City University in London recently closed a Muslim prayer room after students refused to submit their sermons to the university administration for advance scrutiny. The university had good reason to monitor what was going on in that room — one speaker was recorded advocating the killing of apostates.
Now the Muslim student group is unhappy with the “discrimination” against its members, and is busy mau-mauing the university authorities with the usual “diversity” rhetoric.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video from PressTV:
Below are excerpts on the same topic from a BBC article:
City University London Removes Muslim Friday Prayer Room
City University in London has been accused of discrimination by a group of Muslim students after it closed a dedicated room used for Friday prayers.
A group of students have formed Muslim Voices on Campus, calling on the university to reverse its decision.
The group said it was being “unjustly targeted”.
City said it acted because students had refused to submit the proposed content of sermons to the university before prayers to check its “appropriateness”.
Wasif Sheikh, who leads the group, said: “We feel we are being unjustly targeted. All of our sermons are open, we welcome all students and all staff.
“But when you start submitting your sermons to be monitored and scrutinized then there’s a chance for it to be dictated what’s allowed and what’s not allowed. We, as students, don’t accept that.”
Three years ago, the counter extremism think tank the Quilliam Foundation released a report on the sermons at Friday prayers at City University, in central London.
It claimed hard line views and a confrontational atmosphere were being encouraged.
In one sermon, which was recorded, the speaker said: “The Islamic state teaches to cut the hand of the thief. Yes it does. And it also teaches us to stone the adulterer.
“When they tell us that, the Islamic state tells us and teaches us to kill the apostate, yes it does.”
BBC London has seen no evidence those views are still being spread now, but some argue the episode shows the need for greater scrutiny…
Hat tip for the article: Steen.