Camberley Mosque Thrown Out

Azari

fluffnutter wrote: »

Plus lighting a fag is work. What a nightmare for those who smoke!

I would imagine that provided you light a candle before the start of the Sabbath you would be OK. (But that's just a guess.)

POPPYOSCAR

Don't get too excited.

Many developments here get turned down but win on appeal. Money talks. We have lost some lovely buildings for designer flats(so don't start raving on about the need for more homes)

fluffnutter

Azari wrote: »

That 'no work on the sabbath' has to be one of the weirdest things for arbitrary rules made up long after the original law was set down.

How can they seriously maintain that driving a car is 'work' but walking isn't?

How can they seriously think that pressing a lift button is work but expending a great deal of energy in climbing stairs isn't?

I seem to recall it's about using mechanical things (amongst other bits and pieces). Hence why using the lift is 'work' yet walking up the stairs isn't, even though the latter is clearly more 'work' in energy terms.

fluffnutter

Azari wrote: »

But why do we call Beijing 'Beijing' and not call Paris 'Paree' and Mexico 'Mehico' (and Einstein 'Einshtein')?

Of course, I do prefer to call Madras Chennai, Calcutta KolKata and pronounce Himalayas as Him-are-li-as.

It's a rum one for sure. I think part of the reason that some things are more of a sensitive issue than other is to do with respect and recognition. It's not merely about using the local term for something; it's in doing so you afford recognition to that local term.

The French couldn't give two !!!!!! that we don't say 'paree', nor could the Mexicans about 'mehico' probably. More recently however, we're saying 'OK, let's let go of our colonial past. It's not Rhodesia, it's not Keeenya, it's not Bombay' etc. etc.

People who cling on to the 'old terms' out of pure stubbornness... why? Are they so insecure in their position in the world that they don't want to recognise emerging nations? Is it that important to them that they hold on to old colonial names? Says a lot about them, IMO, and none of it good...

fluffnutter

The thing that most get me about this entire thread is why bother? Why come on the internet and post 'Goody! A mosque is NOT being built! I'm not racist but...'. If you had half a brain you'd realise that you'd be challenged, surely? So what's the motivation? If it's not 'sharing the good news' then I can't see that it's anything else than merely to be provocative. And people who use conflict between western nations and Islam to provoke a ding-dong on the interweb are a bit shitty, IMO. Like the OP says... "it only takes a handful of idiots to set everything off"... Yeah, and she's one of them.

dmg24

fluffnutter wrote: »

Why not just admit you're a nimby at best and a little bit racist at worst? And I've always disliked the word 'Moslem' too. It's a bit like people who insist on calling Beijing 'Peking', or Mumbai 'Bombay' etc. But that's a minor point compared to some of the nonsense above.

A quite perfect post. I like very much.

SwanJon

fluffnutter wrote: »

It's a rum one for sure. I think part of the reason that some things are more of a sensitive issue than other is to do with respect and recognition. It's not merely about using the local term for something; it's in doing so you afford recognition to that local term.

Cote d'Ivoire has specifically asked to be called that not Ivory Coast - it seems very erratic which is used here though.

Still the one that confuses me is Bayern Munich. Why not Bavaria Munchen? Can't even be consistent within the one name!

c'est_moi

fluffnutter wrote: »

I seem to recall it's about using mechanical things (amongst other bits and pieces). Hence why using the lift is 'work' yet walking up the stairs isn't, even though the latter is clearly more 'work' in energy terms.

Orthadox Jews keep Shabbat rules - one of the rules forbids the lighting of fire. This means that anything that creates a 'spark' eg using an electric light, or turning on a car engine, is not allowed. They are permitted to walk up to a a certain distance though.

Enterprise_1701C

As far as I was concerned, I was posting good news, especially as I am not the only person from Camberley or the local area on here.

Yes I'm being a NIMBY, but my "backyard" happens to be a locally listed victorian school in a conservation area. One that the old owners had to sell at a reduced price because they were not allowed even to extend it, let alone demolish & replace it. The BWA have had permission to extend it, have half started it then stopped because they could not afford to finish it. Yet someone is willing to stump up the money to build an entirely new mosque.

The traffic problems were actually stated by the BWA - they said they would be needing far more parking spaces as they expected many more people to visit, and not just on Fridays. They already cause traffic chaos, it would have been far worse.

It would have been out of character - no opinion about it, and the planning inspectorate agreed on that one.

You can call me a racist bigot if you want, but I and my friends know that I am not. I am quite happy with it continuing to be a mosque, it was always the building that was the problem and not the people.

I perhaps should not have started this, but I wanted to finally cheer the fact that someone in authority has not been swayed be religion or race, has not been forced into a decision on anything other than the facts of the case, and they have agreed

The PI describes the proposed mosque as "little more than a fairly traditional mosque design transposed into Surrey from somewhere in the Near East or the Indian subcontinent" and agrees with those who believe that the design would be inappropriate for the Conservation Area on the London Road. The building would be orientated towards Kaa'ba, the most sacred site in Islam (the ancient stone cube located in the Grand Mosque in Mecca) and so would be diagonally placed on the site between the old infant school building and the proposed new house. The entrance to the proposed mosque would be away from the London Road, so in effect the building would be "turning its back on the street". The plans would be more suited to a mosque standing in its own grounds rather than in the relatively small roadside plot on the London Road. The PI describes the site as "not spacious enough for such a large building to stand within" it successfully and the mosque would look as if it had been "squeezed on to the site." The size of the mosque, its orientation and its visual relationships with the retained building, the proposed house and the woodland to the rear all add up to the proposed development being inappropriate for its location. Looking at the design of the mosque, the PI said that the proposed design did not appear to make any concessions to the fact it was being built in a conservation area and felt that the loss of the existing school building would "not be adequately replaced or reflected in the proposed development

Azari

fluffnutter wrote: »

It's a rum one for sure. I think part of the reason that some things are more of a sensitive issue than other is to do with respect and recognition. It's not merely about using the local term for something; it's in doing so you afford recognition to that local term.

The French couldn't give two !!!!!! that we don't say 'paree', nor could the Mexicans about 'mehico' probably. More recently however, we're saying 'OK, let's let go of our colonial past. It's not Rhodesia, it's not Keeenya, it's not Bombay' etc. etc.

People who cling on to the 'old terms' out of pure stubbornness... why? Are they so insecure in their position in the world that they don't want to recognise emerging nations? Is it that important to them that they hold on to old colonial names? Says a lot about them, IMO, and none of it good...

I hadn't really thought about people refusing to use the 'new' names.

I dare say you are right, sadly, that some will do so out of a misguided attempt to cling to empire - or not 'pander' to the locals.

Of course, there is also the factor of the annoyance at suddenly being told, often without reason, that you have to start calling something by a new name when you were quite happy with the old one.

A good example of that is the seventh planet which was known as 'yewr-ain-us' for many years until everyone on the TV and radio suddenly started to pronounce it 'urine us'. Wrong!

It comes from the same root as does the element uranium and you don't hear anyone calling that urine-ium. (well, a few Australians might. )