I have been banging the drum on this exact point for years……
Some defend the building of a mosque from liberalism. It is said that everyone should have the right to build what they want and to worship and what they see fit. It must be remembered, however, that where political Islam is booming, there is no democracy and individual freedoms. Therefore, the state must act in advance to prevent the spread of equality harmful ideology. Christianity has experienced early reform of education and is integrated (more or less) into modern society. Political Islam has not experienced that reform, but proceeds under the same rules as in the 600’s. […]
My own view is that almost all the mosques operating in Finland have links with political Islam. When Russian influence presently is a hot item, we should not forget to look out for the beaching of political Islam in Finland.
NOTE: The Reformation was about reforming the Catholic Church, not Christianity itself.
Point of view: Whose agenda does the Grand Mosque serve?
Monday 20.03.2017 at 08.59 (updated at 09.17)
My own view is that almost all the mosques operating in Finland have links with political Islam, writes researcher Salehzadeh, specializing in the field of geopolitical conflicts in the Middle East and North Africa.
The planned Helsinki Grand Mosque countries was brought up. Especially before the elections, it has become a hot potato, a subject of intense debate with those for and against. Those taking a position on the project have been candidates for mayor, researchers and ordinary citizens.
The project is defended by various motives. For example, the Grand Mosque is seen by pious Muslims contributing to facilitating integration and enable them to exercise their religion. Many politicians profiling themselves as tolerant instead may defend the project because it would gain them votes from immigrant groups. What also can’t be excluded is that some of the most active promoters of the project itself would benefit economically or be a better position of more power in religious circles on completion of the project.
Also, there are a variety of motives in being against the project. Some of them are negative attitude towards all Muslims and Islam in general, and they do not want any visible symbols of it in Helsinki. While others will see that the funding by Gulf countries, the Sunni branch of the mosque does not serve equally to all Finnish Muslims. Still others rely on the past experience of other European countries, with the construction of large mosque has given a say to outside states and political groups, and hampered the integration of the Muslim population.
It would be important to think about the good and bad sides of the project, in addition to whose interests does the Grand Mosque serve. In Finland, dozens of mosques are already working today whose establishment has been supported by influential countries such as Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. These mosques serve as the donors’ eyes and ears in Europe. For example, in the aftermath of the controversy last week between Turkey and the EU countries, Erdogan has called for the resistance of the Turkish diaspora and be faithful only to Turkey.
Imams are perhaps the most significant eloquent and direct influence in the Diaspora that the Islamic state may have in Europe. The links between mosques in Finland and politics have long been known. Many religious leaders have expressed their views directly to the Syrian situation and the question of who would like to win the war.
I personally believe that the large mosque envisaged at Kalasatama is a Muslim Brotherhood driven project.
Watertight evidence is difficult to present, as the Muslim Brotherhood does not hand out membership cards. The Muslim Brotherhood is a global, political Islam driven network. They have their own mosques and their own organizations everywhere in Sunni world, as well as a strong supporters involved with European Muslims, even in Finland. They advocate political Islam that oppresses women’s rights, democracy, human equality and freedom of the individual, and not an ideology that should be given a foothold in Europe.
Muslim Brotherhood political Islam agenda is lead by Turkey’s Erdogan, Qatar and Bahrain, as well as the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. They compete in many things with Saudi Arabia led (and funded) political Islamic agenda. However, both are just as evil from a Western point of view.
A more detailed explanation of the financial foundation for the Great Dome is difficult, in the sense that the mosque funding agencies know how to recycle the money through a set of intermediaries (local organizations, cultural centers, etc.), so that its connections to political Islam are blurred. This has been done in connection with hundreds of European mosques. Now afterwards, connections are constantly being exposed, such as the German and Danish examples have shown.
I defend the freedom of religion but I’m against the grand mosque. Why? There are already a lot of mosques. In most cases, there are direct links between specific country or Muslim political organization, and they preached doctrines that are sometimes at odds with standards of gender equality. This prevents the integration of the Muslim population, and in addition provides a foothold for influence foreign countries and organizations.
NOTE II: One of the principal driving forces behind the grand mosque is Anas Hajjar from Syria. He was pictured in a meeting with the Muslim Brotherhood connected CAIR organization not too long ago. (The bald headed guy seated left) Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood friendly (and very anti-Israel) Finn Church Aid was there as well.