST SOCIALISTS EVEN HAVE A RELIGIOUS CLAUSE – WE NEED A GOVERNMENT THAT UNDERSTANDS RELIGION.

jane wrote:
Will the Bishop also welcome the Sharia court in ten years time? Sixteen years ago when I moved out of East Oxford the Muslim community was active in banning mixed swimming from local schools. Now they have a Mosque and roads wtih Islamic names. Sure as night comes after day they will want Sharia law and those who choose to live in East Oxford will be obliged to adhere to it. I'm glad I'm out; if they have the call to prayer it wil be a no go area for me becuase I do not want to be part of an Islamic society; I prefer liberal democracy with Church bells.

DanOxford wrote:
I've realised that countering any of Alan Page's 'arguments' is futile as he clearly doesn't READ any of the points, but rather jumps in with his usual stock rantings about sufism, the bourgeoise, drug users, child abuse and how life in Birmingham was so much more progressive- puts me in mind of the 'talking action man' I was so excited to receive as a child but rapidly grew bored with as there was no way of telling which of the 10 phrases he was capable of would come out when you pulled his string...

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

r wrote: To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\\\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it? I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don\'t look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed. That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

And your rather insulting response explains an awful lot about your attitude. It\'s no wonder why Im noticing an increasing animosity towards this backward, violent, intolerant religion.

Yes I quite agree. Conservative Evangelicalism is rather backward isnt it. I once played piano for one. I was once cornered by one \"spirit filled\" guy and told that the return of Christ was imminent. In fact he was due back in Novemeber. 1983. Perhaps you could explain? After all you are all part of the same Holy army arent you? You know God intimatly don\'t you so why the **** up? Did he, perhaps, take the wrong train and end up in Neasden?

well well, nice of you to generalize because I just so happen to disagree with your twisted views. I am an Atheist and am very well aware of all the ills of the Abrahamic religion, which only belongs in the middle ages.

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

r wrote: To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\\\\\\\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it? I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don\\\'t look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed. That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

And your rather insulting response explains an awful lot about your attitude. It\\\'s no wonder why Im noticing an increasing animosity towards this backward, violent, intolerant religion.

Yes I quite agree. Conservative Evangelicalism is rather backward isnt it. I once played piano for one. I was once cornered by one \\\"spirit filled\\\" guy and told that the return of Christ was imminent. In fact he was due back in Novemeber. 1983. Perhaps you could explain? After all you are all part of the same Holy army arent you? You know God intimatly don\\\'t you so why the **** up? Did he, perhaps, take the wrong train and end up in Neasden?

well well, nice of you to generalize because I just so happen to disagree with your twisted views. I am an Atheist and am very well aware of all the ills of the Abrahamic religion, which only belongs in the middle ages.

So you believe conservative Evangelicalism to be vibrant and progressive?

Oh sorry no, your opposed to all religions aren\'t you.

And just as self righteous and bigoted about that as they are.

Atheism is also merely a system of belief.

They don\'t have any public holidays either.

Incidentally, Kinsey argued that the prohibition of paedophilia was a result of irrational moral bigotry from the Judeo Christian tradition.

Perhaps you would like to explain where irrational bigotry stops? And by what criteria we are to judge them?

Farouk Patel wrote:
Alan thank you for taking the time in which to reply to my post. However when I stated that one has to be correct with the facts, I didn’t expect you to reply with a whitewash (yet again) 1) “Things like wife beating etc are not an ISLAMIC issue, they are a GENERAL issue applicable to all communities.” Actually the Koran dictates to the faithful that they have to beat their womenfolk in which to keep them in line. \"Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in their sleeping places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; “ (Quran, 4:34) How many times have you heard Muslims demand that the Koran is respected, as they view it and the words it contains as sacrosanct so tell me what have you to say about the above quote on beating women in the Koran. A Koran I should add is the cornerstone of the Islamic faith today. In fact Alan so ingrained is female abuse in Islamic counties that the laws actually defend males who do so. Read up on those laws and then come back and tell me that issues such as wife beating isn’t just an Islamic issue. The thing you forgot to mention is in the west we have laws which defend women from male violence. 2) “If you are quite happy to watch Mosques etc being firebombed (as with animal labs) then you just keep joining with the mindless cretins.” Excuse me but just where did I write that I wish to see Mosques burnt down? For that matter when was the last time you saw a animal lab burnt down. If you are unable to debate then don’t. But please don’t put words in my mouth in a cheap attempt to character assassinate me. The majority of people on this board are expressing the right to free speech. You know the same free speech that racist idiots such as Abu Hamza, Bin Laden and Inayat Bunglawala use day in day out. We may not like what we hear but they have the right to say it and the left use the maxim of “I may not like what they say, but I will defend the right for them to say it” But here is the catch, the very people who defend the right of terrorists to speak , become all angry and use abuse,cat calls and rhetoric in which to try and disable the otherside. As I stated before the reason the people of the Uk are angry is that for years any attempt in which to debate Islam has resulted in the victim card and in turn the racist card in which to disable any debate on Islam. The above quote of yours falls in that category. Lastly as I have brown skin and a Muslim name I have much more to lose than you (presuming that you are white and are indeed called Alan) if the balloon goes up in the Uk. Unlike you I can clearly see the risks from playing the race card every time Islam is discussed in the UK. Unlike you I stand to get a good kicking if something ugly transpires in the name of Allah here in the UK. Unlike you I cannot hide. People like you Allan with all the good intent in the world are part of the problem. Step aside and allow a real Muslim to debate the issues. The last thing this country needs is an Islamic familiar defending the unpalatable mores of Islam.

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

phil m wrote:

alan page wrote:

r wrote: To Alan Page. My local Church as lots of community events quite often my children have used the their hall along with their friends. Close by is another church where my girls go on a Saturday for Ballet Classes. We live very close to a Mosque in East Oxford. I am unaware of any events where we have been invited, recently a illegally parked Taxi Driver told me not walk my dog near there because he scares their children, every single day we are challenged by the crumbling properties, rubbish and over crowding because of houses owned by Asian investors. Why in any ones name would I want that terrible noise imposed on our lives. Its nothing other than a power trip! Go back to Birmingham if its so tolerant there. Because I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ve been tolerant enough.

Oh some thoughtless taxi driver represents the whole Islamic civilisation does he?And if the same Taxi driver was white that would reflect on Christianity as well would it? I would assume that the reason you never get invited to these meetings is that a)you don\\\\\\\'t look out for the leaflets in libraries etc. or b)your church is a rampantly evangelical hellhole which believes everybody who disagrees with its position is demonically possessed. That would explain an awful lot about your attitudes.

And your rather insulting response explains an awful lot about your attitude. It\\\\\\\'s no wonder why Im noticing an increasing animosity towards this backward, violent, intolerant religion.

Yes I quite agree. Conservative Evangelicalism is rather backward isnt it. I once played piano for one. I was once cornered by one \\\\\\\"spirit filled\\\\\\\" guy and told that the return of Christ was imminent. In fact he was due back in Novemeber. 1983. Perhaps you could explain? After all you are all part of the same Holy army arent you? You know God intimatly don\\\\\\\'t you so why the **** up? Did he, perhaps, take the wrong train and end up in Neasden?

well well, nice of you to generalize because I just so happen to disagree with your twisted views. I am an Atheist and am very well aware of all the ills of the Abrahamic religion, which only belongs in the middle ages.

So you believe conservative Evangelicalism to be vibrant and progressive? Oh sorry no, your opposed to all religions aren\\\'t you. And just as self righteous and bigoted about that as they are. Atheism is also merely a system of belief. They don\\\'t have any public holidays either. Incidentally, Kinsey argued that the prohibition of paedophilia was a result of irrational moral bigotry from the Judeo Christian tradition. Perhaps you would like to explain where irrational bigotry stops? And by what criteria we are to judge them?

Why are you bringing up things that have nothing to do with this topic ? Evangelicalism, Public holidays and Atheism ?!? Honestly ..... Bottom line is, if people can keep their religion personal then I think most would\'nt have any problem but when it starts affecting peoples lives, theres obviously going to be a backlash. You call me a bigot why ? because I just happen to disagree with you ? and Im the bigot ?? Look at my posts, tell me where the bigotry is. Another example, an MP gets sacked because he agreed with Enoch Powell in the sense that uncontrolled immigration is bad for the country but the former leader of the Muslim Council of Britain pubically stated death is too good for Salman Rusdie, over a novel, then gets knighted.

Rick wrote:
I think the Bishop should resign : in supporting a public call to Allah, he us surely betraying his oath to uphold the 39 Articles, taken when he was ordained priest. If her prefers to hear the name of Allah, he should leave office and make room for a Christian bishop.