Taslima has a connection to Charlie Hebdo.
Charlie Hebdo has been supporting my freedom of expression. http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Charlie-Hebdo-N-120-Taslima-Nasreen-au-pays-/290593052613 …
Check it out – she’s on the cover of issue 120.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
More photos, via a reply to a tweet of Taslima’s.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Via Agence France-Presse on Twitter –
People hold signs reading “I am Charlie” at the Place de la Republique in Paris.
#Photo by Joel Saget#CharlieHebdo
Many many people.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Salman Rushdie made a statement. Via the Wall Street Journal:
“Religion, a mediaeval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms. This religious totalitarianism has caused a deadly mutation in the heart of Islam and we see the tragic consequences in Paris today. I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity. ‘Respect for religion’ has become a code phrase meaning ‘fear of religion.’ Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect.” –Salman Rushdie
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Via HuffPostUK on Twitter – the four Charlie Hebdo cartoonists murdered:
- Charb
– Cabu
– Tignous
– Georges Wolinski
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Also in the news – the Denver Post reports:
COLORADO SPRINGS —A bomb detonated at an NAACP chapter on Tuesday left little damage to the building, but the loud boom that resonated through the historic neighborhood of small homes has also sounded across the nation.
As word spread of the blast, anger and questions spread with it across social media, on Twitter through the trend #NAACPBombing, and news headlines. The national president of the NAACP, the organization that appears to have been the target of the Colorado Springs blast, said he is thankful no one was hurt.
“We remain vigilant,” Cornell Brooks, the president of the Baltimore-based organization, said in a statement.
That’s horrible too. As a matter of luck, the bomb physically injured no one and did little material damage, but it certainly could have, and was intended to. A can of gasoline was placed next to the bomb, but it failed to ignite.
According to the FBI, officials are seeking a “potential person of interest,” described as a balding white male, about 40 years old. Neighbors saw a man matching his description flee after the explosion.
“He may be driving a 2000 or older model dirty, white pick-up truck with paneling, a dark colored bed liner, open tailgate, and a missing or covered license plate,” the FBI said in a statement.
Addendum: he’s probably heavily armed. Just a guess.
The NAACP informed other offices across the nation of the events in Colorado Springs.
Henry Allen Jr., the NAACP chapter president, told The Gazette the explosion was strong enough to knock items off the walls.
“We’ll move on,” Allen told the newspaper. “This won’t deter us from doing the job we want to do in the community.”
Be safe.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Katha Pollitt wrote a piece in 2012 titled “Blasphemy is Good for You.”
As I write, mobs all over the world are rioting about an amateurish video portraying Muhammad as a horny buffoon. Death toll so far: at least thirty, including Christopher Stevens, US ambassador to Libya, and three embassy staffers. Not to be outdone, Pakistan’s railways minister announced he would pay $100,000 to anyone who murdered the videomaker, and added, “I call upon these countries and say: Yes, freedom of expression is there, but you should make laws regarding people insulting our Prophet. And if you don’t, then the future will be extremely dangerous.” More riots, embassy closings and a possible assassination attempt or two followed the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo’s retaliatory publication of cartoons of Muhammad naked. To bring it all full circle, an Iranian foundation has raised to $3.3 million the reward it’s offering for the murder of Salman Rushdie. (Just out and highly recommended: Joseph Anton, Rushdie’s humane and heroic memoir of his years in hiding.)
Full circle.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Via BBC Breaking News on the Charlie Hebdo massacre:
17:59
Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell tells BBC News channel: “We’ve got to stand up for the right to take the piss out of these monsters, these idiots, these fools, these posturing maniacs who strut around in their black gear as a kind of death cult trying to frighten us all.”
18:08
The Globe and Mail’s Mark MacKinnon took this picture at the Place de la Republique in Paris, where crowds are gathering to express solidarity with the magazine:
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
#JeSuisCharlie
Freedom of expression is making ink flow, not making blood flow.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
CFI has a statement on the Charlie Hebdo murders.
In response to the murders of journalists at the French magazine Charlie Hebdo by terrorists in Paris today, Center for Inquiry president and CEO Ronald A. Lindsay issued this statement:
We are heartbroken by the unthinkable and cowardly attack at the magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris today, and outraged that such a barbaric act was a response to journalists and satirists exercising their right to free expression.
As publishers of Free Inquiry, the first (and for some time, the only) U.S. publication willing to publish the cartoons of Muhammad that sparked riots in 2005 after they appeared in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, we stand in resolute solidarity with the people of Charlie Hebdo, and all those writers, thinkers, and satirists who know that no idea or individual ought to be immune from criticism, and have the courage to point out the flaws and fallacies of even the most deeply-held beliefs.
As a show of support for free expression and the staff of Charlie Hebdo, CFI plans to prominently display on our website (http://www.centerforinquiry.net) the cartoon of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that apparently was one of the motivations for the attack. We will not be cowed by the savagery of those few who would like to see the world dragged back to the Dark Ages, who will kill to protect their backward ideologies from criticism, and we will continue to fight for the right of all people to dissent, to satirize, and to freely speak their minds.
The original Free Inquiry article with the Muhammed cartoons is available at bit.ly/CFIDanishCartoon
The Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi cartoon is on the main page.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Gunmen have shot dead 12 people at the Paris office of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in an apparent militant Islamist attack.
Four of the magazine’s well-known cartoonists, including its editor, were among those killed, as well as two police officers.
This is a fucking disaster.
Witnesses said they heard the gunmen shouting “We have avenged the Prophet Muhammad” and “God is Great” in Arabic (“Allahu Akbar”).
The number of attackers was initially reported to be two, but French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve later said security services were hunting three “criminals”. He said that Paris had been placed on the highest alert.
Footage taken from a rooftop in Paris shows two gunmen firing shots
Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane Charbonnier, 47, had received death threats in the past and was living under police protection.French media have named the three other cartoonists killed in the attack as Cabu, Tignous and Wolinski, as well as Charlie Hebdo contributor and French economist Bernard Maris.
The attack took place during the magazine’s daily editorial meeting.
At least four people were critically wounded in the attack.
The satirical weekly has courted controversy in the past with its irreverent take on news and current affairs. It was firebombed in November 2011 a day after it carried a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad.
It didn’t “court controversy” you cowardly assholes.
We’re all fucking doomed.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
NPR did this piece on AA last March but I’m not sure I saw it then, and if I did I forgot about it, so I’m looking at it either again or for the first time.
The punchline? For 90% of people who try it, it fails.
AA and the many 12-step groups it inspired have become the country’s go-to solution for addiction in all of its forms. These recovery programs are mandated by drug courts, prescribed by doctors and widely praised by reformed addicts.
Dr. Lance Dodes sees a big problem with that. The psychiatrist has spent more than 20 years studying and treating addiction. His latest book on the subject is The Sober Truth: Debunking the Bad Science Behind 12-Step Programs and the Rehab Industry.
Dodes tells NPR’s Arun Rath that 12-step recovery simply doesn’t work, despite anecdotes about success.
Because guess what: we don’t hear the anecdotes about failure.
There is a large body of evidence now looking at AA success rate, and the success rate of AA is between 5 and 10 percent. Most people don’t seem to know that because it’s not widely publicized. … There are some studies that have claimed to show scientifically that AA is useful. These studies are riddled with scientific errors and they say no more than what we knew to begin with, which is that AA has probably the worst success rate in all of medicine.
It’s not only that AA has a 5 to 10 percent success rate; if it was successful and was neutral the rest of the time, we’d say OK. But it’s harmful to the 90 percent who don’t do well. And it’s harmful for several important reasons. One of them is that everyone believes that AA is the right treatment. AA is never wrong, according to AA. If you fail in AA, it’s you that’s failed.
So that’s crap for morale, self-respect, hope – lots of things. Bad news.
The reason that the 5 to 10 percent do well in AA actually doesn’t have to do with the 12 steps themselves; it has to do with the camaraderie. It’s a supportive organization with people who are on the whole kind to you, and it gives you a structure. Some people can make a lot of use of that. And to its credit, AA describes itself as a brotherhood rather than a treatment.
So as you can imagine, a few people given that kind of setting are able to change their behavior at least temporarily, maybe permanently. But most people can’t deal with their addiction, which is deeply driven, by just being in a brotherhood.
And it’s a terrible shame that AA has such a great reputation; it’s tragic that most people think it does work, and that courts tell addicts to go there.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
From Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature, chapter 8, Inner Demons, section on dominance:
The psychologists Jim Sidanius and Felicia Pratto have proposed that people, to varying degrees, harbor a motive they call social dominance, though a more intuitive term is tribalism: the desire that social groups be organized into a hierarchy, generally with one’s own group dominant over the others.¹ A social dominance orientation, they show, inclines people to a sweeping array of opinions and values, including patriotism, racism, fate, karma, caste, national destiny, militarism, toughness on crime, and defensiveness of existing arrangements of authority and inequality. An orientation away from social dominance, in contrast, inclines people to humanism, socialism, feminism, universal rights, progressivism, and the egalitarian and pacifist themes in the Christian Bible.
¹Social dominance: Pratto et al., 2006; Sidanius & Pratto, 2009.
It interests me what a thorough match that is for me (and, probably, most of you, or you wouldn’t be reading this blog). I dislike all the items in the first list, and favor all the items in the second (except for the Xian bible part). I do dislike social dominance and/or tribalism, and the qualities and “virtues” that apparently go with it.
I think it would be a better world if more people did.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Some of Bill Cosby’s accusers are fighting back.
Two women who have accused Bill Cosby of historical sex offences have joined a defamation action against the star.
The original case was filed in December by Tamara Green, who has accused Cosby of assaulting her in the 1970s.
The two new plaintiffs are Therese Serignese and Linda Traitz.
The women claim the comedian publicly called them liars through statements issued by his representatives. Cosby is facing a series of accusations, which he has called “unsubstantiated”.
The women’s lawyer, Joseph Cammarata, said the civil action allows them to have their allegations heard now criminal statutes of limitation have expired.
…
Ms Green, who first spoke out regarding her allegations in 2005, said in her claim that [Cosby’s publicist David} Brokaw had made statements intended to expose her to public contempt and ridicule.
Well that’s what you do when you’re a rich and famous tv star accused of drugging and raping a slew of women – you do your best to expose them to public contempt and ridicule, by way of discrediting their testimony.
Ms Serignese and Ms Traitz, from Florida, allege in the amended complaint that when they came forward in November last year, Mr Singer issued responses for Cosby that said they were lying.
Best known as Dr Cliff Huxtable on The Cosby Show from 1984 to 1992, the 77-year-old comedian is facing a number of allegations dating back to the 1970s.
The accusations, which he has described as “fantastical” and “uncorroborated”, have led to some of his stand-up shows being called off and the cancellation of some TV projects.
Cosby has not been charged in connection with any of the allegations.
I look forward to hundreds of Irish blog posts explaining that the police have not arrested Cosby and therefore the BBC is smearing him.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
From a conversation Chris Stedman had with Phil Zuckerman about the rise in “nones” in the US and whether or not the pugnacity of people like Dawkins and Bill Maher is the chief cause:
CS: What are some of the most important things nontheists can do right now to support the growing number of nonreligious Americans? What should we prioritize?
PZ: In my opinion, the best thing atheists can do right now is to make the world a better place. That means fighting inequality, racism, sexism, homophobia, religious fundamentalism, and global warming. When life is hard—when people face suffering—religion tends to be strong; it offers comfort in the face of life’s troubles. But when life is more manageable and secure, people can find meaning and purpose in the here and now.
To put it more crudely: when life is shit, religion has a chance. When life is better, people have less need for religion. Better things are better. It’s better for people to have better lives, and the decline of religion would be a good side effect of that. The really important bit though is the betterness of more people having better lives.
We also need to bring in more voices into the secular tent: more people of color, more people from differing political viewpoints, more families with children.
More women. That’s a big one, because we’re half. If you leave us out, you’re leaving out half. Don’t leave out half.
But we have been making progress: Twenty years ago, if you wanted to find a community of secular humanists, it wasn’t always so easy, especially if you weren’t in a big city. Or didn’t just want to hang out in a room with ten whites guys in Members Only jackets and glasses with ugly frames. Today, the diversity of a plethora of options for finding secular community is truly amazing.
And would be even more so if there weren’t such an ugly pushback going on.
Finally, we need to help our secular brothers and sisters in regions of the world where being secular isn’t so easy. They desperately need our support.
Yes they do. You can find quite a few of them right here on this blog network.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Alistair McBay suggests that charity work should be done because it’s a good thing to do, not as a way to justify arbitrary privileges.
Recently some Christian leaders in Scotland angered at secularists challenging their privileges have responded by pointing out the National Secular Society and other secular groups don’t run care homes, or operate food banks, or run adoption agencies. Secularists have been the target of this ill-informed sniping from both the Free Church of Scotland and the Church of Scotland, and Anglican and Catholic leaders have made similar attacks in the past.
It’s a familiar trope. “You rage-bloggers aren’t out there bagging up groceries for war refugees so shut up!” You can plug in any terms you like in order to jab at anyone you don’t like. What did you do in the war Daddy; Dear Muslima; first world problems; professional victims; yadda yadda. It’s not always wholly unreasonable, but most of the time it’s mostly unreasonable. Use sparingly if at all.
The NSS is not a registered charity, it is a not-for-profit campaigning organisation. It would be more accurate for the churches to compare us not with themselves, but to the Christian not-for-profit think-tank Ekklesia, which is also a campaigning group, not a registered charity, and doesn’t run care homes or food banks.
And that kind of distinction applies to so many things. Journalists aren’t firefighters; musicians aren’t doctors; engineers aren’t charity administrators. Different people do different things. Lots of things need doing. We get to choose.
I know of no secular charity that prostitutes its charitable works as justification for retaining special privilege in society – that seems to be the sole prerogative of some religious groups. All over the UK, every day of the year, people of all religious beliefs and none perform selfless works and activities to raise funds for those worse off in some way, or give up their valuable personal time as volunteers to make better the lives of others less fortunate. Yet the only people who consistently brag (sorry, bear witness) about what they do in this regard are church leaders looking to leverage this work in exchange for power and privilege, and to champion their allegedly superior belief system.
I suppose they want to think their allegedly superior belief system is good for something.
Of course many secularists donate or support charities run by religious groups, including the many secularists who are also believers. How wonderful it would be if Christian leaders could continue the good work that their churches and congregations do because they are just good people with a human desire to help others, and did so without using it as a bargaining chip for special favour and influence.
Yet in its own way the NSS funds charitable organisations and activity. For example, we may not run schools or provide shelters for battered women, but our annual Secularist of the Year fund has recognised and rewarded charities such as Plan UK which supports the education of girls and young women around the world, an award we made in recognition of the wonderful example of Malala Yousafzai. We also continue to support secular groups such as the Southall Black Sisters, who do such sterling work on behalf of victims of domestic abuse in the UK’s black and minority ethnic communities and challenge the religious dogma which contributes to their marginalisation. And we could do so much more of this if only we didn’t pay our taxes in full and enjoyed the tax breaks and regular Government handouts the churches receive.
I have yet to see any church leader comment that the £15m handed out in the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement for church roof repairs would be better spent directly providing a happier Christmas for many of the homeless. And this, remember, is on top of the £42m Listed Places of Worship Grants Scheme, which provides funding amongst other things for auto-winding turret clocks, pipe organs and bells and bell ropes!
See? That’s the danger of this “why don’t you do _______ instead of what you are doing?” trope – it can be applied to almost anyone; it’s a gun that fires backward.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
There’s an event in Oslo at the end of this month that looks extraordinary, and it seems to be somewhat under-publicized. It’s called World Woman, and the list of speakers and performers is jaw-dropping in its richness and geographic breadth. It’s organized by Deeyah Khan’s group Fuuse.
Deeyah says it will be a mehfil:
“When I was growing up, I experienced the warmth and vitality of a great South Asian cultural institution – the mehfil – a spirited, informal gathering in an intimate, salon-style setting. In these hospitable mehfils, the guests listened to music and poetry, held impassioned discussions about the significant issues affecting the world and, most importantly, celebrated and connected with each other. I remember them as nights of great brilliance and inspiration, conversations and performances. This is what I want to bring to Oslo on a cold winter’s night – the joy, spirit and warmth of the mehfil, bringing together heroes of activism and art, to share, to eat, to drink, to talk, connect and enjoy….” - Deeyah Khan, curator & founder of WORLD WOMAN
What is World Woman?
WORLD WOMAN is an intimate global gathering of solidarity in Oslo — a convening of courageous and creative women. They are defenders of freedom of expression, campaigners for gender equality, peace, justice and human rights; they are known and unknown activists, artists, journalists, leaders, policymakers, scholars, and changemakers.
The participants are activists and artists who have found the compassion and strength to speak about the needs and reality of people who are suffering. Sometimes risking their own lives and livelihoods in the defence of individual freedom and equality, they give voice to the marginalised, the excluded, the silenced.
This gathering is a gesture of solidarity with these remarkable women, and a tribute to their bravery and their achievements. It is an opportunity to hear their stories, to experience their artistic expression and to develop dialogue across cultures and disciplines in order to strengthen our own voices and protect theirs.
The topics:
WORLD WOMAN will unfold over two days of talk and performance at Riksscenen in Oslo. The underlying theme of WORLD WOMAN 2015 is Freedom Of Expression.
On the 30th of January 2015, we will explore freedom of expression; women, art and activism; and the rise of violent extremism and jihadism.
On the 31st of January 2015, we will explore women and peace, women under occupation, violence against women, and the crisis of masculinity
Both days will finish with an evening concert
Check out the people who will be there.
Just the top row –
Nawal El Saadawi
Nawal El Saadawi is an internationally renowned writer, novelist, medical doctor and fighter for women rights. Her writing has influenced five generations of women and men in Egypt, in other Arab speaking countries as well as in many other societies, …
Shirin Ebadi
Shirin Ebadi is an Iranian lawyer, writer and human rights activist and founder of Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran. In 2003, she became the first Iranian to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her significant and pioneering …
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Let’s have something beneficent for the end of the day. (Well, end of the blogging day where I am. It’s morning in other places.) NPR tells us of a woman who climbed the corporate ladder and then hopped off it to do something helpful.
When Srirupa Dasgupta came to the U.S. from India to attend college in the mid-1980s, she was determined to work in high-tech, not the restaurant industry. But today, she owns a small restaurant and catering service in Lancaster, Pa., and employs primarily refugees who might have trouble finding work elsewhere.
She did work in high tech, but then she got tired of it. She was being an executive coach, and then
in 2008 she heard Nobel Peace Prize recipient Muhammad Yunus speak about for-profit businesses that also have a social objective.
…
In 2010, Dasgupta opened Upohar as a catering business with a social mission of hiring refugees and others, such as homeless people, who have difficulty finding work. Last April she expanded and opened a restaurant. Employees are paid double the minimum wage, which is $7.25 an hour in Pennsylvania.
Tulsha Chauwan is a chef at the restaurant. Her family fled Bhutan in South Asia and then spent years in a refugee camp in Nepal before the U.S. granted permission to come here. Her favorite dish to make is eggplant tarkari, a dish that’s special to her because her mother taught her to make it.
Dasgupta says Chauwan was very shy at first, but now she’s bringing in new recipes regularly, hoping her boss will put them on the menu.
Rachel Bunkete is lead chef at Upohar and has her own favorite dish to cook: peanut stew. She learned how to make it growing up in the Democratic Republic of Congo in Central Africa.
In 2008 she fled the political, ethnic and religious conflicts there. Bunkete had to leave behind her husband and three children. Eventually she got permission to come to the U.S. Here she was able to make contact with her family again.
She’s saving money from her job to bring her family over.
It’s good to read about people like Srirupa Dasgupta in among all the killers and tormenters.
H/t Kausik.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
For more from the Annals of Inappropriate Royal Influence, we get the BBC deciding to postpone its new documentary on Charles Windsor’s efforts to spin the press, after some royal lawyers oozed up to them in the canteen and leaned heavily on their shoulders. Jessica Elgot reports in the HuffPo UK:
According to the Radio Times, the documentary, presented by former Panorama editor Steve Hewlett, was pulled from the 9pm slot on Sunday’s schedule after lawyers “known to represent senior members of the royal family” had made contact.
Reinventing The Royals is described on the corporation’s website as a “two-part series about the twenty-year battle between the monarchy and the media – the first family and the fourth estate – over personal privacy and public image”.
I guess now we need another documentary on the battle between the monarchy and the media over showing a documentary about the battle between the monarchy and the media. Maybe there can be an infinite loop.
A statement from the corporation said: “The BBC is delaying broadcast of the documentary Reinventing The Royals, due to be shown on BBC Two on January 4, until later in the New Year while a number of issues including the use of archive footage are resolved.”
How fraffly kind and deferential of them. It wouldn’t do for the royals to be subject to too much public scrutiny. Their job is to spend other people’s money and live in luxury, not to be questioned or criticized by the peasants.
Anti-monarchy campaign Republic have said they will write to James Harding, the BBC’s head of news and current affairs, to seek clarification on why the documentary has been postponed.
Republic’s spokesman Graham Smith, said: “The decision to delay broadcast of this documentary looks like undue pressure and interference that would not be tolerated if it were from Cameron or Miliband.
“At best the BBC might make a quick edit to avoid libelling someone – but delaying the broadcast so it can discuss the content of a documentary with its principal subject is unacceptable.
“The BBC has a responsibility to the public to show no fear or favour in its reporting. Prince Charles is in line to be Britain’s head of state – he must be subjected to the same standards of media scrutiny as any politician.
“The BBC and other broadcasters are far too deferential to the royals. It’s time they began to treat them in the same way they treat politicians and other public officials.”
That’s how it seems to me. I dislike all this bowing and scraping, this jumping when a royal says jump. It’s demeaning. Plus it only encourages Charles to think he’s a fine amateur doctor.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
