There are other critics of the word “Islamophobia”

Jan 21st, 2012 4:44 pm | By

There was that statement by 12 writers in Charlie Hebdo in 2006 for instance. It includes this:

Islamism is a reactionary ideology that kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present.

Its victory can only lead to a world of injustice and domination: men over women, fundamentalists over others.

On the contrary, we must ensure access to universal rights for the oppressed or those discriminated against.

We reject the “cultural relativism” which implies an acceptance that men and women of Muslim culture are deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secularism in the name of the respect for certain cultures and traditions.

We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of “Islamophobia”, a wretched concept that confuses criticism of Islam as a religion and stigmatisation of those who believe in it.

We defend the universality of the freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit can exist in every continent, towards each and every maltreatment and dogma.

The signatories are:

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Chahla Chafiq

Caroline Fourest

Bernard-Henri Levy

Irshad Manji

Mehdi Mozaffari

Maryam Namazie

Taslima Nasreen

Salman Rushdie

Antoine Sfeir

Philippe Val

Ibn Warraq

There’s also Piers Benn in the New Humanist in 2002, a whole article on the subject.

‘Islamophobia’ is a negatively loaded word. Not many people would admit to being Islamophobic, any more than they would admit to being homophobic. [Indeed, there is an interesting parallel between the two concepts. Although 'homophobia' really means fear of homosexuals, it is now widely used to refer to any criticism of homosexuality. Many who use the word appear oblivious to the distinction between the fear (or hatred) of homosexual individuals, and disapproval of homosexual behaviour. Of course, one might argue that language evolves and words change their meaning. But this misses the point. There is a real distinction to be made here, which needs to be reflected in language. With Islamophobia, the same applies.]* It is essential to distinguish criticism of Islam both from fear of Islam, and from fear, hatred or contempt for Muslims. But all too often, moral criticism of Muslim practices, or scepticism about doctrines, is dismissed as Islamophobic.

This is what I’m saying. What I’m saying is not particularly crazy.

*An unfortunate side point which I strongly doubt Benn meant the way a number of readers are taking it – but which certainly can be read that way, so it was indeed an unfortunate side point – and which has led to a tedious side dispute along with irritating demands for confession and prostration. I should have replaced it with an elipse. I didn’t, because that would have made his argument a little too abrupt, in the sense that he wouldn’t have written it that way. Mea culpa. Take the brackets as a disavowal. I do not, as some ungracious pastors do, love teh gayz but hate the behavior. I don’t think Benn does either and I don’t think that’s what he meant to say – but I know it reads that way, which is why I thought about replacing it with an elipse when I posted. I do hope that clears things up.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



The organisers have refused to hand over the tapes

Jan 21st, 2012 3:33 pm | By

The police are still policing the writers who read from The Satanic Verses at the Jaipur festival yesterday.

A day after author Salman Rushdie made it clear that he would not be coming to India, alleging that he was told that underworld hitmen were out to get him, the raging debate at the Jaipur Literature Festival is still on. The police have now asked for the tape recordings of author Amitava Kumar reading out excerpts from Mr Rushdie’s controversial book – Satanic Verses – which is illegal in India. The organisers of the event, however, have refused to hand over the tapes.

Authors Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar, as a mark of protest, used their session at the festival to read from Satanic Verses. Later, authors Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi also read out from the banned book. “We asked organisers today to provide us details and video footage of a session in which the book was allegedly read,” Jaipur Police Additional Commissioner Biju George Joseph said.

“We will examine whether the alleged reading from the banned book was done. It is a suo motu action. After examining the matter, appropriate action would be taken against those who were found guilty,” he said.

Pathetic.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Hank Fox’s book

Jan 21st, 2012 10:06 am | By

I’m reading Hank Fox’s book Blue Collar Atheist - and it’s fantastic.

He has me choking up on one page, then giggling on the next, then shrieking with laughter on the next. He’s a genius with metaphors. I love love love this book.

Some good lines -

…we live in a society so permeated by goddiness that the idea that there might not be a God seems perversely even more mystical. [p 5]

On the emancipation of escaping the entanglement of religion and the peace that goes with it:

It was the peace of understanding that, while there might be quite a lot of the world unknown to me, there was nothing purposely concealed. [p 14]

I love that. It’s exactly what I think: the hiding cheating lying tricking aspect of the putative god is one of the things that I hate the most.

There’s an absolutely brilliant bit about candy bars and explanation, that culiminates with the mystery of M&Ms – that was the bit that got a window-rattling shriek of laughter from me this morning.

Tell all your friends. Seriously.

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



The UN plans to make everybody gay!!11!

Jan 21st, 2012 9:35 am | By

And then there are those zany Spanish bishops.

During his Boxing Day sermon, the Bishop of Córdoba, Demetrio Fernández, said there was a conspiracy by the United Nations. “The Minister for Family of the Papal Government, Cardinal Antonelli, told me a few days ago in Zaragoza that UNESCO has a program for the next 20 years to make half the world population homosexual. To do this they have distinct programs, and will continue to implant the ideology that is already present in our schools.”

Wheeeeeee! Demetrio Fernández must have a whole wardrobe full of tinfoil hats.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



A big win for theocracy

Jan 21st, 2012 9:26 am | By

So Egypt is doomed. Islamists control two thirds of the seats in the People’s Assembly. In other words, the Assembly is in the hands of avowed theocrats.

The final results in Egypt’s first post-Mubarak parliamentary elections confirm an overwhelming victory for Islamist parties.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) won the largest number of seats under Egypt’s complex electoral system.

The hardline Salafist Nour party came second.

The overall results mean that Islamist parties control around two-thirds of the seats in the assembly, though the final share out of seats is not yet known.

It’s a disaster.

Check out some Islamists in Derby.

Ihjaz Ali, 42, Kabir Ahmed, 28, and Razwan Javed, 27, were found guilty of stirring up hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation.

They distributed a leaflet entitled Death Penalty? at a mosque and through letterboxes, Derby Crown Court heard.

The court heard the leaflets showed an image of a wooden mannequin hanging from a noose and quoted Islamic texts. The leaflets said capital punishment was the only way to rid society of homosexuality. They were handed out near the Jaima Mosque on Rosehill Street, Derby, and put through the letterboxes of people’s homes in surrounding streets. The court heard the leaflets were made and used as part of a campaign to publicise a protest in response to the Gay Pride festival held on 10 July 2010 in Derby.

By saying that gay people should be executed.

The men admitted distributing the leaflet but said they were simply following and quoting what their religion taught them about homosexuality and did not intend to threaten anyone.

Yes see that’s completely incoherent. “Simply” following and quoting what their religion taught them about homosexuality is indeed to threaten “anyone” when what their religion teaches them about homosexuality is that people should be executed for it. It’s not an escape clause or an “oh that’s all right then” or a decency stipulation to say “oh that’s just my religion.” Egypt’s Islamists can say exactly the same thing only now they have their hands on the power of the state so they can put the threat into practice. We don’t get to say “Oh well but they won’t do that” – not with the example of Iran to look at.

One gay man, who gave evidence but cannot be identified for legal reasons, said he received the Turn Or Burn and Death Penalty? leaflets through the door of his home on two occasions.

He said the first leaflet, Turn Or Burn, made him feel “quite horrified” and it was after he received Death Penalty? that he called the police.

“They made me feel terrorised in my own home,” he said.

“Sometimes I wondered whether I would be getting a burning rag through the letterbox or if I would be attacked in the street.”

The unfortunate people of Egypt won’t have the option of calling the police when the Islamists start to close in on them.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Mr Rushdie regrets

Jan 20th, 2012 1:41 pm | By

More on Rushdie not in Jaipur.

Times of India:

Two prominent authors on Friday read out portions from Salman Rushdie’s banned book “Satanic Verses” at the Jaipur Literature Festival as a mark of protest after the India-born author had to pull out of the event over security concerns.

As the literary community expressed outrage over Rushdie not being able to make the trip, Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar used their session at the festival to read from “Satanic Verses”. The controversial book was banned in the country shortly after it was published in 1988, for allegedly hurting the sentiments of Muslims.

Love those guys.

The organizers later asked Kumar not to go ahead with his reading. Kumar initially agreed to the suggestion but later continued reading from Rushdie’s work.

Later, authors Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi also read from the Satanic Verses.

The BBC:

Author Salman Rushdie has withdrawn from India’s biggest literary festival, saying that he feared assassination after influential Muslim clerics protested against his participation.

The author had been due to speak at the Jaipur literature festival.

He said he had been told by sources that assassins “may be on the way to Jaipur to kill me”.

Wait for it -

Salman Rushdie sparked anger in the Muslim world with his book The Satanic Verses, which many see as blasphemous.

There it is. Wouldn’t do not to have that.

The author had been scheduled to speak on the opening day of the five-day Jaipur event which began on Friday, but earlier this week organisers said his schedule had changed and took his name off the list of speakers.

“I have now been informed by intelligence sources in Maharashtra and Rajasthan that paid assassins from the Mumbai underworld may be on their way to Jaipur to ‘eliminate’ me,” Salman Rushdie said in a statement read out at the festival.

“While I have some doubts about the accuracy of this intelligence, it would be irresponsible of me to come to the festival in such circumstances; irresponsible to my family, to the festival audience and to my fellow writers,” he added.

“I will therefore not travel to Jaipur as planned.”

Correspondents say the protests against this year’s planned trip are linked to crucial state elections due in Uttar Pradesh.

Correspondents say no political party wants to antagonise the Muslim community, which constitutes 18% of voters in the state, India’s largest.

Notice that correspondents apparently assume that Muslims can be seen as a solid bloc or a “community” which thinks and votes as one. Somewhat “Islamophobic,” that.

 

 

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



No longer a “safe space”

Jan 20th, 2012 11:52 am | By

Alex Gabriel reports another front in the battle against “Islamophobia” (meaning, in the battle against any and all criticism or mockery of Islam). This time it’s LSE’s Student Union hassling LSE’s student atheist society. It has to do with the atheist society’s Facebook page not being a “safe space” for Muslim students.

What?

Well don’t look at me, it’s not my idea. It’s what they were told:

Here’s part of the e-mail I got today from the society, who’ve just met with their union to discuss the issues:

Essentially, a large of group of Muslim students felt offended that there were pictures of Mohammed on the facebook group. As a result, they felt that our facebook group was no longer a ‘safe space’ for Muslims. Thus, they have ‘requested’ that we remove the offending images. Until an official complaint procedure is completed they cannot mandate we take it down. However, they made it pretty clear that would be the next step should we choose to keep the images.

Was the atheist society’s Facebook page ever intended to be a “safe space” for Muslims? Is that the point of such societies – to be “safe spaces” for their opposites? Aren’t people allowed to be X without also having to be a “safe space” for anyone who disagrees with them?

No no and yes. It’s just a new way to bully people you don’t like – conflate a difference in world view with a personal assault.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



These crimes happen everywhere in the world

Jan 20th, 2012 10:26 am | By

Speaking of “Islamophobia,” as we were, we can always count on the Guardian for lashings of Islamophilia. David Shariatmadari tells us the University of East Anglia is going to set everyone straight on women, Islam, and the media. I bet you can figure out what’s coming.

Women, Islam and the media are topics often found in close conjunction, and not always in the happiest of circumstances. So in a canny move, the University of East Anglia (UEA), which often gives better-known institutions a run for their money in terms of column inches, has developed a course entitled exactly that.

The 12-week module, which the university claims is the first of its kind in the UK, will cover the often inflammatory topics of veil wearing, arranged marriage and “honour” crimes – looking at how they are portrayed in contemporary film, TV and other media, and how this reflects cultural biases in both the east and west.

Ahhhh yes, those pesky cultural biases in “the west,” the ones that think systematic subordination of women is a bad thing.

The course was developed by Dr Eylem Atakav, a graduate of Ankara University and lecturer at UEA. “Lots of people have written about women and Islam, lots of people have written about Islam and media or women and media, but they haven’t been brought together before,” she said.

Atakav said the course would be an important way of changing perceptions of Islam. Study materials include films and TV programmes from around the world, including Iran, the US, Turkey and China. “We will look at how the media talk about ‘honour’-based violence, for example. If it’s a Middle Eastern woman who happens also to be a Muslim woman it’s called an ‘honour crime’. But if it’s a British woman who was killed because her husband was jealous because she was having an affair with another man, it’s called murder.

“These crimes happen everywhere in the world, it’s not just a Muslim, or just a Middle Eastern thing.”

But if it’s a British woman who was killed because her husband was jealous because she was having an affair with another man, does the killer or anyone else talk about “honour”? Would the same woman’s father or mother or brother or son help the husband kill her in the name of protecting the family’s “honour”? Would their friends turn a blind eye or cheer them on, because a woman who has an affair is a stain on the whole “community”?

The article doesn’t say.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Muscle v truth and humour

Jan 20th, 2012 8:42 am | By

Salman Rushdie stayed away from the Jaipur Literary Festival because of threats. So, defying the organizers of the festival, Hari Kunzru and Amitava Kumar read from The Satanic Verses, then Jeet Thayil and Ruchir Joshi joined them.

And then what happened? According to Stephanie Nolen, South Asia correspondent for the Globe and Mail, who is at the festival and tweeting from and about it, the four writers are being investigated by the police. Since she tweeted that from the festival, it must mean that the cops were “investigating” the writers up close and personal, right then and there.

I get all this via the invaluable Salil Tripathi (#FF!), who said at Facebook about an hour ago:

Stephanie Nolen has tweeted that the authors who read from The Satanic Verses (Hari, Amitava, Ruchir, Jeet) are to be investigated by Rajasthan’s finest. Many of my friends reading this are in Jaipur, some as writers, some as participants. Overwhelm the cops; hope more and more of you read publicly from the novel, and shame the state further. Deoband and the state may have the muscle – the writers have truth, humour, and Gandhi on their side.

Go, writers. Rock the world. Push back.

Update

Subir Ghosh reports a press release that he got from Kavita K Bhaskaran, Senior Vice President, Sampark, the PR agency running the Jaipur festival:

This press release is being issued on behalf of the organizers of the Jaipur Literature Festival. It has come to their attention that certain delegates acted in a manner during their sessions today which were without the prior knowledge or consent of the organizers. Any views expressed or actions taken by these delegates are in no manner endorsed by the Jaipur Literature Festival. Any comments made by the delegates reflect their personal, individual views and are not endorsed by the Festival or attributable to its organizers or anyone acting on their behalf. The Festival organizers are fully committed to ensuring compliance of all prevailing laws and will continue to offer their fullest cooperation to prevent any legal violation of any kind. Any action by any delegate or anyone else involved with the Festival that in any manner falls foul of the law will not be tolerated and all necessary, consequential action will be taken. Our endeavor has always been to provide a platform to foster an exchange of ideas and the love of literature, strictly within the four corners of the law. We remain committed to this objective.

So much for solidarity in defense of free expression.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Are you now or have you ever been an Islamophobe

Jan 19th, 2012 4:15 pm | By

The UCL Atheist, Secularist and Humanist Society put out a statement today. They’re tired of the whole thing and don’t want to talk about it any more.

What makes a student society is the ability to be open, foster community and – most importantly – encourage critical debate. The principal objective of our Society is to maintain a sceptical view on everything, be it astrology, numerology or theism. I am personally a strong believer of freedom of speech and I believe that it is a vitally important freedom to maintain. Freedom of speech guarantees the space for intellectual discourse, and in that space, people should be able to say what they want, without being afraid of censorship on the grounds of offence.

In other words – thank you so much for your valuable input, Ahmadiyya Male Muslim Youth Association UK, but we’ll take it from here. We would actually like to run our organization in a way that fits with our reasons for belonging to it in the first place rather than according to your reasons for wanting to kick up a fuss. We’re terrifically grateful for your energetic – indeed, truth be told, rather insistent – offers to help, but we think we know better how to run our own organization than you do. We would draw your attention to that lack of input from us on how you should run your organization; there’s a reason for that.

By our publication of this image there was no intention to offend and i am sorry to hear that people took personal offence when viewing it. However, ‘offence’ was certainly inadequate grounds for the removal of the image to be requested by the UCL Union. Their policies need clarification to prevent this same situation from arising in the future.

Yes they do.

Meanwhile, in case anyone’s blood pressure should fall dangerously low, the LSE Students Union has leapt into the breach created by the UCL ASH’s retirement. The LSE Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society has also put out a statement.

Today we were contacted by the LSE Students Union to “discuss some of the issues around recent postings on facebook etc.”

We think this might have to do with the accusations of “Islamophobia” that were levelled against us during Thursday 19th Union General Meeting after some “Jesus and Mo” cartoons were posted on our facebook group and Marshall Palmer posted an article on his blog about the cartoon controversy at UCL.

Any accusation of “Islamophobia” against the LSE SU Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society are baseless. We will be meeting SU officials tomorrow 20th to discuss this issue.

And so the secret police continue their vital work.

 

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



More from the bully boyz

Jan 19th, 2012 11:51 am | By

And then we drop in on the Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association UK – which is actually not a “youth association” at all because it addresses members as “Brothers,” so clearly it’s only for male youth. Anyway we drop in on it and find its views on how to get more deference and obedience from people who don’t share its religious commitments.

You should all now be aware that we have been running a campaign over the past week in response to the decision take by Atheist Society of UCL to post a cartoon depicting the Holy Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the Holy Prophet Jesus (as) having a beer (God forbid) at a pub frequented by some of the UCL students.

To defend the honour of our beloved Prophets, a press release was issued along with a number of articles. Our message to the UCL Atheist Society was simply that they should use their right to ”freedom of speech” in a responsible way which demonstrates both tolerance and respect.

The voice of the goombah bully boy again. The voice of the thug smacking a club against the palm of his hand in a threatening manner. “Hey you: use your ‘freedom of speech’ [pause to spit on the ground] in a responsible way or you might be getting a visit from us. Demonstrate tolerance and respect or we’ll make things hot for you. When we say ‘respect’ we mean do whatever we say as soon as we say it; that’s respect. We hope we don’t have to remind you of this again.”

All this for the sake of “defending the honour” of a couple of guys who have been dead for many centuries.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



London 11 February 2012 – defend free expression

Jan 19th, 2012 11:02 am | By

Maryam says HOLD THE DATE:

One Law for All is calling for a rally in defence of free expression and the right to criticise religion on 11 February 2012 in central London from 2-4pm.

We are also calling for simultaneous events and acts in defence of free expression on 11 February in countries world-wide.

The call follows an increased number of attacks on free expression in the UK, including a 17 year old being forced to remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon or face expulsion from his Sixth Form College and demands by the UCL Union that the Atheist society remove a Jesus and Mo cartoon from its Facebook page. It also follows threats of violence, police being called, and the cancellation of a meeting at Queen Mary College where One Law for All spokesperson Anne Marie Waters was to deliver a speech on Sharia. Saying ‘Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?’, an Islamist website called for the disruption of the meeting. Two days later at the same college, though, the Islamic Society held a meeting on traditional Islam with a speaker who has called for the death of apostates, those who mock Islam, and secularist Muslims.

Read the rest at Maryam’s.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



History has told us that these things cause offence

Jan 19th, 2012 9:56 am | By

The president of UCL’s Atheist, Secularist and Humanist society, Robbie Yellon, has stepped down to be replaced by former vice president Michael Thor. Yellon quit because of all this mishegas about the Jesus and Mo image.

“Robbie stepped aside because he signed up as president to organise events and run a student society,” said Michael Paynter, secretary for the National Federation of Atheist, Humanist and Secular Student Societies.

“He did not appreciate the stress he would be under when dealing with a controversy like this, so he wanted to make way for someone else.”

A small but no doubt pleasant victory for the shit-stirrers. The BBC goes on to make the shit-stirrer case.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Association is continuing with its protest against the image, saying it has wider implications.

Adam Walker, the association’s national spokesperson, said the two student groups had worked well together in the past and said the offence was unnecessary.

“The principle is more important than who is being attacked – this time it is Muslims and Christians* but in the future it could be atheists themselves.

“There is no need to print these things other than to cause offence and history has told us that these things cause offence.”

That is such an interesting idea, or not so much idea as trap. People have pitched huge violent rageboy fits in the past over what they chose to consider “offence”; therefore history shows that what rageboys choose to consider “offence” will be met with huge violent fits; therefore you must never do the thing which rageboys choose to consider “offence”; so just forget about this pesky liberal idea of free debate. It’s an elaborate threat. “Our goombahs have killed people over this stuff in the past, so you know they’ll do it again, so shut your filthy kuffar mouth.”

But at the same time what we’re talking about here is a principle, and it could be atheists next time. It never is, of course, but it could be. We’re all in this together, united for the principle that perceived “offence” trumps freedom of discussion and criticism. In your dreams, Adam Walker.

UCL Union (UCLU) said in a statement: “The atheist society has agreed they will take more consideration when drawing up publicity for future events.

“The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs.”

Yes it did. We saw that statement a couple of days ago, and a very nasty statement it is. A “safe environment” is interpreted as one in which one particular religion is given special treatment.

*Note the lie. It’s not Christians.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Orlando

Jan 18th, 2012 3:13 pm | By

Oh hey, I’m excited now – Jessica Ahlquist is a speaker at the Moving Secularism Forward conference - which is exciting for Me Me Me because so am I. Yip!

The annual joint conference of CFI and the Council for Secular Humanism takes place March 1–4 at the Hyatt Regency in Orlando, FL and includes presentations from Daniel Dennett, Jamila Bey, PZ Myers, Ophelia Benson, David Silverman, Ronald A. Lindsay, and more.

Jessica Ahlquist croppedNew speaker announced: Jessica Ahlquist! Jessica, our volunteer high school coordinator, just won the case against her public high school’s display of a prayer banner. She’s participating in a Saturday morning session on “Outreach and Advocacy Strategies” moderated by campus organizer Debbie Goddard.

It’s fun having teenage heroes. Makes a person feel optimistic.

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?

Jan 18th, 2012 1:10 pm | By

And then there’s this “Urgent – Calling all muslims” at Islamicawakening on Monday -

Brothers, the Queen Mary Athiest Society, sister of the shaytaani UCL Athiest Society (which published pictures of Rasoolullah(saw)) are holding an event today at Queen Mary University of London at 7:00 pm on ‘ Is Shariah in violation of human rights’.. We need your presence. Who gave these kuffar the right to speak?

The kuffar have no right to speak, at a university in London. That’s an interesting thought. Also the comment addresses “Brothers” – so apparently “all muslims” actually means only half of all muslims – and then the “kuffar” who was speaking at Queen Mary that evening is a woman, so her right to speak is even more non-existent.

Let me ask you – if a bunch of kuffar got together and were given the right to touch your mother up and analyse her, then would you stand by and let it happen?

The patriarchal mind at work – “you” are always male, and women are always “yours” as opposed to being you. Men are always the agents and women are always the faceless voiceless objects. That of course is before we even get to the confusion between molesting a human being and disputing a religion.

Then what about your deen?!! Remember, these guys hate religion and are not looking to have an unbiased debate. Please be here by 7 pm. to let them know what we think. Back in my day no-one in UNi would dare even look the wrong way at a muslim, because we used to represent our deen and didnt take kindly to it being insulted. It is only when the pacifists ecame numerous that the kuffar dared to raise their heads.

A bully and a thug.

Update

Via Anne Marie Waters – she and Maryam debated sharia with an Ahmaddiya Muslim at UCL last month, and here that debate is:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTYrjFE6Rcg

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Threat threat threat threat

Jan 18th, 2012 12:53 pm | By

On Rhys Morgan’s (currently very busy) Facebook page – a guy called Safwan Ahmed, a graduate of Rhys’s school, posted to say

take that blog down before i fly kick you!

Rhys said no, Ahmed replied

inappropriate and offensive! take it down before you lose the remaining half of your penis.

Someone tried to tell Ahmed that threats are a serious matter and can be reported to the authorities. Ahmed replied

nah no argument cbf wasting time with u. sorry if you were looking for a rebuttal, i will deal with this matter personally.

More back and forth, culminating in Ahmed’s

hahahahha scott you amuse me in the sense that your a fucking sad prick! look at my avatar? id rather not! go stick your avatar up your ass you lame cunt! Rhys u can stfu i will be seeing u soon!

Helen Dale said she was taking a screenshot, and Safwan Ahmed went silent. Hooray for that, at least – but this is what’s at stake – threats of violence over benign cartoon images on blogs.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Another chorus of “god hates atheists”

Jan 18th, 2012 12:21 pm | By

Steve Ahlquist (Jessica’s uncle) just posted several Youtube videos on the Support the Removal of the Cranston High School West Prayer Facebook page, including this gem of majoritarian bullying (which we have seen before – remember that Mississippi high school?) -

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtULr3eKaQA

 

 

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Jesus and Mo promote peace, tolerance and respect

Jan 18th, 2012 11:39 am | By

A new Jesus and Mo.

bogus

With an apt dedication:

Today’s comic is dedicated to Rhys Morgan, Jessica Ahlquist, One Law for All, and Salman Rushdie. Heroes, all.

Of course, author himself belongs in that company.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



QED

Jan 17th, 2012 5:14 pm | By

Well at least I know exactly what I’m going to talk about at QED. Oh yes. Suddenly as of today there was only one possible topic.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Behold, theocracy in action

Jan 17th, 2012 4:00 pm | By

Ann Marie Waters on last night at Queen Mary College.

This week I was due to give a talk to students at Queen Mary College, London on sharia law and human rights. Rather fittingly – and as if to prove my point – my human rights were quashed by a person demonstrating one of the effects of sharia law; the threat of violence for criticising religion.

Or to put it another way, both are instantiations of theocracy. Both are what you get when you have theocracy. You get god-centered everything, with humans expected to obey the imagined god slavishly and harsh punishments if someone thinks god is being defied.

Just before I was due to start, a young man entered the lecture theatre, stood at the front of the room with a camera and proceeded to film everyone in the audience. That done, he informed us that he knew who we were, where we lived and if he heard a single negative word about the Prophet, he would track us down. (I am told he made further threats as he left the building).

The young man is a theocrat, who thinks god is everything and people are nothing.

I am left wondering what exactly we could have done. I would love to say that we stood up to him and carried on bravely in a valiant defence of free speech, but it was a frightening experience and I know that people felt genuinely threatened and upset. In any case, is it the role of speakers and students to face off against potentially violent Islamists in defence of our free speech, risking our safety in the process? Just whose job is it to defend freedom of speech and can we be expected to fight for it when the state and other powers refuse to back us up?

Hell no. The choice may be forced on us, but it’s not our job. We shouldn’t have to ask theocrats for permission to speak.

Freedom of speech needs to be defended from above. We need prosecution and punishment of those intent on frightening people into staying silent. Until the state speaks out and makes it clear to the likes of this guy that this behaviour is not acceptable – no excuses, no apologies – these things will continue to happen and more and more people will be frightened in to shutting up. We can then say goodbye to freedom for good.

So we have to keep speaking out to make that point, whenever possible without any threatening young men interrupting.

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)