daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 5th, 2007, 07:44 AM   #461
gohorns
Registered User
 
gohorns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NoVA
Posts: 772
Likes (Received): 25

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaki View Post
No i think the clock is quite important and should stay there. Remember, muslims pray five times a day at specific times. A clock like this i think will be very useful for its position.

Do you really think people in Makkah need a clock to look up prayer times?

Because of the way the valley is shaped, in most liklihood if you can see that clock, you'll hear the call to prayer from the Holy Mosque itself. And even if you don't, you'll hear it from some other mosque nearby.
gohorns no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 5th, 2007, 08:24 AM   #462
paw25694
Batik
 
paw25694's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 4,749
Likes (Received): 36

soo.. any update??
__________________
Visit Indonesia
Click here
"The sound of invitation is rising, waiting for you to come... It's time to visit, Indonesia"
paw25694 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 08:54 AM   #463
city_thing
Put it in your mouth
 
city_thing's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Melbourne.
Posts: 7,131
Likes (Received): 883

This building's just too close. That's the only problem that I have with it.

I can't see any point in denying luxury accomodation to Muslims that can afford it -that'd be like telling Donald Trump or Bill Gates to stay in a backpacker hostel. No one would ever say that, even if they are on a pilgrimage. Not one of us has the right to dictate such a thing to another person.

But this is such a holy site, and having this building right next to it detracts from that. The architecture is straight from some cheap Las Vegas theme hotel. It also creates a social structure whereby the richest Muslims get the best treatment -surely the Hajj is a time of ALL Muslims bowing together infront of God? This building even dwarfs the mosque.

I just think it should have been built a distance away from the main mosque. It's detracting from the whole reason as to why the pilgrims are there in the first place.

And on the subject of the House of Saud practising this architectual and historical genocide by demolishing places of cultural significance, I really, really don't agree with it. These sites are important to humanity and shouldn't be torn down just to put a few more dollars in the pockets of the Saudi royal family and Paris Hilton.

I'm sorry if this has offended anyone.
__________________
Calling occupants of interplanetary craft...
city_thing no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 09:01 AM   #464
connected_
Registered User
 
connected_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 305
Likes (Received): 15

Don't be sorry: you're right. You're not even meant to tear down trees in Mecca let alone build anything taller than The Sacred Mosque!
connected_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 01:11 PM   #465
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by connected_ View Post
Oh it's not the first time. The Saudi's are notorious for pissing on the history of other nations. They've demolished several historic Ottoman buildings (including the 220-year-old fortress of al-Ajyad) as well as houses, castles and cemeteries just for building new developments in Mecca and Medina.

Now this hideous monstrosity is being built. Yes, there might be demand for it, but guess what? Pilgrims have been going in and out of Mecca for centuries. The historic houses (now demolished) in the area surrounding Masjid al-Haram contained local communities which openly accepted pilgrims into their homes.

And a 5 star hotel? Don't they realise that not all pilgrims can afford this? Abraj Al-Bait, as large as it may look, will only house around 65 000 people at a time, and most of them will be permanent residents.
First of all, Abraj Al-bait is not only 5 star hotel, it consists of 4 star hotels and even royal hotels so all types and classes are available not as you said.

secondly, about uthman house and old houses, I believe if Saudi offered 10,000 visa only yearly not 3 million as it does now and the execuse was "makkah is full by historical houses so we can not make any extension", I believe that you and all muslims would attack saudi so much and would not like it at all.

Imagine!! muslims are 1.5 billion and only 10,000 maximum are allowed to perform hajj to dont destroy the old houses for extensions of haram and buildings around it to let pilgrimes sleep in air conditioned areas unless if you want to them to sleep on streets and stop cars, buses and all ways of translportations.

Let's be honest and logic please, I am not saying that saudi government did not make any mistakes... yes they did but they are learning too and improving the service yearly... many extensions for the haram but there were no new buildings so they detected that pilgrimes have no places to live in and they used to lie in streets.

Saudi government started building new towns and skyscrapers around the haram for pilgrimes but they detected that streets are not enough for pilgrimes.

The saudi government started now to build new modern railway to server pilgrimes.

You do not have to go to makkah and find it desert as it was unless if you accept few thousands to perform hajj only yearly which means 99% of muslims will die without performing hajj and the execuse would be "Sorry we can not destroy any historical house".

Other cultures can keep their hisotircal houses and protect cause it is totally different situation than Makkah.

for example in Egypt, they do not plan to wipe the graves around the pyramids. Why? because no millions go to perfom hajj there and only tourists go for a visit which is not essential.

In Makkah, almost 7 millions go AT SAME TIME and AT SAME PLACE... where can you find it? while makkah is surrounded by huge mountains!!

This government paid more than 200$ billions to improve Makkah and Madinah. at least all should appreciate it... I believe that any of your country would not pay half to improve or even to support improving of Makkah and Madinah... maybe even if they were in your countries, we would buy tickets to go into the haram not free as it is now.

Note: I am not saudi but I am logic.
__________________
DreaM1981

Last edited by DreaM1981; April 5th, 2007 at 03:18 PM.
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:13 PM   #466
Alle
Registered User
 
Alle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Göteborg
Posts: 2,337
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by city_thing View Post
This building's just too close. That's the only problem that I have with it.

I can't see any point in denying luxury accomodation to Muslims that can afford it -that'd be like telling Donald Trump or Bill Gates to stay in a backpacker hostel. No one would ever say that, even if they are on a pilgrimage. Not one of us has the right to dictate such a thing to another person.

But this is such a holy site, and having this building right next to it detracts from that. The architecture is straight from some cheap Las Vegas theme hotel. It also creates a social structure whereby the richest Muslims get the best treatment -surely the Hajj is a time of ALL Muslims bowing together infront of God? This building even dwarfs the mosque.

I just think it should have been built a distance away from the main mosque. It's detracting from the whole reason as to why the pilgrims are there in the first place.

And on the subject of the House of Saud practising this architectual and historical genocide by demolishing places of cultural significance, I really, really don't agree with it. These sites are important to humanity and shouldn't be torn down just to put a few more dollars in the pockets of the Saudi royal family and Paris Hilton.

I'm sorry if this has offended anyone.
Muslims dont go there to see the mosques "greatness". Altough it may be beautiful, its just an emotional argument that the mosque will no longer dominate the "skyline" when coming to Mekka. Mosques started as simple places to live, it started as a place where to offer people a home. I think that it is way more important to make the city more functional and safe for all the people going there for pilgrimage, than to preserve the view towards the mosque.
Though i disagree to build a fivestar hotel, but thats another issue.

Also it should be noted, that its custom in islam not to let old things hinder new improvements.
__________________
Stop the censorship in the BiH forums

Castles And Fortresses [Alpe Adria] [Bosnia]
Alle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:02 PM   #467
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

I agree with you (except that I agree with building 3,4 & 5 stars hotels near the holy mosque to satisfy demands of many different standards of people).
__________________
DreaM1981
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:08 PM   #468
gothicform
Bossman
 
gothicform's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: s****horpe
Posts: 31,413
Likes (Received): 12343

its right next to the main mosque in mecca and they demolished a vast chunk of the ancient town to build it.

consider this too... people walk from all over the world to mecca on pilgrimage, these guys will walk over the sahara. you then have a bunch of rich guys who stay in a luxury hotel next to it... sort of defeats the purpose of the whole thing which is about sacrifice for god. the whole point of it is an expression of a devotion to god, attaing a higher social standing during it or through it is dishonourable according to islamic texts.

if anyone wants to read more on this development of mecca unesco has an excellent report. youll see that all the house of saud wants is to make money and destroy the religious shrines of anything they think is blasphemous including all the shia ones in the country. this involves demolishing many old houses, such as where this nephew or that wife of mohammed lived.

the building itself is a loathsome stalinist lump, which is quite appropiate when you consider there's only two countries in the world that have no parliament at all. saudi arabia, and burma. the architecture perfectly fits the mind boggingly corrupt house of saud.
gothicform no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:08 PM   #469
Riyadhi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,966
Likes (Received): 14

Some people should know that Mecca is a holy place, not a historic site. People go there to pray, not for site seeing. If you want history, go to Egypt and you'll find 2200 years old pyrmids instead of crying over 220 years castle!

And for those who think that it is wrong to build anything taller than the holy mosque, please tell us where was that mentioned in the Quran. Also please provide an alternative solution to host the millions for pilgrims every year!
It is so easy to condemn, yet so hard to creat!

I truely believe that the same people who now bash the Saudi government for building those skyscrapers would have bashed the government if it had not built it!

Finally, this subject has been discussed enough already. And the skyscrapers are rising. So it's time to move on...
Riyadhi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:13 PM   #470
Riyadhi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,966
Likes (Received): 14

DreaM1981,

Where are you originally from? And can you confirm if the construction of the hotel tower started or not? the thread still says that the tower is 'proposed'.
Riyadhi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:22 PM   #471
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

have not you guys noticed something? thread has been changed to be "MECCA ABRAJ AL-BAIT 577M (PROPOSED).

[email protected] the project is almost finished

Name should be changed to be "Mecca: Abraj Al-Bait 577M (Part 2) U/C".
__________________
DreaM1981
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:24 PM   #472
KoolKeatz
█████████
 
KoolKeatz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Berlin
Posts: 979
Likes (Received): 102

thats one of the ugliest scrapers of the last years... and its a shame that they build it so close to the kaaba!
KoolKeatz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:29 PM   #473
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

lol Riyadhi, I replied at same time when you was replying and that is why I didn't see your second reply.

Yes hotel construction started 2 months ago and there are many pictures I already posted 2 weeks ago.

__________________
DreaM1981
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:32 PM   #474
gothicform
Bossman
 
gothicform's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: s****horpe
Posts: 31,413
Likes (Received): 12343

mecca is a historic place BECAUSE its a holy site, its also a historical place because its old. here are some of the holy shrines that the saudi govt is demolishing right NOW

http://www.savethehijaz.org/

Quote:
The Washington-based Gulf Institute estimates that 95 per cent of millennium-old buildings have been demolished in the past two decades.
gothicform no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 04:00 PM   #475
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

I would like to say the following:

1- If you disagree with existance of King's palace in same location of Qubais Masjed, I can tell you that this palace will be demolished soon and transfered somewhere else.

2- If you disagree with existance of hilton makkah in same location of Abu bakr house (which am not sure of it), I can tell you that it will be wiped soon since it will be the main enterance of Jabal Umar to the haram.

3- If you disagree with existance of public toilets in same location of Sayeddah Khadijah house (which am not sure of it too), I can tell you that next plans after extension of haram (Al-Shamiyya side) the later extension will be in Ghazza side which include the public toilets.

4- If you disagree with existance of one of doors of haram in location of Dar al arqam school, I can tell you "do you disagree with demolishing any school to increase the area of haram and to be one of main gates? If yes then NO COMMENT"

Now I can say, not only the saudi government demolished all of these sites and if you want to make sure of it, please read the history before even Al-Saoud leads Saudi arabia... You will find that many many islamic religious leaders made such steps to extend the capacity of haram so whom are you blaming exactly?

No one anwered me and still you guys are argueing!! would anyone accept it if Saudi provides 10,000 Hajj visa only yearly?

Anyway, as Riyadhi said.... It is the time to move on and discuss the project not historical stuff.
__________________
DreaM1981
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 04:42 PM   #476
gothicform
Bossman
 
gothicform's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: s****horpe
Posts: 31,413
Likes (Received): 12343

the point is the kings palace was built on a historic site which is now demolished. that its moved elsewhere is now irrelevant. removing the hilton also does not restore the lost historic building that stood on this site. likewise, public toilets too saw something demolished. its not what stands there now, its what they have replaced thats the problem.
coming next, why the demolition of st augustines abbey by henry the 8th and turning it into a royal palace was ok because the royal palace was eventually pulled down.
gothicform no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 06:53 PM   #477
zerokarma
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,511
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by gothicform View Post


Wow I never knew it was so crowded in that area.
__________________
.... Trump Tower Toronto .............. Costa Rica Photos 1, Costa Rica Photos 2
.... if you build it they will come ........ St. Martin/St. Maarten Photos, Aruba Photos
.... www.trumptowertoronto.com ....... St. Lucia Photos, My Complete Photo Album
zerokarma no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 07:14 PM   #478
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,504
Likes (Received): 6525

why is it now Proposed? i've thought it is already UC
ZZ-II no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 08:27 PM   #479
Alle
Registered User
 
Alle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Göteborg
Posts: 2,337
Likes (Received): 9

gothicform:

If u never demolish/replace historic buildings you will eventually end up with no place for developement whatsoever.

In my opinion, a building is just a building no matter what building it is. I mean, they are just symbolic, its not the buildings that are important but in this case for example what has happened there, that can be preserved in other ways.

Of course it is good to preserve as much as possible, so that people can experience them, but maybe its not always possible. You have to have a balance. And sooner or later everything will get replaced/improved. All buildings are transient.
__________________
Stop the censorship in the BiH forums

Castles And Fortresses [Alpe Adria] [Bosnia]
Alle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 10:57 PM   #480
DreaM1981
Registered User
 
DreaM1981's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 551
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by gothicform View Post
the point is the kings palace was built on a historic site which is now demolished. that its moved elsewhere is now irrelevant. removing the hilton also does not restore the lost historic building that stood on this site. likewise, public toilets too saw something demolished. its not what stands there now, its what they have replaced thats the problem.
coming next, why the demolition of st augustines abbey by henry the 8th and turning it into a royal palace was ok because the royal palace was eventually pulled down.
I will not repeat myself or go into useless arguement so just we better move on and keep our comments only about the project and progress
__________________
DreaM1981
DreaM1981 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
abraj al bait, saudi arabia

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu