Our new pal Valerie, of Act for Canada
(pictures c/o http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.co.uk/ )

We must thank Act for Canada for hosting the Law and Freedom visit to Canada. You can marvel at my hostess-with-the-mostess here and here. Thank you, Pal Val!

They set up three speaking venues, all of them superb.[1]

If I had to pick a favourite it would be Ottawa, because that was where we had the most opposition. CAIR-Canada tried to get us banned. Not because they are a thuggish bunch of censors, an offshoot of the Hamas linked CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations), or unindicted co-conspirators from the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial. But because they were concerned to save the Ottawa Public Library’s finances from the burden of hosting hatemongers like Law and Freedom. CAIR-Canada are now a fiscal watchdog.

There are no mosques in England. According to the planning register they are all “community and welfare centres for the benefit of all faiths” or suchlike bilge. Similarly, CAIR-Canada poses as a free speech organisation opposed to public subsidy for the discussion of religion. They’re historically ill qualified for this role, but never mind.

They seem to have been poked into action by a delicious bit of drivel in The Ottawa Citizen, where an unlikely double act complained that Act for Canada were “foolishly inviting” Law and Freedom “to build support for anti-Islamist activism”, no less. And that we “end up ironically supporting the Islamist view there is no Islam other than what Islamists insist it is”. Oh, the irony. They needn’t worry: we don’t build support for “anti-Islamist” activism – we build support for anti-Islam activism. Read it yourself, but take a warning from Shakespeare:

“(their) reasons are as two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaff: you shall seek all day ere you find them, and when you have them, they are not worth the search.”

As this article confirms, the term “Islamist” is a cowardly piece of pedantry looking for a distinction without a difference. Talk about non-Islamists, and the celebrated moderate muslim, brings to mind Bertie Russell’s reply to a question about what he would say if he came face to face with God: “Sir, why did you go to such lengths to hide your existence?” [i]

Hard on their heels came this press release from CAIR-Canada. It lacks CAIR’s usual ululating, but is still fit for our trophy scrapbook:

(February 1, 2013) The Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR.CAN), a national Muslim civil liberties organization, is calling on supporters and concerned Canadians to immediately contact the Ottawa Public Library (OPL) to urge that it revoke permission for the appearance of an anti-Muslim hatemonger at its main branch on February 4, 2013.

No censor was ever a teenager, otherwise they would know that calls to ban a talk, like calls to ban a record, make it more popular. I must thank the censors for filling the rooms I spoke to.

The good news is that the freeborn citizens of Ottawa dissected this repressive rubbish, first by turning out to judge for themselves, and second by writing to the press. Robert Sibley ’s perceptive take is here. My less elegant response is here (kudos to Sun TV). And the lovely Janice Fiamengo nailed it here. Thank you Janice!

Then on to Montreal and Toronto. The warmth of the audience, and the shrewdness of the questions, was most obvious at Montreal. I am continually surprised at how far ordinary people, i.e. non politicians, have thought through the problems and how they will play out.

If you’d like to watch me bore the pants off a Montreal audience, then here is the video evidence:

Gavin Boby: Montreal Feb 5 2013 PART I

Gavin Boby Montreal Part II

Our new pal Meir, of the Toronto Zionist Centre
(pictures c/o http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.co.uk/ )

For example, no politician ever turns his mind to the endgame. They see no solution, so they would just as soon see their multicultural paradise hang for a sheep as for a lamb. If their People (that’s you and me) fail to make diversity Fascism work then we deserve the ensuing welter of violence, as the German Fascists consigned the German people in 1945. But ordinary people have not given up looking for solutions, and do so with a steely and humane gaze.

The nicest audience was at the Zionist Centre in Toronto. It is a sad indication of what Islam has brought to Canada that security at the Zionist Centre had to be so efficient. I loved it of course, because it was fun to feel like Beyonce with a bodyguard for an evening. I don’t think you will find more loyal friends anywhere. Thank you, Meir!

The only thing nicer than a roomful of Islamophobes is a roomful of Zionist Islamophobes. It was a pleasure to tell this mainly Jewish audience exactly what I thought of them: a light among the nations. And before you accuse me of pandering, that isn’t me talking, but the Nobel lists. If you are ever in the presence of a muslim and a Jewish guy, then the Jewish guy is over 4,000 times more likely to have won a Nobel prize. If you take out the nonsense Nobel Peace prize, then that disparity almost doubles. Remember that next time you’re discussing immigration policy in the pub.

And has history ever given us a more spoiled bunch, or a better sermon against the dangers of pampering, than the self-destructive (literally in many cases), and so-called, Palestinians?

Please see the fantastic Blazing Cat Fur’s pictures from this talk here (K really is that tiny!) And one of the excerpts that they kindly recorded, here.

Our new pal K, of http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.co.uk/

A super tour, and the most welcoming people. It would make for a boring article to thank everyone who was so generous, hospitable, and supportive, so we’ll do it privately.

If you’re wondering where to go on holiday next, choose Canada. I think it is even more beautiful in winter – in a mysterious, noir-ish way – than in summer. And if you have money looking for a safe haven, Canada’s probably it. Whilst much of Europe is scheduled for collapse, Canada will stay standing.

Over the next 20 years the English speaking world has a fighting chance of defeating Islam without atrocity, without dirtying our hands. Ex politicians will then look for someone to blame for this dignified outcome, and for their personal disgrace, having skidaddled for the airport to esc ape the chaos they created. When they do, they could do worse than this: Blame Canada!

Please see below the shocking statement by a 16 year old girl in Paris, detailing the anti-Jewish assaults and hatred she has endured for two years, until her mother pulled her from the school.

It was sent to us by her mother, asking for help, particularly in finding employment in London. She is coming to escape the violence and malice in her home town. Unfortunately, we have no job to give her. I wish we had.

If you can give her any help, please let us know, even if it is only advice or moral support. She needs it. France is currently worse than Britain. Consider how it is to discover that your child has suffered this, and to meet nothing but denial from the authorities given the duty to protect you.

If you’re grateful for anything we have done, then you needn’t help us, but please think if you can help her.

Thank you.

“At school in the St Denis area of Paris the humiliations were constant. They were designed to make me feel abnormal, deformed, disgusting. Psychological and physical humiliation.

Everything I said or did were constantly scrutinized, criticized, belittled, and turned around in order to mock me in public. As were all my physical characteristics. “For fun”. This was every day for two years, each week worse than the last one.

When not actively mocked and harmed, I was ignored.

If there was group work, I was forcibly excluded: nobody wanted to team up with a “nasty Jew”. Never any help from anybody. In German lessons, Nazi crosses were drawn on my desk. They were in ink, except for one which was engraved in the wood. When I saw pointed out these swastikas to the teacher, she erased the ink one while saying that it was nothing, and merely a coincidence that it was on my table. The engraved cross stayed on my table during the whole year.

Some examples of physical violence used against me: one day I was surrounded by about fifty children, with three girls (2 Muslims and 1 Catholic) close to me who took it in turns to hit me. The game was to see who could hit me the hardest. Others looked on and laughed, while others said that was what a “Nasty Jew” deserved – a typical insult against me.

There were other games: when I was sitting on a bench in the courtyard, a Muslim boy and two Muslim girls took it in turns to strike me on the head as they walked past. They circled me, striking me on the head each time, hitting harder each time.

Another game: push the Jew downstairs. This happened about ten times in two years.

Another game: in changing room after sport, several girls would catch my arms behind me and pull me upward until I thought my shoulders would be dislocated.

Everyday there were insults. Here is a sample (roughly translated):

« Nasty Jew whore »

« Whore of your race »

« Nasty Bolshevik »

« Dirty Yupine »

 « How ugly with your big Jewish nose »

« People like you should have been incinerated»

« Nasty intellectual Jew »

« The Jewish blood is impure so fire is better than a knife »

« Nasty Chinese eyes »

« Pig’s Eyes »

« You are as pink and ugly as a pig »

« You know that we do to pigs »

« Dirty Mongolian »

« Abnormal rat »

« Jewish moron full of shit »

At first I was ashamed and did not dare to mention any of this to my mother. But in the second year it became much worse and I eventually told her. She met the Director of the school, but he refused to believe this could be possible and accused me of imagining things. We went to the police to talk about a Muslim boy who was sexually harassing me for three months, but I did not tell the police about the anti-Semitism because I was afraid that they would not believe me.

My mother believed me and removed me from the school. I slept a lot because I was exhausted. Now I want to go back to school, but to a very good school. I need to go back to school before I am too old.

I want to work to make a good future for myself.”

Law & Freedom, U. K.

Date:                   Monday, February 4^th, 2013, 7:00 p.m.

Place:                  Ottawa Public Library

Address:             120 Metcalfe Street (cross St. – Laurier)

Cost:                    $10.00; students & seniors free

Date:                   Tuesday, February 5^th, 2013, 7:30 p.m. 

Place:                  Ruby Foos Hotel

Address:             7655 Decarie Blvd. (corner Pare St.)

Metro stop:        Namur (orange line)

Cost:                     $15.00; students & seniors free

Parking:               FREE!

Date:                   Wednesday, Feb. 6^th, 2013, 7:30 p.m.

Place:                  Toronto Zionist Centre,

Address:             788 Marlee Rd. (just south of Lawrence)

Metro line:         Lawrence West subway station (Lawrence Line)

Cost:                    $10.00; students & seniors free

Gavin Boby is a British lawyer who specializes in town planning law. He runs The Law and Freedom Foundation, dedicated to preserving a lawful society that protects freedom. Their first project is a legal effort to assist community groups, on a pro-bono basis, if they are faced with inappropriate planning applications for more mosques in their neighborhood. They focus on legal procedure but also on the nature of Islamic doctrine and as a result have won 16 out of 17 cases.

The National Post just disclosed that a Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s (CSIS) reportstatedthat “a large number of venues” that are used by Sunni “Islamist extremists” are “radicalizing Canadians” across Canada.  In this Canadian context Gavin Boby’s message is even more relevant.

The Muslim Brotherhood, operating in Canada, just purchased a 10,000 square foot building in a Montreal neighborhood. On record, this will be the 4th real estate acquisition in a very short time span. Last fall, the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC) was also involved with the establishment of a new Mosque in Quebec City that also needed rezoning. In Edmonton, the Lessard community countered the establishment of a MAC run school in their neighborhood for fear of radicalization. Again, several zoning laws have already been transgressed by the local MAC- run Mosque and in several new Saudi and Muslim Brotherhood linked Mosques that have been built. In Ottawa, MAC is also administering several venues, one of which is the Abraar school that made international headlines because “two teachers (…) who praised a pupil’s essay about killing Jews with hand grenades” were suspended.

Why should we be concerned about the Muslim Brotherhood operating in Canada?

The former Chair in Islamic Studies at the University of Alberta described how the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood “hoped to change the status of the Mosque, bringing it from a static place of worship to a center of Islamic revolution. “(pp. 76-77)

Youssef Qaradawi unconditionally endorsed by leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood operating in Canada describes the role of the Mosque in these words: “To guide public policy of a Nation, raise awareness of critical issues and reveal it’s enemies. From ancient times the Mosque has had a role in urging Jihad for the sake of Allah.”

These will be very special evenings

so please mark your calendars!

Inside the unlawful Cricklewood Mosque. Not a mosque, surely?

Few of our liberal-left opponents have any real guts.

We get plenty of abuse, which is one of the things that keeps us going.

Otherwise, it tends to be the moral exhibitionism of people anxious for the good opinion of those who agree with them. People with such needs tend to be too selfish to do much. And there are few other reasons – e.g. being a treacherous nutcase – for a non muslim to cut a pro-islam pose.

Substantive opposition is usually self serving, especially if money is involved.

E.g. if you sue someone for non payment of a bill, their response is that it is beneath their principles to cough up to an islamophobe. Or if a BBC guy wants to pose as macho, he’ll pick on an islamophobe.

This behaviour is as far removed from principle as you can get, based on the assumption that an islamophobe is a weak target. And they get a surprise.

And this was the case with the Cricklewood mosque in Camden. We briefed a printer, who shafted mis-served us. When we informed him that there might have been a problem, he told us baldly that the issue was “sensitive”. I.e. it was our own fault and he kept the money.

So, a few weeks ago, I thought it would be my hard lot to explain to you, Dear Readers, that we had lost the case by lousing up the case. Because getting taken advantage of by the supplier you’ve selected is no excuse. There are no excuses in this line of work, full stop. When you louse up, you own up.

Not fun. Losing a case is kind of inappropriate for an organisation whose motto is “We Win”.

Never daunted, we scrambled into rearguard action and we managed to turn it around despite a major setback. If you have any idea how hard it is to change a Council’s mind once they’re in a mindset, then you’ll know how pleased we are with ourselves.

Our tactics were clean, lawful, and effective. And we won. The Council decision came just as Santa was doing his rounds on Christmas Eve: “Decision: Refused and Warning of Enforcement Action to be Taken  24-12-2012”.

We know how keen the Taqiyya artists are to proclaim their reverence for Jesus, so we hope this news didn’t spoil their celebrations of His birth.

This was a miserable application – as they tend to be. There was a history of lack of candour with the Council. The mosque outfit claimed to have been operating unlawfully, without planning, since 2009. And to have been “offering services to our community members since 2004”, despite having claimed in a 2007 application that the property “is used as A1 leased shop and will remain the same”. This was not the case. And now they claimed that it was used as a “library”, and not a bookshop after all, and that that use would continue.

Outside the unlawul Cricklewood mosque. No, no – not a mosque…

Funnily enough, this outfit lists itself as “Masjid (translation: ‘mosque’) Rawda” on Somali related websites. Watch below for some interesting brainwashing. See the little twerp speaking for 3 minutes from the 7:05 mark (“imitating the Kuffars”) for some less than cohesion-enhancing stuff. Yes, I think we can say this place is a mosque.

The Council had fallen for the string of Islamic half truths and evasions, as public apathy always tempts them to do. Until we got involved.

Take a step back and ask yourself precisely what a mosque is doing in Cricklewood, the butt of every suburban-London joke since the Carry On films. Had you offered Hattie Jacques, Sid James, and Kenneth Williams the chance to appear in some slapstick about “Up the Cricklewood Mosque!”, they would have thought it too contrived.

Preaching in the unlawful Cricklewood Mosque …Definitely not a mosque.

However, truth is stranger than fiction and reality is zanier than comedy. Thus we found ourselves briefed to do the business with the Cricklewood Masjid Rawda. And it was nice to win despite, or because of, the hindrances.

In the meantime, you might like to contact the Camden Council Planning Enforcement Department, especially if you live in London. Here is their page to “Report a Suspected Breach of Planning Control”, where you can let them know just what this property is used for. You may like to include a link to their YouTube vid below (“Ardayda Masjid Al Rawda Cricklewood Cnt 08 04 2012 Somali Channel”), and point out the bit from 7:05 to 10:15, where junior shows off what they preach about the Kuffar, and the Kuffar’s reverence for Jesus, at this unlawful mosque.

It usually takes something to rouse a Council enforcement department, and you can be that something.

Once again, Merry Christmas, and a mosque-free 2013 to you and your neighbours!

Although Australia is 10-15 years behind the islamisation of Britain and Europe, it is ahead in terms of its response to this dire problem.

It’s main, and certainly its most coherent, response is the Q Society. A secular, grassroots Australian organisation, incorporated in 2010 with the task of “informing, emboldening and engaging” Australian citizens, and of building a network of citizen lobbyists and activists, to bring pressure to bear on politicians, key administrators and companies.

The commitment and professionalism of the Q Society were the first thing that I discovered when I hit the ground in Perth. These people mean business. How I wish we had had a Q Society in England 10-15 years ago: how I wish we had a Q Society in England now. With these people there is none of the hot air and hollow promises which can often accompany activism.

The other thing was the Australian hospitality. This was the hardest part of my speaking tour! And not just their kindness in flying me over. Steer clear of Australia if a warm welcome makes you feel awkward!

It is a shame to see such a big warm paradise as Australia get Islamised. It is absurd in itself, because it would be hard to think of somewhere that Islam belongs less. Because such a naturally beautiful environment has so much to lose to the sewer of Islamic doctrine. And because the depredations of eyesores like the Lakemba mosque, and the Camden mosque – whose leading Iights want to rename the town “Islamden” – are offensive to decency.

But the people of Australia are facing the task. And their numbers are growing fast.

This growth is aided by the strategically inept (as with all sociopathic things) sense of leadership of Australia’s muslims. No sooner had I arrived than there were:

• A full blown Islamic riot in Hyde Park, Sydney, with riot policemen knocked unconscious on camera and having to be dragged out by their colleagues. And over excitable beardy-weirdy characters shouting to camera:

Obama! Obama!

We love Osama!

Remember that if you ever feel in the mood to try a bit more appeasement with muslims.

• The next day, reports of a full blown terror raid at a mosque outfit in Melbourne. The usual excuses about cultural misunderstanding were trotted out, and they had as much effect as a cow on a crutch with your average Aussie battler.
• A couple of days later, the first arrests on a female genital mutilation charge in Australia. This puts them a decade ahead of us Brits, who have had legislation to deal with the problem for 14 years, and have yet to make an arrest let alone charge anyone.

So people were more than usually keen to listen to what I had to say. The big questions being: “What’s coming our way?”, and “Are we gonna end up like you Brits?”

And my answer? “Of course you are!” But you’ll have to watch the video below to see why! Plus a bit else besides.

A few things struck me about the audiences for my talks.

Their intelligence. These people had read up on the issue. They understood what was going on in England, America and Europe far better than I did what is going on in Australia. One couple, who met me in such style in Canberra, were very active and informed on the cause to protect Middle Eastern Christians from mass murder. This is the “ethnic tension” that the BBC sometimes tells us about, which always end up with churches getting torched and Christian girls getting “abducted”. As a citizen of a crusader nation, I was ashamed of my lack of knowledge here.

Their tough mindedness. These people want to know about the endgame. For them, it is not simply about letting off steam. They want to know how this thing will end, ugly as it may be. I put this down to the Aussie ability to look reality square in the eye. I’m reminded of the Australian attitude to joining the doomed League of Nations: when President Woodrow Wilson pompously asked their Foreign Secretary, “Are you prepared to defy the opinion of the civilised world?”, the Australian reply was: “That’s about the size of it Mr. President”.

Their political incorrectness. One gentleman told me he had fought a mosque application, and secured a court order allowing him, as a neighbour, to visit at any time of day or night to make sure the place was complying with the conditions of its permission. “And I’m gonna enjoy doing it!”

Their enjoyment it all. You only have to hear Sergio Redegalli speak. His “Say No to Burqas” mural on the wall of his artistic studio, naturally incurs calls for censorship and violence from fellow artists in Sydney, plus lots of thrown cans of highly environmentally damaging paint. He refers to them as “his ferals”, and incorporates their smudges and splashes into new versions of the mural.

I completed my trip by advising a local group about a mosque proposal that appears to be something very sinister. I can’t go into it now because the investigation will have to be done on the quiet. But this proposal is not what they claim, and will certainly turn into a downright dangerous presence for the peaceable and warm hearted neighbours.

Australia doesn’t deserve what is currently coming to them. But from what I saw, they won’t get it, because they won’t allow it. They won’t have to go so far down the road as we have before they wise up.

On the European side of the world, we may end up fighting the war in order to solve the problem. But my bet is that Australia will quietly and firmly see our example and solve its own problems without fighting the battle. And this, if Sun Tsu is to be believed, is the highest form of strategy.

Erick Stakelbeck Interview, plus another win (sort of)

You can find Erick Stakelbeck’s interview with me for America’s CBN here:

http://blogs.cbn.com/stakelbeckonterror/archive/2012/12/11/stakelbeck-on-terror-mega-mosque-madness.aspx

My bit comes in at the 8:03 mark and lasts until the 17:30 mark.

It was a pleasure to talk with Erick Stakelbeck, a smart, intelligent, and professional presenter, who thinks deeply about the issues. He is the opposite of the PC, conveyor-belt interviewer, and you can’t go wrong signing up to the “Stakelbeck on Terror” weekly bulletin.

Another report based on this interview is due out this week on CBN’s 700 Club show. So please look out for that.

Anyway, enough boasting: now for some bragging.

Why are they always so beautiful and inviting?

Readers will no doubt recall the Purley Mosque planning application, from March 2012:

As usual the Council Planning Officers recommended permission for this “community facility”.

As usual, local feeling was hostile to it, for good reason.

As usual, the Councillors in committee let out a lot of repetitious nonsense about “community”, whilst knowing what this mosque would do to the sense of community. Councillors know what a mosque means for their constituents. They’re paid to know; they’re in a position to know.

As usual, we won.

And as usual the perma-smiling, glad-handing, smooth-shaven front men for the mosque outfit stormed off in an Islamic huff. Seeing that, you always feel like a Mum must feel, watching her son pull off his first bank job: “Aah, it’s all been worthwhile!”

And then the mosque outfit appealed the refusal. And now it has lost that appeal.

This case shows that writing objection letters to the Council on a planning application works. It counts.

First, the Council must – surprise, surprise – take account of your views.

Second, a Councillor’s rule of thumb is that if one person writes, 10 others intended to. Today, that ratio is even higher. And Councillors notice this.

If you think today’s politician is brave and self sacrificing, perhaps you’ve been living abroad for a while? You’ve certainly never been approached to stand for Council yourself, with the words: “Go on – you get thirteen grand a year you know – plus expenses!”

Such a person is not keen to get voted off the payroll.

Third, objection letters must be taken into account as part of the planning process. They are themselves a reason for refusal, especially if they’re based on planning grounds like parking and disturbance.

Many people think that that planning is an obscure, technical thing, like surgery, where what you think doesn’t matter much. This is sometimes convenient for Council officers, because it makes their lives easier.

But it’s wrong. The planning system has long said that local opinion is relevant to the application. So, with a little guidance about what a “planning matter” is, you can have a big effect.

We give that guidance. That is why we win.

It’s not just politics. It’s set out in the technicality of government policy. The government’s National Planning Policy Framework is clear that it:

“provides a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans, which reflect the needs and priorities of their communities.”

See that word “accountable”? Your local Council answers to you. Just see what happened in Purley.

The first bunch of planning professionals, the Planning Officers, recommend permission for this mosque. We can’t be sure whether they were influenced by the desire for a quiet life. But they appear to have underestimated local opposition.

But Councillors don’t underestimate it at all. Not if they want to get in again next time. And by the time they made their decision, the objections had come in. The Councillors refused planning permission. The mosque outfit went to appeal.

At appeal, a different planning professional, the Planning Inspector, gets to make the decision. She has all the local objections to hand from the start. And this planning professional came to a different conclusion from the Planning Officers, and dismissed the mosque outfit’s appeal. Shame.

What changed in the meantime? The proposal didn’t change. What changed was all the objections that came in.

The appeal Inspector might say that she just looked at the case differently. But I would bet the reason she did so was because of the strength of local opinion. English people – unlike some other groups – are reasonable, and generally only kick up a fuss if they mean it. And her reasons for refusal were the same as the objectors’ reasons.

Can we chalk this up as another win? Probably not. We had already won, and the appeal Inspector confirmed the refusal.

It would be nice to add it to our tally. But it’s the same mosque as a previous win. It’s the same neighbourhood that now has some time. It’s the same neighbours who have a chance to hold out.

So our success rate will just have to stay at 93.75%, instead of shooting up to 94.11%.

The point is that your objection letters are a key contribution. They are weighed in the balance when the planning decision is made.

These cases are won and lost at the desk. It’s a grind, but stick at it.

If  you do, you’ll win.

We win.

Pester power works on Homer, but not us

Sometimes mosque-fightin’ is like an episode of the Simpsons. The opportunistic caricatures that present the applications, the gullible simplicity of the Councils that lap it up, and the spiteful narcissism of the community organisers and journalists. all play their part in this absorbing pageant of human nature.

But the most amusing thing is the juvenile pester power that mosque outfits employ. It goes something like this: apply; apply again; if refused, apply again; apply again with a glossy traffic report; get angry (but apply again); finally, if all else fails, apply again.

The fewer comparisons made between Council planners and Homer Simpson, the better. But mosque promoters are obviously avid students of Bart and Lisa, who know something about the Nag Factor.

This was the routine with our latest win: 7 Carlisle Road, in Brent.

The Zia Ul Ummah Foundation wanted a “Community and Education Centre”. I think we know what that means by now. Nothing else gives itself that title, and if anything did it would be a pub. It was for a mosque, plain, simple, all 8,400 square feet of it. And they were not to be put off.

Previous application refused earlier in 2012? Don’t worry – reapply!

Previously application told that this site is valuable employment land, intended to help create jobs for hard pressed locals? Don’t worry – reapply!

Previous application told it would create unacceptable traffic problems? Don’t worry – reapply!

Those spinelss kuffar can only hold out so many times, right?

Perhaps. But I’m guessing the mosque outfit’ll run out of resolve before we do.

It would have been great to see this lot at the Planning Committee meeting. But it didn’t even get that far, because we slam-dunked them. Of the 276 comments submitted, only 9 of them were in favour, and all of those bleating on about “community cohesion”, something that Islam lacks any historic credentials to talk about. The rest expressed the justified vehemence of local people against this nasty application. Read them here.

In the end their application was refused by the Planning Officers under delegated powers. So no 3 minute speech about “community” and “peace” for them. Just a black and white refusal notice landing on their mat a few days ago. Shame.

In fact, this refusal notice is tighter than the last one, so this outfit have spent money to go backwards!

Little more to report, except that we won. A thoroughly inappropriate and domineering proposal got its just desserts for once. Well, well.

And did I mention that we won? In that case I’ll leave it to Homer to say what needs to be said: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meGgSOl8470

We’ll  keep doing this if you don’t grant planning permission!

A planning application was submitted for a mosque at No 90 and 92 Chingford Mount Road. No 90 was to go  from  a “book shop” (you know the routine) to a full mosque, and be extended to No 92. More than doubling its size, to a total of 148 square metres, or 1,600 square feet.

The Applicants said that otherwise they would have to pray in the street.

The proposal was gross over development, and out of context with the residential area – busy roads, terraced streets, continuous double yellows, white zig zags, and residents-only parking.  Chingford Islamic Society – wanted the mosque open from sunrise to 11:30pm, 365 days a year, making huge disturbance for neighbours, and unacceptable congestion and noise problems.

This was a reworking of an application that had already been refused, and the Applicants were trying their customary Grind-‘Em-Down act. It didn’t work. In fact they have gone backwards for their pains, earning themselves a refusal that is even more tightly worded than the last one!

What follows is a report from our Man-At-The-Meeting, and how I envy him for delivering the coup de grace.

We arrived at Waltham Forest Town Hall for the Planning Committee meeting at 7pm. Walking down the long drive to the main entrance we saw a large group standing outside the front entrance, the majority of them in traditional muslim garb – long white shirts, white hats and beards.

We just managed to enter the building, at a push. Council security shouted that people should move away from the entrance to allow people in, but the cries must have fallen on deaf ears because no one made any attempt to move. I had to use my brief case to prise access to the front desk, where i gave my name and informed them that I was a speaker. We were told to wait and someone would come to take us to chambers soon.

While we were waiting, the many muslims packed into the reception area were looking at the few of us dressed in suits and taking pictures with their mobiles.

There was a lot of shouting as people tried to explain that not everyone would be able to get into the public gallery. This only increased the jostling by the muslims in the crowd, partly for position. But also, it was obvious, to ensure that as many non muslims as possible were stopped from getting into the public gallery. I only saw 1 non muslim heading towards the stairs to the gallery.

At 7.20pm the five speakers were lead through the crowd to the Council chamber. Just before 7.30 I looked behind me to see a stream of people, mostly muslims, being lead into the chamber itself and sitting or standing behind us. This is contrary to normal procedure, which usually requires that Councillors and speakers should be safe from any feeling of intimidation. It seems some types of intimidation are more acceptable than others!

The meeting finally got underway at 7.40. I was the first to speak.

If the muslims standing behind me intended to intimidate me, they failed. I delivered my prepared address in full, despite the shouting when they realised that I had called Islam a violent religion.

The speeches by the Architect for the application, and by one of the mosques supporters, was meet with huge cheers and loud applause. You can easily imagine.

One of the speeches by the Councillor for the ward pointed out that she had not spoken to one local person in favour of the mosque application. This statement was meet by more Islamic hooting, causing the Chair of the Committee to call for order.

Once order was resumed, the planning officer gave his statement, and made a biased comment about the attitude of some of the objectors. This was surprising because I was the only person who had identified Islam as a problem. All of the other speakers had fallen over themselves to say how Islam wasn’t a problem, and that their concerns were only with parking problems, noise pollution might arise, and God forbid any of them should take a dim view of the that Religion of Permanent Offense.

After conceding, reluctantly it seemed, that there was no reason he could find to pass the application, the Planning Officer advised the Planning Committee to refuse permission.

The vote against the application was unanimous, and met by even loader jeers, hollering, and expletives than before. I saw two of the supporters of the mosque leaving with the accustomed bad loser attitude that we have come to expect at these applications. Shouting, swearing, kicking chairs, and punching doors rather than opening them.

I do hope their unsporting ways didn’t cause them to feel too badly about the refusal!

We realised this might be one of those times when the Religion of Peace gets violent, so we made for the exits, quickly shook hands, and congratulated each other as we made our way out. You feel ten feet tall when you stop a mosque. It’s a life’s good works in one evening.

As we left, the guard on the front desk was still screaming for people to clear the entrance, but to no avail. By now the failure of the application had reached the Islamic crowd at the front of the building, many of whom were trying to force their way in just as others were trying to leave. Some were trying to question us on the way out, asking our names, and why we were opposed to the mosque. We ignored them, and pushed through with raised briefcase.

Once outside, it seemed safest not to hang around. People still tried to question us, but we made our excuses and walking to our cars. Luckily it started raining, and the group of warriors stopped following.

The best moment of the evening came next, when I turned around and saw about twenty muslims standing on the Council steps, shouting and gesticulating at each other, and generally looking displeased.

I have to admit that I enjoyed that.

Our motto is “We win”. So it’s appropriate that, amid the bad news, we get a bit more good news: an online interview series with 20 people who are explaining Islam and the politically correct West.

Every third week of the September, October, November and December, five interviews will be presented, one a night from Monday to Friday.

The October series started on October 15 and is called: “Personal Journeys Toward Difficult Truths – Understanding Islam, Understanding the West.” The 5 interviewees are:

Monday, Oct 15: Robert Spencer of JihadWatch. Probably the best known explainer of Islam to a credulous west.

Tuesday, Oct 16: Valerie Price, of Act for Canada, a very interesting lady: counter-jihadi, and one of the stars of Beauty and the Breast.

Wednesday, Oct 17: Gavin Boby, the English mosque blocker from Law and Freedom, who helps local neighbourhoods resist planning applications for mosques. So far they’ve won 14 of the 15 cases.

Thursday, Oct 18: Aruna Papp, who has been helping women escape from honor-based violence for 20 years.

On Friday, Oct 19: Vince Lombardi, the counter-jihadi, who became instrumental in Elsa’s own understanding, especially with her blogging after the Danish cartoon jihad.

In September, the interviewees were Pamela Geller, Mark Durie, Raheel Raza, Fred Litwin and Bill Warner.

Here’s the link to register to hear the interviews for free:
http://WorldTruthSummit.com

We’re often smeared as racists and Islamophobes. Rather than swallow toe the line, Elsa decided to find out we’re really like, by interviewing us. How did we get into this? What did we do before that may have motivated us to stand up? How do we keep going? Does the abuse bother us?

Check out the series here:
http://WorldTruthSummit.com

A thing of beauty

One of the things that concerned me about our success rate was that people might take it for granted.

Well, not any more. On Tuesday night we lost our first case.

To be honest, I thought we would lose when I took the case on. I just couldn’t resist going down fightingfor the residents getting shoved around in their own neighbourhood.

The immediate neighbourhood

On Tuesday night, Sunderland got 15,000 square feet of solid mosque foisted on them. Don’t worry, the Council said, most of that floorspace will never get used. And the fact that the mosque outfit are adding a second floor and 15 toilets (more than a multiplex cinema) is coincidence.

The site already has two mosques very close by, one of them has been operating unlawfully for at least 7 years, with the full knowledge of the Council, despite two planning refusals, and an enforcement notice.

So why did we lose?

I was called in at the last moment. Residents had got up quite a campaign, and assumed that the Council would listen fairly to their concerns.

That was a mistake.

The other mistake they made was to get people to submit objections in the form of signed, pro-forma letters summarising their fears.

This tactic, along with petitions, gives Councils the opportunity ignore the objectors as a bunch of ignorant pie-eaters who won’t write a proper letter on their own. And Councils are only too happy to take the opportunity. Mosque Applicants nearly always accompany their applications with signed photocopy letters, and I have never seen a Planning Officer’s report discount the “letters in support” for that reason. But they will do so if the objectors try this tactic.

This was unfair, because there was no denying the strength and sincerity of feeling against this mosque. And there were over 1,000 (one thousand) objection letters.

It was dismal watching Councillors, who would never risk a prolonged experience of Islamic enrichment, lecture the people who have to put up with it every day. How Islam is a beautiful religion of peace. How beautiful the Dome of the Rock is. How, if only they could drop their prejudice they would soon find out how lucky they were to have the mosque in their midst.

And tough: they were going to get a mosque in their street like it or lump it. Lawful or unlawful, it would happen, so suck it up. I somehow doubted the Council would have such an elastic approach to the law about an unlawful massage parlour or an illegal Hell’s Angel chapter house.

The Councillors felt no fear from these objectors: they weren’t going to derail the PC gravy train, and these working class neighbours, mostly retired and elderly, could be ignored.

The future

Residents will pay for this planning permission in tears during the years to come. The situation has progressed long past stage 1 – the parking jihad stage. And beyond stage 2 – the “F-off, this is our area now” stage. It has now progressed to stage 3, the “You really should sell to us” stage.

Pensioners in this area report men knocking on their door, with a few twenties and fifties in a plastic bag, suggesting it might be in their interests to sell up. This was reported in terms to the Council, but might as well not have been.

Stage 4 is not pretty. But it forms an effective pincer movement when combined with the squeamish police response that “We have no reason to suspect that a racial element to this crime madam”.

This is the stage at which the proudest residents give up the fight and go. I don’t know how long that will be. But my heart goes out to the bewildered residents who are going to suffer it, and who can’t understand why their Council didn’t to the right thing in the end. They are going to learn a lot about the sharp end of dysfunctional modern politics over the years that follow.

I’m not sorry we took the case on, even though we lost. These residents are the quiet poor who get the short end of the stick most of their lives, and taken it with gentle dignity. We gave them a chance, but I wish I could have won it for them. And how I wish we had been called in at the start.

We’re probably going to get harder in this respect, and only take on cases that we can guide from the start. Elementary mistakes are easy to make, hard to undo, and a gift to Councils who fear the derailment of their PC gravy train.

Sorry people, but you’re going to have to call us earlier in future!

Finally, the Council will regret this decision. The clash between Islamic law and state law is only going to grow, and Local Authorities will not be able to ride two horses for much longer. I don’t know if they will be held to account for this particular decision, but I think that they will. They will find that bending to unlawful activity is a long and unpleasant ride that they can’t get off when it ceases to suit them.