1. Comment #27529 by rory on March 25, 2007 at 7:20 am

In reality it is often fuelled by ethnic or political conflicts and competition for resources, which can be fierce, given that so many people live in poverty, he says.

Because of course it couldn't really be religious differences. Everyone knows it's never religion that's actually at fault. The violence in Northern Ireland? Political. In Iraq? Ethnic. Never religious, no siree.

Other Comments by rory

2. Comment #27539 by Luthien on March 25, 2007 at 7:56 am

I'm just reading "Infidel" at the moment (Ayaan Hirsi Ali), and her description of some of the countries in Africa, and the sort of attitudes people have there, were quite an eye opener. Sadly it seems that things have not changed for the better, only got worse with the amount of Saudi oil money being used to spread their particular brand of Islam.

The thing is, they actually believe that someone who does not "submit to Allah" deserves to die, so it is nothing to do with political, economic, or ethnic differences.

Other Comments by Luthien

3. Comment #27554 by MihaiC on March 25, 2007 at 9:13 am

Nigerian police say students beat the teacher to death outside the school compound after she had been invigilating an exam.

Sooo... who goes to jail for this crime? Surely they must have some law against instigating and encouraging lethal violence.

Other Comments by MihaiC

4. Comment #27555 by waxwings on March 25, 2007 at 9:13 am

"In reality it is often fuelled by ethnic or political conflicts and competition for resources, which can be fierce, given that so many people live in poverty, he says."

Don't you love the hasty addendum to the article? Quick! Add a disclaimer lest religious nuts really flip out and do some violence. We certainly wouldn't want to leave the impression that religion is involved in this instance of insane violence, let alone when it's explicitly given as a reason.

Our coddling of religious nuts is akin to letting the madmen run the asylum. 'Oh, come on now, where's the harm in letting him believe he's Napoleon? Really now, what is the harm in letting him rule the country a bit? We certainly wouldn't want to offend him or deny him the comfort of his delusion, would we?'

I am fucking sick and tired of the suck-up, ass kissing, fawning respect paid to religious nuts and the robed charlatans who lead them

Other Comments by waxwings

5. Comment #27560 by Friend Giskard on March 25, 2007 at 9:30 am

Islam must be destroyed.

Other Comments by Friend Giskard

6. Comment #27588 by fonex_86 on March 25, 2007 at 1:31 pm

Common lip-service to religious schmuck:

"I may not share your beliefs, but I respect them".

*QUACK-O-SP33K Translator v.2.3*

"I may not share your beliefs, but I respect your perceived right to stab, rape, maim, behead, burn, and/or kick the asses of others, especially those who disagree with you".

Gee, I guess that includes me...

Other Comments by fonex_86

7. Comment #27589 by Pantore on March 25, 2007 at 1:33 pm

Rofl, the ignorance it's appalling.

Other Comments by Pantore

8. Comment #27623 by Veronique on March 25, 2007 at 5:49 pm

You know I always viewed the interminable infestation of Christian missionaries in non Christian countries as disgusting in the extreme even though they purported and, in various ways, did set up health, education, clothing of the old body etc. among the 'heathens'.

To extrapolate - the Muslims did the same all over the middle east and down into Africa, except they used the sword a bit more liberally. I have been reading about the early life and times of Ethiopia and of Axum in particular. The spread of both these religions has been attended by the most revolting practices.

Fear has to be the most manipulated emotion ever. I think it is Harris who says to try and put yourself into the shoes of a muslim and actually believe that it is your duty to kill anyone who refuses to convert to Islam.

BTW - apparently there was a mistranslation of 72 virgins awaiting the muslim martyr in paradise (a bit like the mistranslation in the Babble from 'young woman' to 'virgin'). This time the 72 refers to a handful of white raisins. Beautiful isn't it?

Cheers
V

Other Comments by Veronique

9. Comment #27626 by mjwemdee on March 25, 2007 at 6:29 pm

goody...i'm rather partial to raisins.

Other Comments by mjwemdee

10. Comment #27649 by the great teapot on March 26, 2007 at 1:41 am

two problems with the title -

1 Dies- why not "is brutally murdered."?

2 more trivially- Nigeria- Why don't people say Nigerian, Spanish etc anymore (particularly on the BBC website- Spain results, France international etc)

Other Comments by the great teapot

11. Comment #27672 by MouthAlmighty on March 26, 2007 at 4:39 am

There was a similar incident in 2003, when Nigerian journalist Isioma Daniel made some inappropriate remarks in an article about the Miss World contest... "What would Mohammed think? He would probably have chosen a wife from one of them."

Her personal account is here...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,896926,00.html

When I browsed through the Google news site I read the fatwa by the Zamfara state government through their spokesperson, Mamuda Aliyu Shinkaf. "Like Salman Rushdie, the blood of Isioma Daniel can be shed. It is abiding on all Muslims wherever they are to consider the killing of the writer as a religious duty." I felt calm. It was then I realised that there was no going back to Nigeria.

200 people died in the riots, but of course this was also probably "fuelled by ethnic or political conflicts and competition for resources" so - nowt to worry about there then.

Other Comments by MouthAlmighty

12. Comment #27699 by HunterZolomon on March 26, 2007 at 7:17 am

I agree with previous posters. Articles like this seldom come sans the apologetic note at the end. It's as if some possible truths are so offensive and unwanted that they are censored before even a discussion has taken place. People will bend over backwards to absolve religion it seems.

72 raisins? Worth it!

Other Comments by HunterZolomon

13. Comment #27716 by cosmos1 on March 26, 2007 at 10:19 am

It's not only Islam that needs to be destroyed (Friend Giskard)it is all religion. 'Destroyed' however has overtones of violence whether deserved or not. We have to find a way of educating the CHILDREN, reaching them in some way. If we can do that religion will die out on it's own.

Other Comments by cosmos1

14. Comment #27719 by Steven Mading on March 26, 2007 at 10:25 am

While it is true that a common term for virgin and the word for white raisin are the same (much like the English word "cherry"), many other passages (other than the one that gives the number 72) do give explicit descriptions of the virgins one will be rewarded with in heaven that are not abmiguous and do use other terms for virgin than the "white raisin" term. So in theory the argument about "white raisins" not being virgins can only be used to discount the part where it gives a count of 72 of them. So maybe you could use that argument to say the number of virgins one will find in heaven is not really 72 because that passage was talking about raisins. But you can't use it to claim that one is not promised virgins in heaven. It's only the place where a count of 72 is given where this linguistic ambiguity exists. In the other places where the Islamic texts state that one is rewarded with virgins in heaven, there is no such ambiguity.

Other Comments by Steven Mading

15. Comment #27731 by Reg on March 26, 2007 at 11:23 am

They will be assimilated, is I think more suitable. Just don't follow with "we are the Borg". But seriously, I agree with Cosmos1, educating the children in science and maybe explaining that well balanced adults don't feel the need to demand eternity(something I find it difficult to wrap my little mind around, leave alone wanting). Perhaps then the teachers survive to teach the next term. Does anyone suppose that any shame is felt by the Imams/Clerics that indoctrinated these kids? I cannot, as that would suggest them having learned a lesson.

Other Comments by Reg

16. Comment #27811 by Russell Blackford on March 26, 2007 at 10:18 pm

Down with ethnic or political conflicts and competition for resources. (Wow, what a great euphemism for religious fanaticism. I must remember it.)

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

17. Comment #28013 by kkant on March 27, 2007 at 3:27 pm

[[In reality it is often fuelled by ethnic or political conflicts and competition for resources, which can be fierce, given that so many people live in poverty, he says.]]

Several of you have already commented on the wrongness of this part at the end of the article, where the author quickly patches together "alternative explanations" for this clearly *religious* barbarism. Sam Harris is right: religious moderates really don't know what it's like to believe fervently, and consequently they can't believe that others are really motivated by their beliefs.

I used to have such feelings of true belief, so I know what it is like. Actually, I still do have lingering "beliefs" that won't let go, even though I am a complete atheist intellectually. When you are indoctrinated with religion in childhood, the taboos and impulses and some of the instructions get right into the primal levels of your brain. They are right there at the same level as fear and terror and rage and other such primal emotions. For example, I was indoctrinated with the idea that all paper is sacred, and should not be stepped on with your feet. I know now intellectually that this idea is meaningless, that my stepping on a piece of paper has absolutely no bearing or effect on anything. Yet to this day the thought of stepping on some papers that are on the ground induces in me a dread-like feeling, and I won't do it (or I'll feel squeamish doing it). I have no problem with cardboard, but I do with papers or books or anything else that has or could have knowledge on it. This indoctrination is somewhat similar to the anti-desecration doctrine in Islam. And I have no trouble understanding how such desecration can truly and easily induce Muslim-indoctrinated people to commit violence against the perpetrator.

Other Comments by kkant

18. Comment #28322 by Old Coppernose on March 28, 2007 at 6:36 pm

There was a similar incident in 2003, when Nigerian journalist Isioma Daniel made some inappropriate remarks in an article about the Miss World contest... "What would Mohammed think? He would probably have chosen a wife from one of them."

Daniel was clearly wrong. He would have wanted to marry all of them, plus the winner of the Little Miss Under 7 Beauty Pageant in Tampa, Florida.

It's only the place where a count of 72 is given where this linguistic ambiguity exists. In the other places where the Islamic texts state that one is rewarded with virgins in heaven, there is no such ambiguity.

Not only that, as I have stated before, they are promised 28 Ghilman, or young boys. Age is unspecified, but it is said that their faces will "shine like the sun". Mulim potentates often used to keep Ghilman for sexual services. One apparently boasted of having two harems - "One of women for show, and one of boys for use."

Other Comments by Old Coppernose