“100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”
Here’s Maryam Namazie’s answer to that question.
“100 lashes if you don’t die of laughter!”
Here’s Maryam Namazie’s answer to that question.
By now, you have all been inundated with endless television and radio specials on the legacy of 9-11 and how America was changed forever. While America may have been changed, did the American people actually learn anything from that tragic day? Did WE in fact, change? Judging by the fact that numerous hate mongering religious extremists such as Perry and Bachmann exert such influence over the political and cultural landscape, it appears not. We are no different a people than we were before 9-11 and that is not a good thing.
Through the endless babbling of news commentators, pseudo-experts in terrorism, political hacks and responses from the man on the street, a still, small voice could be heard. A voice that called for reason to prevail and for a return to our roots as a nation; a nation that was founded on secular principles and the wisdom of the Enlightenment. That voice was soon squelched; smothered by paranoia, hate and ignorance.
We were all given a choice and we chose wrong as a nation. 9-11 could have been the beginning of an American Spring, a chance to throw off superstition and bigotry and embrace rational thought and humanist values. Instead, we collectively chose a path of darkness. Our descendents will look at the events of 9-11 as an opportunity wasted.
A message lost.
One of the best commentaries I’ve heard to date from any atheist on the massacre in Norway.
Sorry folks, I’m in the beginning phases of a start-up and it’s going to be a hellish time for the next year or so. Wish me luck. If anyone has $650,000.00 just laying around and wants a good return on it, let me know.
Regardless of my ventures, I’ll still be putting out fun stuff to read as I’ve really come to miss my interaction with my readers and friends in the blogosphere. I have another article coming out in the next few days, but until then, here’s an exchange between myself and another that I shamelessly lifted from another blog. To put the exchange into context, I was responding to comments on a posting about the Islamic Center near Ground Zero not really being a mosque, etc. Most of those who disagreed with me were upset with the following comment:
“Your analogy borders on being a non sequitor. It’s all about function, not a name. You are projecting from a western mindset, not the mindset of those whom you are trying to present in a positive light.
I was raised Muslim. I attended a Community Center/Islamic Center/Mosque.
Ever been in an Islamic Community Center? Ever been in or prayed in a mosque? Ever attend Islamic classes in a community center or mosque? If you have and you are a Muslim, then you are guilty of deception and equivocation, but, then again, I would expect nothing less from a pitchman for the “Religion of Peace”. All religious pitchmen are the same…liars or deluded saps…or both.
Was there something I missed out on in my upbringing or in my travels or work in the Middle East and elsewhere?
I’m all eyes and ears.”
Another dear reader took exception to my statement(s) and had this to say:
“The Godless Monster, sorry but you are making a lot of generalizations and that is irrational even if you have good intentions. Your experiences do NOT mean that you are the authority on Islam or Muslims. Not all Muslims are terrorists or support terrorism. That is a fact. I will not respond further, but I will read your response if you choose to respond. Thank you and have a good day.”
I cannot deny that the person was polite, almost disarmingly so. It was almost enough to keep me from giving a response in my usual manner…almost. However, even polite idiots need a readjusting:
I am irrational? Fascinating. You are implying that nobody can be an expert on any subject? If not, then please detail exactly what would qualify a person in your mind as an expert and then in this particular case, Islam. And though you’ll never have the intellectual honesty to admit it, I’m convinced that your answer would ultimately be, “Anyone who agrees with me.”
I cannot claim to be an expert in Muslims; that is absurdity in its highest degree. I know a fair bit more about Islam then you ever will, I can safely say. And, by the way, there is a difference between the people and the religion. I make that distinction, you apparently do not.
Regardless of your unreasonable stance on the subject, being an “expert” in Islam is not required for one to make a reasoned decision. You hold that up as a bogus requirement, but to any reasoning person, that claim falls flat on its face. I’ve come to expect this, however, as lack of critical thinking skills is a hallmark of the left, just as it is of the far right. For those who are not alarmed at the Islamization of Europe, it is only because they are themselves Muslims or they don’t have a clue as to what Islam is or how to digest and make use of the information they do have. They fill the void of knowledge, reason and skills with leftist dogma, but intellectual laziness and dishonesty never pays off in the long term.
The truth of the matter is, that you and others like yourself are just as dogmatic and opposed to the truth as those on the right that you criticize for being dogmatic.
You are not going to let facts get in the way of your preconceived notions of what is right or wrong.
“Evidence and experience be damned” is your creed and your motto.
I know, I’ve seen and dealt with your kind for decades. It’s so much easier to make an ad hominem attack against the individual bearing uncomfortable news than to seriously scrutinize your own irrational beliefs.
Good luck with that, and “have a good day”.
While working on several articles concurrently, a lengthy comment from a reader of a past post (Where is the atheist outrage?) grabbed my attention as it touches on a few points that I will make in upcoming posts. Consider this a preview of sorts, of things to come. I responded to points and accusations the reader made, correcting errors of fact and logic as well as acknowledging what, if any, valid points the reader might have made.
“More atheist hypocrisy I see. Atheists always clamor about separation of Church and state and here they are now wanting to deny others their freedom of religion.”
In the fourth sentence of your comment, you make reference to the sin of lumping all Muslims together. I couldn’t agree with you more. Perhaps you could demonstrate some coherence and consistency in your argument by applying the same standards to yourself. Specifically, you have lumped all atheists together with the use of the pronoun “they”. I am hardly representative of the atheist demographic, as a brief jaunt through my posts would reveal to any but the most ignorant reader. In addition, I do not deny anyone their “freedom of religion”. I merely assert my free speech right to protest; a right – I might add – that is also covered by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
“These are American citizens who pay their taxes and live peacefully among the rest of society; why should they not be allowed to build the religious complex? What rational arguments do you have?”
To be sure, I have no rational or even legal argument for preventing the building of any religious structure, whether by litigation or force. Applying pressure via protest, boycott, education and media coverage, however, is an undeniably valid and useful alternative that has been in use for millennia in order to effect change that could not be accomplished in other ways.
“You refe (sic) to “they” as if all Muslims are the same. It’s like saying all Americans are racists and terrorists or all blacks are criminals.”
The post was written “off the cuff” and does not fully convey my thoughts on a rather complex issue. While I do not specifically refer to all Muslims as being the same, it is more than understandable how anyone could take this to be my meaning, especially considering the tone of the piece.
“Atheists, like other far right conservatives, and most atheists are far right conservatives, especially when it comes to war and aggression against other, especially nonwhite nations, are completely ignorant of the historical realities of 9/11.”
Where to start? You are either a liar, astoundingly ignorant or you are insane. Of course, it is within the realm of probability that you are a combination of two or more of these.
First off, the overwhelming majority of atheists are left of center, with a great many of them being far left, liberal loons. Scan briefly through the majority of atheist blogs and this becomes painfully obvious in a very short span of time.
Second, your assertion that atheists are white racists -insofar as you connect them to a vast right-wing conspiracy to wage “war and aggression” against “nonwhite nations” – is insane, to put it mildly. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods. No more, no less.
“9/11 had nothing to do with Islam and everything to do with American aggression in the Middle East. America brought it upon themselves. Why would “Islamic terrorists” come all the way to the US to fly planes into some buildings? Why not a closer country in Europe with the same values as the US, like England, Switzerland, etc. Why the US? Very simple, US is a terrorist nation. Read “Imperial Hubris,” the author is a former CIA agent who readily admits US foreign policy is the culprit, though he, like you ignorant atheists, wants perpetual war. After all, America needs to control the whole world; you are the master race after all, aren’t you? Like Pat Condell’s hypocrisies, this post is nothing but irrational, emotional drivel without a shred of truth or enlightened understanding. For people who claim to commit to free though and reason, you talk from sheer ignorance about religion and politics. What do you know about Islam besides what you hear in the mainstream media and right wing talking heads? What do you know about those who suffer from the actions of your beloved nation and its closest allies other than they are dark skinned, Arab and mostly Muslim? What would you do if you were the target of American aggression? Would you just lie there and take it or would you fight back? Just 4 years before 9/11, America bombed a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory resulting in the deaths of millions from lack of medicine and America bombed an Afghan refugee camp, again resulting in deaths. I am sure your kind cheered and justified it as a pre-emotive strike against would be terrorists, if you even knew about this. Americans and British, and much of the western world, have an immense propensity for not knowing of the crimes against humanity, of the genocide and murder committed by their own nations and allies, much less caring. Then when you are hit back, you whine and cry and think you didn’t deserve it. Sure the US didn’t deserve 9/11 and England didn’t deserve 7/7, if the rule is an eye for an eye, they deserved much worse.”
As with the rest of your bizarre screed, you don’t really make an argument; so much as you vomit up a disjointed, rambling kaleidoscope of emotional and uninformed leftist rants.
If you take bin Laden at his word, 9/11 had everything to do with Islam. Yes, there were token mentions of Israel, imperialism and the Palestinians sprinkled here and there, but only someone unfamiliar with the tenets of Islam would accept those sparsely used (and lame) excuses as the real motivation behind the attacks. The majority of his tapes, videos and writings show the true inspiration for his murderous calling, and it is Islamic imperialism.
You suggest reading material to enlighten me. I have already read the book. The author is misguided and ill-informed, as were many of the intelligence personnel I have had the misfortune to encounter in my time. I offer some advice for future reading material to you in return. Specifically, I suggest you read chapters 4 and 6 of “The End of Faith”, by Sam Harris.
I am an Arab-American and a former Muslim. I was raised Muslim and I have worked in the Middle East as a security contractor and private soldier. Prior to that, I operated there while with the U.S. military back in the 1980’s.
As terrorism has been of special professional and personal interest to me, there is very little you are going to be able to educate me on in that field. In regards to the history and politics of the world, I believe I am more than capable of holding my own against most people, especially someone such as you.
I have close Muslim relatives that I love dearly still living in south Lebanon and in the United States. I wish them no harm, while at the same time, holding their religious beliefs in contempt. There are good Muslims, there is no good Islam.
I would like to touch on the subject of ethnic discrimination and racism. I have been the victim of racism (by white Christians) on a scale that would drive many people to hate the United States and Christians in general. I have been severely beaten many times and lost job opportunities due to ignorance spawned by racial prejudice. Despite my negative experiences at the hands of a small (and unrepresentative) group of unenlightened individuals, I am very proud of my country (most of the time) and do not hate Christians at all. I do not hate Muslims, either. I do, however, hate Islam. I hate it in the same way that I hate totalitarian communism and Nazism. If you had an inkling of what Islam is really all about and if you were of sound mind you would loathe this ugly cult of death.
To say that the men, women and children who died during the attacks of 9/11 “deserved it” is disgusting and shows a lack of ethics and compassion that would rival the worst of any Islamic terrorist. Anyone who would willingly hand over the civilized world to the barbarian elements of this planet in the name of political correctness and multicultural dogma is to be held in contempt.
Take your misplaced indignation and faux morality and cram it.
Molly Norris is the Seattle dog walker-cartoonist that came up with the concept of “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” with a simple cartoon. Those who followed the events subsequent to her cartoon going viral know that only 2 days after an interview she had with Dave Ross of KIRO radio on Friday, April 23rd, 2010, she changed her mind and decided to back out, stating fear as the reason.
Taking a position and then changing one’s mind is no “sin”. In fact, lack of certainty is often a sign of an open mind, not cowardice. Fear is also an understandable reaction to the very real possibility that one may be killed for expressing one’s ideas. I certainly do not condemn a young woman for being afraid.
However, I have some issues with Ms. Norris. Not because she backed down, but because she followed up with attempts to undermine others who chose to publicly express our opposition to religious censorship by grossly misrepresenting her initial position and misrepresenting her initial stated reason for backing out in the first place…fear. When one compares the statements she made in her radio interview with what she now states she said, it’s difficult to come to any other conclusion than that there is an intentional effort to mislead.
Here’s a portion of her April 23rd, 2010 radio interview with Dave Ross:
DR: “…. Really Molly? You sure you wanna do this?”
MN: “Yeah, I wanna water down the targets.” (The intent and desire for mass participation is clearly stated –not just implied.)
DR: “Yeah, so how does ‘Everybody Draw Mohammed Day’ work?”
MN: “I haven’t really, um, organized it yet, I…I…I posted it on Facebook and I have gotten a couple drawings of Mohammed, but I guess I oughtta follow through and really, um collect them and, ya know, put them on a deck of cards or something…“ (A reasonable person hearing this would take this comment to mean that she intends to distribute these images commercially.)
Molly Norris lost her nerve and two days later, declared that she was distancing herself from the project and was not involved at any level. After reading so many negative posts and comments assailing her character. I gave my own take on the situation and made a statement I would later come to regret:
“She has since become frightened of the possible ramifications of her actions and is now distancing herself from the whole idea. It’s unfortunate that she has decided to back down from the project, but seeing as she is not a celebrity with vast resources to hire security protection, it is understandable. She made her point and I respect her decision to bow out.”
Of course, others took up the cause and Molly’s star began to fade…and Molly wasn’t going to have any of that.
Instead of moving on, she launched a campaign to force the spotlight back on herself. With a new page on her site, she backpedaled from her original position and disowned her earlier comments. As stated before, she wasn’t just content to misstate her original position, but also felt a need to draw attention away from the fact that she backed down because of fear of Muslims. Now she presents her change of heart as being due to concern over offending Muslims.
“My cartoon was the beginning and end of expressing my personal views about Comedy Central’s South Park censorship. If I had wanted my one-off cartoon to be the basis for a worldwide movement to draw Mohammed, then at this moment I should be thrilled,” Norris tells Comic Riffs today. “But instead I am horrified! My one-off cartoon that was specifically about Comedy Central’s behaviour vs. Revolution Muslim’s threat leading to a slippery slope of censorship in America is not good for a long-term plan. The results have shown to be vitriolic and worse, offensive to Muslims who had nothing to do with the censorship issue I was inspired to draw about in the first place.” Molly
She also writes,
“I regret going on the Dave Ross radio show on April 25th, before my cartoon went viral; my ego took me there.”
Ms. Norris was perhaps correct about her ego (maybe it took her to later interviews as well), but this interview with Dave Ross happened on April 23rd, not the 25th. A simple 30 second check of the station’s website and podcast schedule confirms that.
She obviously has a poor opinion of others’ abilities to discern truth from bullshit. No matter, most folks would just shrug this off as someone trying to cover her tracks and save face. Good enough.
However, Ms. Norris couldn’t resist taking this to the next level. She asked “that this ‘day’ be called off.” Molly Norris was uncomfortable, so the rest of us better just STFU.
No such thing was going to happen, of course. The event was a done deal and had the support of some of the most influential theist and atheist voices on the web and in print. And happen it did.
I lauded the young woman initially for her bravery in coming out against Islamic bullying. I supported her publicly when she became frightened and backed out due to security concerns.
I now criticize Ms. Norris for not leaving well enough alone and for making a shameful and deceptive public display in which she impugned the integrity of thousands of free-thinkers who decided to stand up to Islamic threats against free speech and expression.
“Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” was one of those events that were inevitable. Eventually, at some point in time, it was going to happen with or without Molly Norris. Free thinkers just can’t be kept down and they won’t be silenced. Ms. Norris got frightened. I get that, but she shouldn’t have asked the rest of us to share her reaction to fear and then condemn us publicly if we don’t.
On May 20th, 2010, millions of Muslims worldwide cried out like infantile idiots over scribblings that were not in any way directed at them, but at an idea that is anathema to those who cherish freedom; the idea that religion is off-limits to criticism and that those who dare to criticize it should be silenced or killed.
It’s guaranteed that most Muslims came away from the day’s events with nothing but an increased hatred for the West and contempt for democratic institutions. It doesn’t matter, that was a done deal anyway. The coalescing of the Islamic world into a definitive, destructive force against the West is a process that was begun 14 centuries ago and was only briefly interrupted by the Crusades and then later, by European & Soviet colonialism.
If we didn’t convince the Muslim community that we were right, then what was the purpose of all of this? What was the point?
As with the “Don’t believe in God?” billboards, this was a way for so many of us to let others in our community know that they are not alone. We’re in this struggle together. That’s the point.
Together we sent out a message to those who would rely on violence to force their way of life on us:
As the build-up to tomorrow’s “event” reaches something of a frenzy, I’m being inundated from every corner of the universe with imagery of the “Prophet”.
I’d like to comment on some of the drawings that I’m seeing out there. Some of these drawings are just offensive and disgusting, and I don’t mean (only) from an aesthetic standpoint, but morally.
I take no issue with anyone drawing Mohammed in any way they see fit, but it is also my right to comment on these expressions of “free speech”.
Many of these works are clearly inspired not so much by a desire to protest Islamic bullying, but are motivated instead by a deep hatred of Arabs and/or disdain for Middle Eastern culture.
It’s my hope that as some of these works come to light that people are discerning enough to see the difference between the two, and moral enough to state that this kind of bigotry is counterproductive and harmful to all parties.
I support the event unconditionally, but ugliness is lurking in the shadows…
Here is an interview with Pam Geller and Mike Ghouse on the Sean Hannity Show, concerning the planned mosque at Ground Zero.
If you have read any of my writings, either here or on other blogs, you know I’m no fan of Fox News. I find them to be little more than a tool of the Republican Party/Tea Party and a mouthpiece for Christian extremists. However, sometimes they cover subjects that others are afraid to cover.
The planned 13 story mosque at Ground Zero is one of those stories that have not been covered enough in the media. If not for Fox News, there’d be almost no coverage at all.
I’m still stunned by the brazenness of this act. The ideological source of the 9/11 tragedy will be located at the very site in which this act of inhuman barbarism was perpetrated. It’s like putting up a billboard depicting a rapist’s face right across the street from where his victim lives. To me, this is just unthinkable and it’s intolerable.
This is unquestionably the biggest outrage committed against the United States of America and its citizenry since the attacks of 9/11. If anyone can think of a more insensitive act that could be perpetrated by “moderate” Muslims against the United States, then I am all ears. Please, enlighten me. They want special treatment and understanding when they go apeshit over a few cartoons, yet they say we are out of line to complain about a mosque being built on the ground where so many people died because of the jihadist message that Islam preaches.
To the arrogant, self-assured primitives who see no consequences arising from your actions, know that there very well could be negative consequences. I call on you to abandon this destructive notion of forcing your ideology on a culture that cannot and will not accept it without a struggle. Back off. Do not build this mosque on Ground Zero.
Finally, I ask my fellow atheists…where’s the anger? Where’s the outrage? If a Christian so much as sneezes we all pile on. The hypocrisy sickens and disgusts me.
At least 30 schoolgirls were poisoned in their classroom by an unknown Taliban assailant in the city of Kunduz today. This is the third such attack in the area in less than two months. You can read the whole story here.
I’ve got many issues with this piece, but I’ll just touch on three:
1) “Islamic atheism”? Wow, talk about oxymorons…
2) Nowira gushes about a period of enlightenment, (specifically citing the works of Muhammad_ibn_Zakariya_al-Razi) yet completely ignores the centuries-long persecution of Zoroastrians in Persia. Granted, the 10 century wasn’t AS bad as the ones prior to and afterward, but that hardly makes for an extended gilded age of tolerance for all non-Muslims.
3) Completely ignoring her own religion’s law of abrogation, she claims that if current Muslim scholars just look to the past for inspiration, they could put Islam back on track. In other words, Islam can be fixed.
“It might be reasonable to suggest then that the problem of Islam does not lie in inherited texts and traditions, but in interpretation.”
Points 1 & 2 are interesting, but it’s point 3 that really sticks in my craw. Most Muslim scholars divide the Qur’an in two sections. There are the verses from Mecca when Muhammad was weak and he was more likely to negotiate and compromise, and the verses from Medina, when Muhammad’s influence and military strength were much greater. Guess which verses were more militant and called for lots of killing, torture and persecution? If you guessed the latter, you guessed right. How do Muslims justify these inconsistencies? They do it via the law of abrogation, in which later dictates of the “Prophet” negate or replace (abrogate) earlier verses. This is justified by at least 4 verses in the Qu’ran.
* When we cancel a message, or throw it into oblivion, we replace it with one better or one similar. Do you not know that God has power over all things? 2:106.
* When we replace a message with another, and God knows best what he reveals, they say: You have made it up. Yet, most of them do not know. 16:101.
* God abrogates or confirms whatsoever he will, for he has with him the Book of the Books. 13:39.
* If we pleased, we could take away what we have revealed to you. Then you will not find anyone to plead for it with us. 17:86.
Whether the good professor wants to acknowledge the facts or not, the truth remains that there is the theoretical Islam of the university and the Islam of the mosques, madrassas and streets.
Abrogation is a real religious concept that’s commonly accepted and taught. Many Muslims, even “moderate’ ones, feel violent jihad is justified, even if they don’t have the nerve to carry it out themselves.
Nowira ends her piece with the following:
“There is little doubt that Islamic scholars have the task and the responsibility to review tradition and re-emphasise(sic) the human values of tolerance and freedom of thought. They do not have to look far for these values. All they are required to do is to reach deep into their own cultural coffers to retrieve the pearls and discard the dregs.”
The attributes of tolerance and intellectual curiosity that Nowira applauds in al-Razi are secular, not Islamic and she does admit that. However, she seems to credit the mullahs of that time and not the men such as al-Razi who bucked the establishment and spoke their minds. That men like al-Razi happened to be heard despite Islam is a testament to the human will and intellect and nothing more. Of course, the fact that these men were powerful and influential when their works were published didn’t hurt, either. No matter how you cut it, Muslim clerics deserve no credit for the works of secular genius.
I remember standing alone at night on my parent’s porch back in the late summer of 2003, mourning the break-up of my first marriage. My uncle came out to join me, and said something that has stuck with me to this day. “You don’t miss your wife; you miss something that never was. It’s tough to deal with, but get over it and move on.” He was right. My marriage was a sham and I was reminiscing about a relationship that existed only in my mind. It was good advice. I got over it and moved on.
Nowira wants to resurrect something that never existed and her admiration is (at least partially) misplaced. It’s time for intellectuals in Muslim societies to face the reality of what Islam is. If they truly want to see free thought establish a foothold in their countries, they need to get over Islam, “move on” and start leading from a secular perspective.
More evidence that what I have been telling left-wing, multi-culturalist loonies is true; give the Muslims an inch and they will take a mile.
Now they are trying to build a mosque near Ground Zero. As if we haven’t had enough shit to deal with from the “Religion of Peace”already.
Nice. If the American public dares to complain about the insensitivity of it, the Muslims will claim racism (Islam isn’t a race, assholes) or that Americans are just intolerant in general.
Ironically, it’s exactly because of American tolerance that the 9/11 hijackers were able to train here, live here and eventually, kill here.
To the insensitive knuckle draggers who want the wail of the Muslim call to prayer and the shadow of your minaret of death to reach the very ground where so many died at the hand of Islam I can only say this to you: fuck you. Fuck you from the very bottom of my heart.
How’s that for sensitivity? Bitches.
Read more about this on Jihad Watch.
If you want to be inspired, read a few comments on the Think Atheist site from young former Muslims who are fighting the good fight.
There is an artist from Seattle who recently went public with a cartoon of Mohammed and promoted the idea of a “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” for May 20th, 2010. She stated that this was in reaction to the threats leveled against the creators of South Park by homegrown Muslim extremists living in the United States.
She has since become frightened of the possible ramifications of her actions and is now distancing herself from the whole idea. It’s unfortunate that she has decided to back down from the project, but seeing as she is not a celebrity with vast resources to hire security protection, it is understandable. She made her point and I respect her decision to bow out.
Several others have since taken up the baton and are requesting that images be sent to their websites or Facebook pages.
I will not list them because I have very strong suspicions that one of them is the Facebook page of a xenophobic, teabagging racist who contributes frequently to comments on an anti-Islamic website. I’m anti-Islamic, but this guy is just a bigot, plain and simple. Overall, I don’t suggest sending anything to websites promoted by individuals unless you know these people personally or they have an established presence and public history. Things can often come back to bite you in the ass.
Not all of us are artistically inclined, anyway. What else can we do for the cause of freedom? Express your disgust with Islamic bullying by writing letters to the editor of local newspapers or contribute your comments to blogs covering the subject. Organize protests outside of local mosques that have not publicly denounced violence (or threats of violence) and invite the media to attend.
If you have investigative or technical abilities, put them to work (LEGALLY!) to unmask those who operate undercover to promote Islamic violence against our democratic institutions. In this particular case, it turns out the issuer of the threat is a 20 year old European American, loner, loser and convert. That still does not absolve the Muslim community from responsibility, however. He got these nutjob ideas from somewhere, and they weren’t from the U.S. Constitution.
If a Muslim makes a threat in the media, call your local mosque and ask for their reaction. Ask them what they have done in order to counter this type of negative behavior. Call them out on their complicity by silence. Ask local news media to cover stories like this more frequently and in greater detail. Ask them to start asking the hard questions and get some real answers. Islam shouldn’t get special dispensation merely because its followers threaten violence to those who question its supremacy.
We all need to do our part to expose these cockroaches to the light and show them for what they really are.
Let’s make every day, “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”.
It’s taken longer than I predicted to get back to writing (for this blog at least), but the jet lag has subsided and the mountain of “must do” tasks that accumulated during my 2 week absence has been reduced to a manageable molehill.
It will require some time for me to fully digest everything that I felt, thought and experienced on my short trip and to make sense of it in a way that will offer something of real and lasting value to my readers. Be patient, it will come.
Now that I have that out of the way, I’d like to offer my take on Pat Condell’s latest video, “What I know about Islam”.
I found it disappointing. To be more specific, I found the last minute or so to be disappointing and factually challenged. Like many others, Condell knew very little about Islam when he first started on his video crusade against the barbaric faith and religion in general. At some point, he says, at the urging of Muslims, he decided to read the Quran. He did so, and apparently was impressed enough by one verse to now believe (or at least state) that perhaps Islam in its original, pure incarnation isn’t such a bad thing and it’s only certain people who have managed to muck it up to the point where it is now perceived by the West as an instrument and vehicle of death and ignorance. What I took particular exception to was Condell’s remark (near the end of the video) to the world’s Muslims that their religion is being seen in a negative light solely because of the actions of a few and that Islam could be a religion of peace if people would only follow their Quran instead of a few bloodthirsty and primitive “throwbacks”.
Condell is in his element when he limits his critiques of the religious to their behavior, but when it comes to the discussion of “holy” texts, he falls short. He doesn’t have the background or experience and it shows. Nothing to be ashamed of – neither Hitchens or Dawkins are known as religious scholars. They recognize that the best way to understand something of the nature of religion is to look at what it DOES and not at what it SAYS. Yes, they both have a grasp of the basics of world religions, but that is not what fuels their arguments or impresses their audiences. I do hope that in the future, Condell will stick with what he does best and leave the theological mumbo jumbo and broader subjective interpretations to others. His typical work is far more important, influential (and frankly, entertaining) anyway.
I could easily turn this review into a thirty page monograph, but I’ll spare you the pain. Please, if you will, take some time out of your schedule and see this full length film on Islam. It’s long, but well worth the time spent watching it.
It states everything I would have, but in a much more entertaining and hopefully, influential way.
It’s good to be back.
is the latest video out from Thunderf00t.
Seems like others are jumping on board the freedom train and calling out Islam for what it is. There’s no guarantee that YouTube will keep this video up as most things that are critical of Islam get taken down as “hate speech”.
Many thanks to Lauren for sharing the link.
It’s a mistake to paint all religious people or, for that matter, all religions with a single broad brush. Like non-believers, there is a great deal of diversity amongst the religious…in fact, even more than amongst the heathen crowd. Certainly, not all religions are created equal. Accepting that as true, would it not follow that not all religions present the same dangers and/or threats to mankind?
I understand that one must accept the initial premise (that some religions are more dangerous) in order to see or accept where I am going with this. I’ll back my assertions to the best of my ability, but I ask you, the reader, to accept responsibility for being informed on the topics I am about to discuss.
To anyone who has access to news media, it should be apparent that Islam is more of a negative influence and presents more of a physical danger to modernity than Christianity or Judaism. This is not to downplay or minimize the dangers of Christianity or Judaism, but Islam as a whole is an entirely different kettle of fish.
One can, of course, point out the history of the Catholic Church and the barbarity of the Inquisition and the Crusades. There is no denying that the Church of Rome has had a bloody and brutal past. There is also no denying that Christianity in general has evolved over the centuries and has not entirely escaped the positive influences of Western social trends and movements. The Renaissance, The Enlightenment, industrialization, and the advances of science have all left their mark on modern Christianity. Fundamentalism, (as expressed in creation science, for example) is a relatively recent invention, when looking at the total timeline of Christianity. It is also, for the most part, a home-grown phenomenon and does not have as strong a hold in the rest of the world. While there is no denying that Christian fundamentalism has an unhealthy and disproportionate influence in the politics of this nation, they do not represent the same type of threat to the fabric of society as fundamentalist Muslims do. The difference is not just one of degree, but of kind. You will not see a Catholic priest brandishing a sword during a sermon, crying out for the blood of Jews and infidels. This type of scene, however, is all too common in the Muslim world.
I shouldn’t need to go into a history of Islam, nor should I need to point out its fundamental differences (sorry, no pun intended) from Christianity and Judaism. To the uninitiated, I suggest that you spend some time reading up on Islam and how it was spread. I urge you to familiarize yourself with Muslim cultures (plural) and their treatment of women, animals and infidels. If you do your homework, you cannot escape the fact that Islam is a religion of a distinctly different flavor than the other two monotheistic cults of Abraham. While all of them are despicable, Islam undoubtedly presents a greater and more immediate danger to man’s overall well-being.
I cannot and do not suggest, however, that those atheists who have made it their vocation to stand up to fundamentalist Christianity in our backyard should suddenly shift gears and jump on the anti-Islamic bandwagon. In order to keep our nation from slipping backwards into idiotic oblivion, we need to operate on several different fronts and pressure needs to be maintained on destructive Christian elements here in the U.S.
I would argue, however, that the threat of radical Islam has been largely ignored by the activist American atheist demographic and requires the dedicated attention of another portion of our community. I have my own thoughts as to how this should be implemented (practically) here in the U.S., but that is a topic for another post…