Why do we always win: Blackpool November 29th 2011

Written by Gavin Boby of Mosquebusters

If you oppose a mosque planning application you will win.


You’ve got to do it with confidence; you’ve got to laugh at the Council and muslims’ nonsense about islamophobia; and you’ve got to keep the pressure up.


If you do, you will win.


That is the lesson from Blackpool, 28th November 2011, when the Planning Committee were forced to refuse permission for the Noor a-Madina mosque.


And they refused it unanimously. The facts, strength of local opinion, and the professional help from the Law and Freedom Foundation, gave them no choice.


The Law and Freedom Foundation tried to film proceedings, a burly guard stuck his gut in front of the camera and ordered it off. Filming committee meetings is quite legal, and encouraged by the government.


Here’s a still of his belly, with Councillors behind and Gavin Boby of the Law and Freedom Foundation to the left:


Councils are opportunistic. They love the PC gravy train, and like to pass mosque planning applications on the quiet, like a vicar passing gas at high tea.

The front-lady for the mosque is Mrs. Tasurraf Shah. We are not sure that she is so nice a person as she looks:






Their organ-grinder is the decidedly less inclusive Qari Muhammad Zaman Qadri.











Ms. Shah claims on her website:


“I am a member of the Race equality and planning cammitee @ the Town Hall. Im am a qualified Interpreter and would also want to give law facillity for Immagration here on the FYLDE.I am a mother of 7…”


Did this have anything to do with the history of this case?


  • The Noor a-Madina mosque had operated unlawfully in the row of shop buildings at 189-199 Waterloo Road, FY4 2AE, since August 2010, and the Council allowed them to get away with it. This is standard mosque routine.
  • The registered owner – Mrs. Shah – launched an appeal to raise £1.5m to build a huge new mosque on the site.
  • In December 2010 Mrs Shah applied for planning permission to use the takeaway as mosque. This was refused. You would think this was the end of the story, but no.
  • Why the delay? Meetings between senior Council officers and Ms. Shah, “a member of the Race equality and planning cammitee @ the Town Hall”, resulted in the enforcement officer being told to hold off enforcement proceedings.


One year later, the application was back in front of the Planning Committee, and permission was refused. The Council Officers, who hoped to usher this one through, wrote a shameful report recommending that Councillors let the Officers grant the planning permission.


If they hoped this would get the Councillors off the hook, they were wrong.


The Law and Freedom Foundation, acting for the Waterloo Road Residents’ Action Group, reminded the Councillors of the highways dangers, and that Councillors would be held responsible are their decision.


The mosque describes itself as follows: “Currently, there are two 200-person capacity buildings at the mosque; three remain under development” .


5 x 200 = 1,000 person capacity. With 4 parking spaces. And they had the gall to claim that there would be “adequate to cater for the number of visitors using the site at peak times”.


The disturbance to residents of the narrow Victorian terraced streets behind would have been unbearable, and it is heartless of the  Council to allow it so long simply because the residents are neither rich nor used to creating a fuss.


Propagating islamic doctrine is contrary to incitement law, public order law, hate speech law, and equalities law. You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand this: the Koran calls 3 times for unbelievers to be killed wherever they are found, and 14 times for them to be enslaved, including sex slavery.


If Councillors or officers assist something that is outside the criminal law, they risk criminal investigation, or being sued for doing something outside their powers.


In the end, none of the Councillors could bring themselves to vote in for planning permission: you could hear the crickets chirp when the chairman asked them to vote in favour of this vile application.


And it is vile, in the town of Charlene Downes, the 14 year old girl plied with drugs, pimped, raped, murdered, her body disposed of in the foulest way imaginable, and her killers rewarded with a government payout of £250,000 each.


And the town of Paige Chivers, groomed, exploited, and ‘disappeared’ in Blackpool.


We only hope that their families will take no offence if we offer the work that has gone into opposing this mosque as an inadequate tribute to their memory.


About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

4 Replies to “Why do we always win: Blackpool November 29th 2011”

  1. Why is it that the authorities can come up with microscopic evidence many years after the Stephen Lawrence case, leving no stone unturned, yet casually dismiss the the Charlene Downes case?

  2. Don’t let them stop you from filming these things. Buy yourself a spy pen from ebay. They cost between £4 and £12 (delivered to your door). Each pen has enough storage for about 3 hours of video & audio. The quality is surprisingly good. The pen can sit in a breast pocket and no-one will know you are filming. Tip: put a bit of black opaque stickey tape over the light on the back of the pen (lights up when pen is recording). Then the pen is totally indistinguishable from a normal pen.

  3. Stephen Lawrence?

    In the meantime Muslims and Blacks have raped and murdered plenty of others in the UK. No such care for them as bestowed on one murder among hundreds that take place every year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *