Far Right targets LEGOLAND after park hired by Muslim cleric for kids' HALAL fun day

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 2:56 pm

BRITAIN’S famous Legoland is being targeted by far right extremists after it hired out its entire children's park to a controversial Islamic cleric for a Muslim fun day. The English Defence League and the neo-Nazi linked Casuals United are threatening a demonstration at the park in Windsor, Berkshire, on March 9 when thousands Muslim youngsters and parents will celebrate a day of “Halal entertainment”. They have been inundating Legoland with abusive phone calls and messages on Twitter and Facebook calling for bosses to cancel the event.

The park is being hired out exclusively to the Muslim Research and Development Foundation (MRDF) and its allied organisations. The MRDF, based in the east London borough of Tower Hamlets, is run by Haitham al-Haddad, who has been banned from speaking at a number of British universities due to his anti-Western views

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/459970/EDL-Casuals-United-abuse-Legoland-Facebook-Twitter-Muslim-halal-entertainment-Legoland

by Vintage Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:03 pm

What the hell is halal entertainment? Another wonderful example of intergration I would say, at least on the face of it, again an example of the 'them and us' mind set.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:08 pm

Vintage wrote:What the hell is halal entertainment? Another wonderful example of intergration I would say, at least on the face of it, again an example of the 'them and us' mind set.

I dread to think. Stalls maybe where the kids can pick their own goat and slit it's throat.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:10 pm

The usual racism from the far right. Twisted Evil

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:11 pm

i guess it won't include bacon buns..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:12 pm

Catman wrote:The usual racism from the far right.

So do you approve this event organized by this bunch?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:14 pm

Tess. wrote:
Catman wrote:The usual racism from the far right.

So do you approve this event organized by this bunch?

Yes, can't see anything wrong with it at all. Rolling Eyes

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:15 pm

Anyone is free to hire for events!

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:16 pm

if this idiot cleric has been banned from speaking in public he should not be given a huge audience to insight violence with..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:18 pm

heavenly father wrote:if this idiot cleric has been banned from speaking in public he should not be given a huge audience to insight violence with..

.....But you would agree with the Nazi demonstration?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:20 pm

Catman wrote:
Tess. wrote:

So do you approve this event organized by this bunch?

Yes, can't see anything wrong with it at all.

Right. So there's nothing wrong with children having a day out with this group:

The MRDF, based in the east London borough of Tower Hamlets, is run by Haitham al-Haddad, who has been banned from speaking at a number of British universities due to his anti-Western views.He is reported to be on a list of 25 “hate clerics” identified by security chiefs and Downing Street as candidates for anti-extremism Asbo banning orders.

He believes music should be banned, that men and women should be segregated, and is a leader of a campaign to build a massive mega-mosque close to the Olympic Park in east London. He has spoken in favour of a form of female genital mutilation, although he recognises it is illegal in Britain

He has also written that “the scourge of homosexuality” is a “criminal act” and was accused of saying that some Jews are the “enemies of God” and “descendants of apes and pigs”.

Funny old double standards you have.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:23 pm

Tess. wrote:
Catman wrote:

Yes, can't see anything wrong with it at all.

Right. So there's nothing wrong with children having a day out with this group:

The MRDF, based in the east London borough of Tower Hamlets, is run by Haitham al-Haddad, who has been banned from speaking at a number of British universities due to his anti-Western views.He is reported to be on a list of 25 “hate clerics” identified by security chiefs and Downing Street as candidates for anti-extremism Asbo banning orders.

He believes music should be banned, that men and women should be segregated, and is a leader of a campaign to build a massive mega-mosque close to the Olympic Park in east London.

He has also written that “the scourge of homosexuality” is a “criminal act” and was accused of saying that some Jews are the “enemies of God” and “descendants of apes and pigs”.

Funny old double standards you have.

I thought you were all for free speech, you would agree with the Nazi demo?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:30 pm

Catman wrote:
Tess. wrote:

Right. So there's nothing wrong with children having a day out with this group:

The MRDF, based in the east London borough of Tower Hamlets, is run by Haitham al-Haddad, who has been banned from speaking at a number of British universities due to his anti-Western views.He is reported to be on a list of 25 “hate clerics” identified by security chiefs and Downing Street as candidates for anti-extremism Asbo banning orders.

He believes music should be banned, that men and women should be segregated, and is a leader of a campaign to build a massive mega-mosque close to the Olympic Park in east London.

He has also written that “the scourge of homosexuality” is a “criminal act” and was accused of saying that some Jews are the “enemies of God” and “descendants of apes and pigs”.

Funny old double standards you have.

I thought you were all for free speech, you would agree with the Nazi demo?

Don't try to wriggle out of it - you've just said you approve of someone who agrees with female genital mutilation and who wants to lock up homosexuals!

I've missed your post about a nazi demo. I'll reply separately.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:33 pm

Catman wrote:
heavenly father wrote:if this idiot cleric has been banned from speaking in public he should not be given a huge audience to insight violence with..

.....But you would agree with the Nazi demonstration?

this guy has been banned, i would be against anyone who was banned being allowed to speak to a large crowd.. :D

peaceful demonstration on the other hand should be everyone's right.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:34 pm

Tess. wrote:
Catman wrote:

I thought you were all for free speech, you would agree with the Nazi demo?
Don't try to wriggle out of it - you've just said you approve of someone who agrees with female genital mutilation and who wants to lock up homosexuals!

I've missed your post about a nazi demo. I'll reply separately.

Right. I've seen the bit about the neo-nazi linked group. Of course I don't approve of them, but I approve of anyone who'll protest about an organization linked with female genital mutilation, who are anti women and anyi homosexuals. Wouldn't you?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:34 pm

Tess. wrote:
Catman wrote:

I thought you were all for free speech, you would agree with the Nazi demo?
Don't try to wriggle out of it - you've just said you approve of someone who agrees with female genital mutilation and who wants to lock up homosexuals!

I've missed your post about a nazi demo. I'll reply separately.

You seem to believe in the right for Nazis to hold a demo, but not for Muslim children to have a fun day.
Why would that be then?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 3:43 pm

Catman wrote:
Tess. wrote:
Don't try to wriggle out of it - you've just said you approve of someone who agrees with female genital mutilation and who wants to lock up homosexuals!

I've missed your post about a nazi demo. I'll reply separately.

You seem to believe in the right for Nazis to hold a demo, but not for Muslim children to have a fun day.
Why would that be then?

You've twisted what I said - squirming or what! It's not an innocent day out for muslim kids, it's an event organized by an evil group who want little girls to be genitally mutilated, women to be relegated to the back of the bus, and homosexuals to be locked up!!! Yet you approve of them simply because they fall into one of your "victim categories". As I said, double standards.

You're trying to paint me as the evil nazi but it won't work. If this had been a day out organized by, say, a group of charitable Sikhs or Hindus I'd have no objection. But this bunch? Worse than nazis.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:09 pm

The past few days have seen a frothing-at-the-mouth far-right campaign against a decision by Legoland Windsor to allow a Muslim organisation to hire the theme park for a family day out.
You may think you’ve heard this before, and you would be right. This is essentially a rerun of the campaign last year against an event at Chessington World of Adventures held by the same Muslim group, and in both cases the source of the campaign was a post on an extremist anti-Muslim website called Kafir Crusaders.
In the course of this latest outbreak of anti-Muslim hysteria the Legoland Windsor Facebook page has been assailed by angry bigots from the English Defence League and Casuals United, to the extent that Legoland evidently became tired of deleting abusive comments and took the page down. Opponents of the Family Fun Day have set up a Boycott Legoland Windsor Facebook page and are planning to demonstrate outside the park and harass the families who are attending the event. The EDL Facebook page has featured the usual calls for the venue to be blown up with all the people in it.

Initially the campaign was based on opposition to a Muslim organisation being allowed to hire the venue and supposedly exclude non-Muslims. However, the event is to take place on a day during which Legoland would otherwise be closed for the off-season, so nobody else would have been using it anyway. Legoland Windsor also stated that the organisation who had hired the park “welcome friends and family which includes everyone”. And it was pointed out that venues are regularly hired out to various non-Muslim organisations, including Christians and the armed forces, without anyone raising any objections at all.
So the far right changed tack. They did a bit of googling and discovered that the organisation hiring the park was the Muslim Research and Development Foundation whose chairman is Haitham al-Haddad. The Boycott Legoland Windsor Facebook page now features the slogan: “Any business happy to host hate preachers is no place for families.”
For evidence that Haitham al-Haddad is a hate preacher, Boycott Legoland Windsor has, predictably, linked to a post on the anti-Muslim witch-hunting blog Harry’s Place. Again, you may have the feeling that we’ve been here before. In 2012 Harry’s Place unleashed another far-right campaign against the Islamia Village event at the Thorpe Underwood Estate.
In that case, threats of violence and protests by the EDL and its fellow thugs resulted in the venue’s management cancelling the event. Hopefully the management at Legoland Windsor will prove more resistant to intimidation.
Update: See “Police investigate hate comments on Legoland Facebook page”,Islamophobia Watch, 13 February 2014
Update 2: See “Legoland is blasted for ‘Muslim day’”, Windsor Express, 14 February 2014

http://www.islamophobiawatch.co.uk/edl-resists-islamification-of-legoland/

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:19 pm

why couldn't they hold the fun day at one of their mosques ?

maybe its because they know that hiring the entire legoland park will give them publicity to spread their message of hate for women and homosexuals .

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:22 pm

Maine coon lover wrote:why couldn't they hold the fun day at one of their mosques ?

maybe its because they know that hiring the entire legoland park will give them publicity to spread their message of hate for women and homosexuals .

Sorry but does not Judaism and Christianity do the same in regards to women and homosexuals in its scriptures?

I think they are going there like anybody to have a fun day out, never knew it was such a crime to take families to a fun place

by Vintage Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:28 pm

Well there's three eggs in one basket already - The Kaffir Crusaders, the Muslim Research and Development Foundation (what ever that pupports to be) and who ever wrote that piece who is certainly has some 'look at me aren't I a good little diversity disciple' thing going on and of course hinting that anyone suspicious of some militant Muslim types are tarring all Muslims with the same brush agenda.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:32 pm

Vintage wrote:Well there's three eggs in one basket already - The Kaffir Crusaders, the Muslim Research and Development Foundation (what ever that pupports to be) and who ever wrote that piece who is certainly has some 'look at me aren't I a good little diversity disciple' thing going on and of course hinting that anyone suspicious of some militant Muslim types are tarring all Muslims with the same brush agenda.

Never laughed at such stupidity, again if the beef here is on religious views, then the need to ban anyone religious would be the point here for any amusement park.
Your ability to buy into the express account but dismiss another side of the story shows your issue is not religious beliefs, but only Muslims themselves, when to me all religions are wrong with their prejudice views.

So if your argument is against religious prejudice, I stand with you on that, but to make absurd claims to only Muslims hiring a place for their families to have fun, because their faith like Christianity and Judaisms treats women second class and thinks homosexuality is wrong is daft.

So what is your beef in regards to, religion or just Muslims?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:45 pm

@ Didge:

"For evidence that Haitham al-Haddad is a hate preacher, Boycott Legoland Windsor has, predictably, linked to a post on the anti-Muslim witch-hunting blog Harry’s Place..."
Your link is Islamophobia Watch or something, mine is the Daily Express, less biased. You imply that the only evidence that al-Haddad is a hate preacher is from some loony blog. Lies.

In a homophobic article called ‘Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs’, Haddad has written of “the scourge of homosexuality”, which he calls a “criminal act” [10]

His attitudes towards women are highlighted by a comment he made in which he declared that “a man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them”.

The Dutch parliament majority tried to prevent Haddad speaking at a major university.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitham_al-Haddad

So you're saying the Dutch parliament are a bunch of loony Islamophobes?

There's also a compelling article in the Huffington Post linking him to terrorism, but my browser won't let me link to it. It's contained in the references on the wiki page - (Hasan Afzal: Is FOSIS Training the Violent Extremists of Tomorrow?. Huffingtonpost.co.uk (2012-02-03). Retrieved on 2012-05-10.)

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:50 pm

Tess. wrote:@ Didge:

"For evidence that Haitham al-Haddad is a hate preacher, Boycott Legoland Windsor has, predictably, linked to a post on the anti-Muslim witch-hunting blog Harry’s Place..."
Your link is Islamophobia Watch or something, mine is the Daily Express, less biased. You imply that the only evidence that al-Haddad is a hate preacher is from some loony blog. Lies.

In a homophobic article called ‘Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs’, Haddad has written of “the scourge of homosexuality”, which he calls a “criminal act” [10]

His attitudes towards women are highlighted by a comment he made in which he declared that “a man should not be questioned why he hit his wife, because this is something between them”.

The Dutch parliament majority tried to prevent Haddad speaking at a major university.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitham_al-Haddad

So you're saying the Dutch parliament are a bunch of loony Islamophobes?

There's also a compelling article in the Huffington Post linking him to terrorism, but my browser won't let me link to it. It's contained in the references on the wiki page - (Hasan Afzal: Is FOSIS Training the Violent Extremists of Tomorrow?. Huffingtonpost.co.uk (2012-02-03). Retrieved on 2012-05-10.)

Again that is not my argument was it Tess?
Are we now to ban organisations based on views to amusement parks and really have little respect for the Dutch parliament either.
The point is the 3 main faiths teach very similar views on homosexuality and women, thus if the points is being based upon these religious views, then it stands to reason the same logic of your argument would apply to any religious group would it not?

This really is islamophobia at its best. So what, they have hired the day for their families to have fun with, as that is all this really is, are you now going to apply the same preventive tactics to Christian, Jewish or political groups, how about the BNP for example?.

by Vintage Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:51 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
Maine coon lover wrote:why couldn't they hold the fun day at one of their mosques ?

maybe its because they know that hiring the entire legoland park will give them publicity to spread their message of hate for women and homosexuals .

Sorry but does not Judaism and Christianity do the same in regards to women and homosexuals in its scriptures?

I think they are going there like anybody to have a fun day out, never knew it was such a crime to take families to a fun place

Always the same excuse, I see very few examples these days of that actually being the habitual custom in most Christian or Jewish societies there may be a few lasting ignorant people around but certainly not to the extent of our Muslim friends, quite a few converts and the young Muslims of this country, (to be fair it could be being new or over enthusiastic to the Quoran and M. E. custom but the result is the same) are becoming more intense and more radical in their religion than their parents are and as I've said before this is after not only they but also their parents have been through the British education system and interacted with non Muslims - doesn't bode well to me.

I have a beef with religious indoctrination, if someone follows a faith fine up to a point, its the add ons that irritate me, like what you can and cannot wear, who you can or cannot speak to, who you can and cannot interact with etc. Faith is what is in your heart and head and treating someone with less respect than you would expect yourself is not faith. Its pretty obvious that many religions try to exclude others so they won't be polluted and yes I have a problem with Muslims that insist they remain seperate, that insist they bring all their customs to a new life with them and insist they excercise them
despite being possibly illegal, unpalatable and annoying to many others and basically ignore the fact that they are not residing in a Muslim country and that goes for any other religion or ideology however small or large a group that decides to come here. So yes I do have a problem with certain Muslims in particular and other groups that include people who by habit and custom which may not be part of the religion originally but always becomes intwined with it to such a degree that most followers don't even realise it, generally treat their women where ever they go and indoctrinate the women to believe its their free choice to be treated that way.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:52 pm

oops didge gets it wrong again...lol

the whole topic was about a hate preacher not being allowed an audience..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:55 pm

Vintage wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Sorry but does not Judaism and Christianity do the same in regards to women and homosexuals in its scriptures?

I think they are going there like anybody to have a fun day out, never knew it was such a crime to take families to a fun place

Always the same excuse, I see very few examples these days of that actually being the habitual custom in most Christian or Jewish societies there may be a few lasting ignorant people around but certainly not to the extent of our Muslim friends, quite a few converts and the young Muslims of this country, (to be fair it could be being new or over enthusiastic to the Quoran and M. E. custom but the result is the same) are becoming more intense and more radical in their religion than their parents are and as I've said before this is after not only they but also their parents have been through the British education system and interacted with non Muslims - doesn't bode well to me.
It is not an excuse your argument is idiotic, your view is that because Christians and Jews in the majority do not adhere to their faith, thus makes their faith exempt from the same argument you are presenting here, it does not. You are asking to censor people based upon religious beliefs now to an amusement park based I might add on allegations to an organisation. So again your argument is not on religious views but Muslims themselves, because as stated this is a religious view point shared by all 3 faiths, you though now tries to deny this, which again is absurd

I have a beef with religious indoctrination, if someone follows a faith fine up to a point, its the add ons that irritate me, like what you can and cannot wear, who you can or cannot speak to, who you can and cannot interact with etc. Faith is what is in your heart and head and treating someone with less respect than you would expect yourself is not faith. Its pretty obvious that many religions try to exclude others so they won't be polluted and yes I have a problem with Muslims that insist they remain seperate, that insist they bring all their customs to a new life with them and insist they excercise them

Great, then apply this logic to all religions, not just one

despite being possibly illegal, unpalatable and annoying to many others and basically ignore the fact that they are not residing in a Muslim country and that goes for any other religion or ideology however small or large a group that decides to come here. So yes I do have a problem with certain Muslims in particular and other groups that include people who by habit and custom which may not be part of the religion originally but always becomes intwined with it to such a degree that most followers don't even realise it, generally treat their women where ever they go and indoctrinate the women to believe its their free choice to be treated that way.

There are Christians, evangelists teaching for the execution of homosexuals in this country, did you know that?

So again your argument is absurd, it seeks only to apply the argument to one faith when they all share the same views, being as the deity is the same in all 3.

So again are we now to ban religious groups from amusement parks, is that your argument?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 4:58 pm

heavenly father wrote:oops didge gets it wrong again...lol

the whole topic was about a hate preacher not being allowed an audience..

and Catman says he's an okay chap. Maybe he should read this:

Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs

..."In order to combat the scourge of homosexuality Allah has ordained us to speak out..."

Posted by: Shaikh (Dr) Haitham Al-Haddad

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/4670-standing-up-against-homosexuality-and-lgbts/

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:00 pm

Tess. wrote:
heavenly father wrote:oops didge gets it wrong again...lol

the whole topic was about a hate preacher not being allowed an audience..
and Catman says he's an okay chap. Maybe he should reas this:

Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs

Posted by: Shaikh (Dr) Haitham Al-Haddad

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/4670-standing-up-against-homosexuality-and-lgbts/

i think didge jumps is and doesn't think then tries to BS his way out of it.. :D

he goes on about jews and Christians being against homosexuality which is correct but they don't want them hung.. :D

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:01 pm

Tess. wrote:
heavenly father wrote:oops didge gets it wrong again...lol

the whole topic was about a hate preacher not being allowed an audience..
and Catman says he's an okay chap. Maybe he should read this:

Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs

..."In order to combat the scourge of homosexuality Allah has ordained us to speak out..."

Posted by: Shaikh (Dr) Haitham Al-Haddad

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/4670-standing-up-against-homosexuality-and-lgbts/

i didn't say that he was an OK chap, i said that the fun day should be allowed!

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:01 pm

Tess. wrote:
heavenly father wrote:oops didge gets it wrong again...lol

the whole topic was about a hate preacher not being allowed an audience..
and Catman says he's an okay chap. Maybe he should reas this:

Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs

Posted by: Shaikh (Dr) Haitham Al-Haddad

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/4670-standing-up-against-homosexuality-and-lgbts/

Again very disgusting and I agree wrong and no different to Christian and Jewish views on the matter?

So why only Muslim?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:03 pm

heavenly father wrote:
Tess. wrote:
and Catman says he's an okay chap. Maybe he should reas this:

Standing up against Homosexuality and LGBTs

Posted by: Shaikh (Dr) Haitham Al-Haddad

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/4670-standing-up-against-homosexuality-and-lgbts/

i think didge jumps is and doesn't think then tries to BS his way out of it.. :D

he goes on about jews and Christians being against homosexuality which is correct but they don't want them hung.. :D

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/21/christian-leader-supports-death-penalty-for-gays/

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:05 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

i think didge jumps is and doesn't think then tries to BS his way out of it.. :D

he goes on about jews and Christians being against homosexuality which is correct but they don't want them hung.. :D

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/21/christian-leader-supports-death-penalty-for-gays/

a, as in one, far right, says it all, Christian group in uganda, do yu think this speaks for the majority..lol

check muslim countries with sharia law... :D

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:07 pm

Last weekend the Sunday Telegraph (“‘Asbos’ to silence 25 hate clerics”) and the Daily Mail (“Dozens of hate clerics face being silenced by new anti-terror Asbos”) reported that “security officials” had drawn up a list of 25 Muslim preachers on whom it was intended to serve the “Terror and Extremist Behaviour Orders” (Tebos) proposed by the government as a result of the recent report by its Extremism Taskforce, which was set up in the aftermath of the murder of Lee Rigby.
As the Mail explained, the Tebos would “bar people from preaching messages of terror and hate, associating with named individuals thought vulnerable to radicalisation, and from entering specific venues, such as mosques or community halls – in a similar manner to the orders used to ban yobs from certain areas”. The Mail quoted David Cameron asjustifying such repressive measures on the grounds that “there are just too many people who have been radicalised at Islamic centres, who have been in contact with extremist preachers” – although of course neither Cameron nor his taskforce provided any evidence at all that preachers at Islamic centres played any role in motivating Lee Rigby’s killers.
Both newspaper reports named Haitham al-Haddad of the Muslim Research and Development Foundation as one of the “extremist preachers” who faces a ban, with theTelegraph bizarrely suggesting that Dr al-Haddad is even more of a threat than Anjem Choudary (though Choudary, interestingly, is not on the list of individuals who are to receive Tebos). The paper claimed that Dr al-Haddad had been “banned from speaking at the London School of Economics after the university’s Jewish society requested that his event be cancelled because of his allegedly hostile view towards Jews”, while the Mailassured its readers that Dr al-Haddad had ”heaped praise on Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, after his death”.

Predictably, the witch-hunt against Dr al-Haddad was assisted by the Quilliam think tank, an organisation with a record of McCarthyite tactics towards mainstream figures in the Muslim community. Quilliam’s head of research, Usama Hasan, who has past form personally when it comes to witch-hunting Dr al-Haddad, accused him of using “fascist language about non-Muslims” and of preaching that “western values of gender-equality, democracy and freedoms of speech, expression and religion are incompatible with Islam”.
Haitham al-Haddad has published a reply to these reports on the MRDF’s Islam21c website, in which he objects that he has been “deliberately demonised and my public image distorted by various right-wing newspapers, blogs and think tanks to fit the profile of some sort of ‘hate preacher’”. He points out that he has never praised Osama bin Laden and has always condemned the late al-Qaeda leader’s views. Nor has he been banned from speaking at the LSE. A talk he was advertised to give there was postponed while accusations against him (made by the terrorism-supporting Zionist blog Harry’s Place,
who suggested that al-Haddad might well be “the next Anwar Al Awlaki”) were investigated. Dr al-Haddad writes: “The investigation was conducted and I was cleared of all false accusations shortly thereafter. I have since then spoken twice at the LSE.” In response to Quilliam’s charges, he notes that “the prevailing consensus among Islamic scholars is not averse to democratic participation, women’s rights or respect for religious pluralism”.

Dr al-Haddad also makes the important point, which is worth emphasising, that the attack on himself is part of “a genuinely disturbing trend in the conflation by many Islamophobic commentators of socially conservative values with issues of national security and extremism in order to demonise Muslim scholars and speakers”. He notes that this is in stark contradiction to “a virtue much lauded in liberal democracies that citizens are free to hold the views they choose, within the law, whether such views cohere with majority or minority opinion”.

This liberal-democratic principle, evidently, is one that will be junked if the government continues on its intended course. As Dr al-Haddad argues, the aim of the Telegraph andMail reports is apparently to “soften people up to the idea that Britain needs to curtail ‘lawful free speech’. Freedom of speech, expression and religious belief is a value that Britain has traditionally upheld. Its termination through agenda-driven government officials and a so-called taskforce, along with an apparently co-operative ‘free’-press is something everyone should be concerned with.”

If the government were genuinely interested in preventing further young Muslims being drawn to the violent extremist ideology embraced by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, it would be asking Islamic scholars like Haitham al-Haddad for advice, not proposing to ban them from mosques and Islamic centres. By choosing the latter option, the government will send out a message that preachers who urge the Muslim community to engage with mainstream politics – as Dr al-Haddad does – will be answered with slanders and suppression. This can only reinforce the arguments of the very violent extremists the government claims to be combating, who assert that Muslims in Britain will never get anywhere by pursuing peaceful political reform.

‘Asbos’ to silence 25 hate clerics
By David Leppard and Richard Kerbaj
Sunday Times, 22 December 2013

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:09 pm

why should they be allowed to incite hatred, it is supposed to be illegal..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:10 pm

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/12/21/christian-leader-supports-death-penalty-for-gays/

a, as in one, far right, says it all, Christian group in uganda, do yu think this speaks for the majority..lol

check muslim countries with sharia law... :D

Again you miss the point, what does the bible teach on homosexuality?

The same as the Quran, so your view on who follows their faith is irrelevant, because as seen all 3 share the same views on homosexuality

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:11 pm

heavenly father wrote:why should they be allowed to incite hatred, it is supposed to be illegal..

A talk he was advertised to give there was postponed while accusations against him (made by the terrorism-supporting Zionist blog Harry’s Place,
who suggested that al-Haddad might well be “the next Anwar Al Awlaki”) were investigated. Dr al-Haddad writes: “The investigation was conducted and I was cleared of all false accusations shortly thereafter. I have since then spoken twice at the LSE.” In response to Quilliam’s charges, he notes that “the prevailing consensus among Islamic scholars is not averse to democratic participation, women’s rights or respect for religious pluralism”.

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:11 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

a, as in one, far right, says it all, Christian group in uganda, do yu think this speaks for the majority..lol

check muslim countries with sharia law... :D

Again you miss the point, what does the bible teach on homosexuality?

The same as the Quran, so your view on who follows their faith is irrelevant, because as seen all 3 share the same views on homosexuality

not many Christian would want to see gays hung.. so clearly the Christian view is different... :D

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:11 pm

Didge, he can deny what he likes, the article I linked was written by the man himself ffs!

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:13 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:why should they be allowed to incite hatred, it is supposed to be illegal..

A talk he was advertised to give there was postponed while accusations against him (made by the terrorism-supporting Zionist blog Harry’s Place,
who suggested that al-Haddad might well be “the next Anwar Al Awlaki”) were investigated. Dr al-Haddad writes: “The investigation was conducted and I was cleared of all false accusations shortly thereafter. I have since then spoken twice at the LSE.” In response to Quilliam’s charges, he notes that “the prevailing consensus among Islamic scholars is not averse to democratic participation, women’s rights or respect for religious pluralism”.

you can tell islam is all for equality, they hang gays, force women to wear ridiculous clothes, give them less legal rights, leave women open to rape, mutilate female genitals and kill people of different religions... :D

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:14 pm

Tess. wrote:Didge, he can deny what he likes, the article I linked was written by the man himself ffs!

Yes I read his article which I am opposed to:

It is in this vein that I commend the many Christian bishops and ministers who have come out in opposition to the current proposals to allow homosexuals to ‘marry’, and I support them in their endeavour to dissuade the government from including LGBTs in current marriage legislation. We also appreciate the brave stance of the Nobel peace prize winner and president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, in defending a law that criminalises homosexual acts and determinedly standing for higher moral standards

Again your argument is based upon his faith, thus all religious would have to be banned

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:16 pm

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

A talk he was advertised to give there was postponed while accusations against him (made by the terrorism-supporting Zionist blog Harry’s Place,
who suggested that al-Haddad might well be “the next Anwar Al Awlaki”) were investigated. Dr al-Haddad writes: “The investigation was conducted and I was cleared of all false accusations shortly thereafter. I have since then spoken twice at the LSE.” In response to Quilliam’s charges, he notes that “the prevailing consensus among Islamic scholars is not averse to democratic participation, women’s rights or respect for religious pluralism”.

you can tell islam is all for equality, they hang gays, force women to wear ridiculous clothes, give them less legal rights, leave women open to rape, mutilate female genitals and kill people of different religions... :D

Has christians never punished homosexuals then?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:17 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
Tess. wrote:Didge, he can deny what he likes, the article I linked was written by the man himself ffs!

Yes I read his article which I am opposed to:

It is in this vein that I commend the many Christian bishops and ministers who have come out in opposition to the current proposals to allow homosexuals to ‘marry’, and I support them in their endeavour to dissuade the government from including LGBTs in current marriage legislation. We also appreciate the brave stance of the Nobel peace prize winner and president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, in defending a law that criminalises homosexual acts and determinedly standing for higher moral standards

Again your argument is based upon his faith, thus all religious would have to be banned

the argument is based on his inciting hatred, which is illegal, his religious choices make no difference, it would be the same if he was an atheist... :D

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:19 pm

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Yes I read his article which I am opposed to:

It is in this vein that I commend the many Christian bishops and ministers who have come out in opposition to the current proposals to allow homosexuals to ‘marry’, and I support them in their endeavour to dissuade the government from including LGBTs in current marriage legislation. We also appreciate the brave stance of the Nobel peace prize winner and president of Liberia, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, in defending a law that criminalises homosexual acts and determinedly standing for higher moral standards

Again your argument is based upon his faith, thus all religious would have to be banned

the argument is based on his inciting hatred, which is illegal, his religious choices make no difference, it would be the same if he was an atheist... :D

As seen he was cleared of any hate incitement, thus your claim is wrong.

I do not agree with any religious views on homosexuality, but if you feel the these faiths are incitement we need to then ban the Quran, Torah and bible, as they all speak the same on this.

Is that your wish?

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:21 pm

he has been banned from speaking at universities because of him inciting hatred not because he is muslim...it has nothing to do with his religion..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:23 pm

heavenly father wrote:he has been banned from speaking at universities because of him inciting hatred not because he is muslim...it has nothing to do with his religion..

That is a fabrication as seen, read again the article showing otherwise

Again his views would be based upon his faith, thus the faith and source if the problem, the religious works, which means the Bible, Torah and Quran incite hatred against homosexuals, thus religions should thus be banned by your logic

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:24 pm

Haitham Al-Haddad supports female genital mutilation

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:26 pm

Tess. wrote:Haitham Al-Haddad supports female genital mutilation

of course he does .. he's a muslim..

by Guest Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:29 pm

Yep very wrong Tess I agree, just like I am against mutilation of boys by Muslims and Jews, one though seems to be wrong only for girls when it is wrong for both boys and girls.

Again the argument is drifting yet again from the point whether a religious group should be banned from an amusement park, based upon their faith, something many avoid like the plague

by Vintage Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:35 pm

Its not, as most people are saying about the particular faith, this particular group happen to be Muslims, with someone who is a hate preacher, someone who holds radical views which are banned, being the organising force for this event, it would be the same if any other known radical of any religion or organisation was involved. It appears that the do gooders are rather biased in their views on this by jumping to the defence of known radical who happens to be Muslim but would in all probability be screaming in indignation if the EDL organised a fun day at such a place.

by Sponsored content