: closely" that an application had been
: made and "regrets" that, in the
: event that an application wasn't made, the
: impression was given otherwise.
Exactly, that's a reasonable interpretation of the clunky Google translation and has been further confirmed by his own words in a newspaper.
This undercuts the whole narrative of your original article which, unsubtly, suggested this was discrimination. It would have taken very little time or resources for someone in the CNA to call Father Fogelqvist to get a clearer picture of what went on.
Unfortunately if they did that, they'd find a priest who is not interested in stoking up ill feeling towards Islam.
: There was still oral information which led
: to Church deciding not to pursue the bell
: ringing permission on the basis it would be
: declined...
That so called 'oral information' wasn't actually tested so it's speculative and not, therefore, a reasonable basis for the story above.
: "There was verbal discouragement
: from one of the municipality's
: representatives in 1993. So the story
: hasn't changed in that regard : we got
: negative communication from the municipality
: to not continue with the application. So we
: let the whole thing go, and as a result
: there has been the view in the parish that
: the municipality gave a negative to
: bell-ringing,"
It's 2018; a quarter of a century later. On what basis can anybody claim, with conviction, that the 'story hasn't changed'?
: Not entirely sure it's a political beat up.
: The mosque had already been the centre of
: considerable controversy before the bells
: issue with claims they had posted extremist
: messages to social media.
Claims? Who by? Were they verified?
Even taking this assertion at face value, how is it relevant to the original story?
The real religious discrimination here is from the CNA which posted a story without due diligence; unfortunately Father Fogelqvist is not buying into it.
Responses
« Back to index | View thread »