Saturday, 26 September 2015

It has been pointed out, in a comment below, that this was an Ahmadi mosque and Ahamadis (often wrongly considered to be the "good Muslims") are considered heretical by most other Muslims. The attack may therefore have been carried out by Muslims. No doubt, the predictable Establishment denunciations of "Islamophobia" would be seen as a bonus. Apparently a 14-year-old and a 16-year-old have been arrested in connection with the fire (see here). Because of their age, their names may not be released.


  1. On the Telegraph, a reader has commented that the mosque is used by the Amadiyyah sect of Islam which is regarded as heretical by other Moslems because it includes another "prophet" after Mohamed in its version of Islam. This reader opined that the mosque, therefore, might have been set fire to by a "Salafist" Moslem (ain't no such critter, salafism refers to part of the 'reformation' which Islam underwent in the 1820s, its most obvious exponents being the Saudi Arabians; yet another deflection from lying media as to the roots of Islam); also, that possibly this arson attack (if that is what it is) was meant to be pinned on non-Moslems.

    1. Very good point. I will add some discussion of this above.

  2. Note on the Amadiyyahs: They are frequently portrayed in lying media as poor victims of other Moslems; possibly so, in Pakistan but, in reality, the Amadiyyahs also subscribe to the Koran, the Hadiths, Islamic law and all the usual traits associated with this ideology. They are very successful at self-advertisement and try to posit themselves as representing a modern view of Islam, and they are quite adept at raising funds and advancing in businesses. Needless to say, media never delves deeply.

  3. There's a comment up at Russia Today, on this news item; the commenter, writing in French, says that this mosque is Amadiyyah and that they generally face problems from the other Moslem sects in the area.