Yeah but most of the time you can't differentiate them with other buildings. You couldn't tell which is an islamic centre and which is just a normal building.
With a traditional mosque, you can tell from far away that it is a mosque. You don't need a sign as such to know what the place is.
I understand your point but there are small buildings which are still mosques and classified as such.
In all the mosques I've been in they've never preached any form of extremism. Maybe happening more in the garden shed but definitely not in mosques
Definitely some garden sheds, probably what bewal believes is a mosque.
I did respond. You original point was that i used plural rather than singular and then i gave the source and you said you dont that accept the source( who are you to say which sources are valid, i still dont know) and then you ran. The Problem does exist but not on the scale made out, but enough to cause any law abiding Muslim which bar these idiots most of us are. Its interesting that you accepted the programme wasnt fake, and there was no lawsuits, and they showed quite a few places. So which bit are you disagreeing with?
No you did not respond and you were very lucky those posts were deleted, I assume you reported them yourselves out of embarrassment. But for the benefit of those who did not read it and to move this discussion on, let us recap (you have the right to state if this recap is honest or dishonest) -
1. You posted that mosques, both big and "back street" were involved in spreading extremism.
2. I responded by asking which ones, and fully anticipated your response.
3. You responded: FINSBURY PARK MOSQUE (bingo). I then countered by saying yet it was once a problem, at the turn of the century when Abu Hamza took over (initially as fault of the committee). However, as the committee realised what he was like, as early as the early-mid 00s, they triedt o have him removed, when they could not they tried to a file an injunction against him. The UK courts agreed to the injunction yet failed to enforce it on multiple occasions, leading to both violence and intimidation against fellow muslims by Hamza against the committee.
This was a failing of the UK justice system, not the muslims or the mosque committee. As the problem progressed the mosque fell empty, something which was not only reported by the media but seen by many of us who tried to see what it was like at the time. It was home to a handful of genuine extremists, who all had criminal records and yet again, the British authorities refused to stop them. We all know how the story eventually ended.
3. After I raised this issue you went back to it a couple times, failed and then tried to change tact. I highlighted that even the MI5 as far back as 2008 did not agree with the narrative or radical preachers and radical mosques. This is when you turned to a near decade old documentary from channel four, which was criticised by the police force and no convictions came as a result of it and which has been refuted by almost all the people who were filmed as part of it. Many of them also released unedited versions of their seminars.
Since that all sounds quite baseless, I asked you to simply name a couple more mosques, because you claimed there was more than one. You then failed. Anyone reading this can see the argument must move ahead if you have made such a large claim and be backed up by evidence.
Thus we move on, my next question - is a much criticised channel four documentary your only piece of evidence? And if so, do you really think any sane, intelligent individual would take that as the only piece of evidence to make such a statement?
