1. 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love'

Comment #178468 by zoltix on May 11, 2008 at 1:18 pm

mordacious1 (and interested others)

You need to copy the whole of epeeist's link to get to the Telegraph article about the rise in 'honour killings'; only part is highlighted in his posting.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1524023/'Honour-killings'-increasing-in-Britain-as-women-stand-up-for-their-rights.html

2. Muslim Rebel Sisters: At Odds With Islam and Each Other

Comment #175020 by zoltix on May 4, 2008 at 7:09 am

I'm sure that Fanusi doesn't need me to defend him but Vinelectric's dismissal cannot be allowed to pass.

Of course, Fanusi is forthright in his fears and views of islam. We all know that. He belongs to the islamorealist school.

But Vinelectric's remarks about only talking to those 'with sense and interest' is an uncalled for swipe at Fanusi's skills, knowledge and integrity.

To infer that an inability to translate arabic websites means he is not entitled to opinions and comments is an unscrupulous debating tactic.

There are only a handful of people at Cambridge who are fluent in koranic arabic and aramaic. Does this mean nobody else can comment on the koran.

Additionally Vinelectric inserts descriptions like 'fetish', 'irresponsible' and needing to be open minded and finishing off with a condescending
'we can all do better than that' are all designed to undermine his opinions without actually dealing with the substance.

I live and work in East London which has a muslim population of 24% and I have gradually come to the conclusion that the 'moderate' muslim is a rare creature indeed.
Muslims don't open up too often in front of non believers but when they do, you get small glimpses of their true views. Virtually all of my adult muslim students consider homosexuality to be a capital offence, even though this is not an option in the UK. All of my male muslims consider that there should not be women in the mathematics classes.
But what is underestimated is the all pervasive 'passing of the line' through the cadre of imams at the Friday sermon. This is where current opinion is formed. What muslims say to each other inside the mosque may be the only true source. The Channel 4 documentary showed that it can be very unpleasant.
OK, I've never be able to get a muslim to express a full opinion on islamic terrorism other than the 'well, the americans are attacking them' response. But that in itself says something.

In fact, for me, regular contact with muslims has exposed the depth of their indoctrination and the realisation that Fanusi is more right than wrong.

3. Anti-Quran Film Fitna Pulled From Web Due to 'Threats'

Comment #152673 by zoltix on March 31, 2008 at 10:23 am

Liveleak have put the video back along with this statement. Bravo to them


On the 28th of March LiveLeak.com was left with no other choice but to remove the film "fitna" from our servers following serious threats to our staff and their families. Since that time we have worked constantly on upgrading all security measures thus offering better protection for our staff and families. With these measures in place we have decided to once more make this video live on our site. We will not be pressured into censoring material which is legal and within our rules. We apologise for the removal and the delay in getting it back, but when you run a website you don't consider that some people would be insecure enough to threaten our lives simply because they do not like the content of a video we neither produced nor endorsed but merely hosted.

4. My Saudi Valentine

Comment #126609 by zoltix on February 13, 2008 at 4:28 pm

It's actually got worse in Riyadh.
Red roses are banned and florists and gift shop owners have had to remove scarlet colouring from their displays.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23198781-5003402,00.html

There is no fun in Islam (Ayatollah Khomeini 1979)

5. Hitchens V. Boteach

Comment #120723 by zoltix on February 2, 2008 at 11:42 am

#73 HughCaldwell

"Your flights of fancy have no bearing..."

What flights of fancy?
For someone who adopts a legalistic approach to the real world, you need to re-read your posts several times before using a bizarre phrase and pressing 'send'

6. Hitchens V. Boteach

Comment #120709 by zoltix on February 2, 2008 at 11:05 am

#62 HughCaldwell on Steve Zara #60

"Your ethics are of a shoddy sort ......"

I'm sure Steve Zara can defend himself, but this cannot be allowed to pass without pointing out that you are assigning a position to him that he clearly does not hold.

His posts merely highlighted the fact that this was not a simple black or white matter.
And he is correct.
Invasion of a sovereign state is not 100% sacrosanct. I can think of plenty of situations where it can be justified.
The same dilemma also applies to the pre-emptive strike and that could be tested if and when Iran does have nuclear weapons, can launch them, and then trains them on Israel.

7. Honour Killings

Comment #113773 by zoltix on January 20, 2008 at 1:43 pm

...muslim role models....

Like Mohammed - the perfect man for all time.
Married Aisha when she was six - consummated when she was nine.
Slave owner, robber and deviant.
Mohammed had people killed for criticising him.

We need to publicise the life of Mohammed as set out in the ahadith and not just the koran (although that's bad enough).
The justification for honour killings, suppression of free expression, murder of apostates, and general barbaric mentality comes from the sayings and behaviour of 'the prophet'.

We need to come down hard on any attempt to say that islam leads to a civilised society let alone be a 'religion of peace'.

8. Girl, 16, dies after hijab dispute with father

Comment #97527 by zoltix on December 12, 2007 at 8:56 am

epeeist

>All you have is the likelihood based on some a posteriori probabilities and a report in a newspaper....wait for the evidence and then criticise<

Are you seriously saying that we can't make comments, have opinions, express points of view because this report comes from a newspaper.
Most of the items we discuss in the news section come from newspapers.

Do we really have to wait until the case goes to court, the hearing is finished, the inquiry is over and all the evidence is in before epeeist will allow us to post.

Perhaps you will be satisfied if Fanusi starts off all his posts with the phrase 'In my opinion'

9. Nurses Told to Turn Muslims' Beds to Mecca

Comment #94162 by zoltix on December 4, 2007 at 11:45 pm

Every time I read these 'pointing at Mecca' rituals, it reminds me of the calculations we did in our maths department. You only have to be an inch out when you line yourself up and your prayer goes wooshing past Mecca. In the UK, muslims only have to be a degree or two misaligned and they can miss the sacred stone by hundreds of miles.

10. You can't be moral without God!

Comment #81909 by zoltix on October 25, 2007 at 11:33 am

Christians do have a response to the argument ' I am an atheist and I am a moral person'.

They claim that good atheists have been affected by the christian moral code during their formative years. This is usually the cherry picked version, be kind and helpful, learnt from the parables etc. but we are refusing to accept the good moral influence of christianity. The nastier parts of the OT and NT are excluded from junior school assemblies and RE classes anyway.
Some moral dilemmas may have been debated by the Greeks, but who studies the Classics when they are 5 years old.

11. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc. were atheists, and they were terrible! Answer that!

Comment #81618 by zoltix on October 25, 2007 at 1:19 am

Totalitarianism is the real problem.

Atheism is not a belief system - it is a rejection of the supernatural.

Totalitarian leaders are against organised religion rather than some principled atheist stand against supernatural forces. This is because organised religion can offer alternative leadership. If organised religion can be accomodated they will do so, otherwise it will be suppressed (along with free trade unions, another potential opposition).

If it can be demonstrated that faith can lead to a propensity to totalitarianism so much the better. This is easy with islam but less so with christianity.
The difficulty with islam is that many muslims (even so called moderates) believe islamic totalitarian dogma is a good thing.

It's actually quite easy to get the attack on totalitarian dogma in early. After starting with the supernatural, reason and faith, you can raise the question 'What can the reliance on faith lead to?'. Your list of horrors then includes Hitler etc. before anyone else mentions them.

12. Christopher Hitchens at AAI 07

Comment #80180 by zoltix on October 20, 2007 at 1:02 pm

13. Christopher Hitchens at AAI 07

Comment #80179 by zoltix on October 20, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Riley

Your remark (below) has made an illogical jump.

>The validity of the "Hitchens Challenge" relies upon its implicit assertion that:
Christians claim to perform ethical acts that non-believers can not.<

Hitchens has never asserted this. His challenge was made in response to the recurring question he gets about 'good morality' residing/originating in believers. There are variations on this question, of course, but the challenge is designed to expose their weakness.

I'm with Dr. Benway on this (message 48)

14. We Few, We Happy Few, We Band of Brothers

Comment #77051 by zoltix on October 8, 2007 at 9:57 am

rokort : Thank you for your comments

Yes, I have to accept your observation that I have a one sided view of islam.

This is because I have chosen which side I am on. Because I consider islam to be a totalitarian ideology wrapped up in a religion, that choice is not difficult.

I am familiar with your reading list and would not want to attempt an apology for the 'unacceptable face of capitalism'. However, when faced with the choice, a society with (imperfect) freedoms of the individual with a market economy (amended by social democracy if you wish) is a clear winner.

The gut reaction of marxists and their softer followers is to automatically align themselves with anyone who is in opposition to the US and/or UK government on the grounds of a common enemy. Taken to its logical conclusion, this would have meant being a fascist sympathiser with Japan, Germany or Italy. It is a dangerous principle.

In the UK, the Socialist Workers Party aligns itself with muslims under the Respect Party umbrella. I have attended their meetings and heard muslims openly advocating capital punishment for homosexuals.

My point about the superiority of the free world was really to explain why the economic power of the west makes it impossible for islam to command an army with a traditional fighting force, as it has done in earlier centuries.

Suicide bombers make effective use of the technology available and the koran provides the incentive. Andy Thomson makes the point that Hezbollah, which is now in a position to take a standard military position, has dropped suicide bombings in favour of rockets into Israel.

Incidentally, those who use the 'occupation excuse' need to explain why jihadists regularly murder non muslims in countries without a US presence. There are plenty of them.

Islamisation of Europe continues relentlessly; muslim majorities are expected in major cities by 2020. Even Russia has been forecast as a majority muslim country within 30 years.

At what point, do we accept islam as dangerous?
When pockets of sharia law are introduced?
When muslims control local councils and make decisions on the advice of imams?
When Ahmadinejad has nuclear weapons?

And what do you do, when the principles of a society allow the growth of a movement which is destined and motivated (by sacred text) to destroy that society and its principles?

15. We Few, We Happy Few, We Band of Brothers

Comment #76966 by zoltix on October 8, 2007 at 1:25 am

Veronique > Bush/Cheney are the initial and ultimate enablers. And therefore responsible.

This is nonsense. The initial and ultimate source is the political ideology of islam.
This has been around for 1400 years. Nothing has changed in the principles of jihad.

There have been setbacks, 732 Charles Martel, 1683 Vienna and the end of the caliphate; but oil wealth has re-ignited the mohammedan vision of an islamic world.

Because the free world is superior economically, technologically and militarily the jihadists do not have an army to conquer dar al-harb.
Suicide bombs are just the current tactic of certain jihadists. In parts of Europe, demographic jihad is the method or relentlessly agitating for religious concessions.
The koran can be used to justify any of this, because the ultimate aim is a world united under allah in the straitjacket of sharia.

Totalitarianism is the real danger and currently, islam is the leading exponent. The unreformable koran can be used to justify any action against any non-muslim. By definition, non-muslims are not innocent, because they are guilty of being non-believers.
If the west completely disengaged itself from the muslim world, jihad would not stop.

The old hard left reactions of anti-US, anti-capitalism is of little value in this war.
Sooner or later you are going to have to decide "Which side are you on".
Under sharia, grumbling about the US will not save you. You are a non believer and hell awaits you.

16. Bible Belter

Comment #68215 by zoltix on September 6, 2007 at 11:29 am

Friend Giskard said that
Richard and Hitch have made a slight blunder. If I'm not mistaken, the injunction to kill apostates does not appear in the Koran but in the hadith

Actually, Hitchens is exceptionally knowlegeable on the koran and hadith. If you listen to the BookTV interview (50:23) he makes the point that this is in the haditha.
I've also noticed that he often uses arabic words with a clear understanding of their meaning.
Incidentally, he has also commented in one of his lectures that CURRENTLY islam is the most dangerous religion.

17. Tome truths

Comment #49354 by zoltix on June 11, 2007 at 3:27 pm

"To me this suggests a profound insecurity among the religious"
"soggy and collapsed into nothing at the first dose of real opposition.........is in process of happening to religion."

Whilst this is certainly true of some christian commentators, it is not so clear cut with regard to the rampant howling beast, islam.
Generally untouched by the media, 'moderate islam', 'the religion of peace' whining about islamaphobia, is full of confidence about its world destiny. Completely indifferent to reason, islam is not open to the sort of debate that Richard Dawkins et al participate in. Its varied tactics, one minute the world's biggest baby; then the world's biggest bully; demographic jihad; inter faith negotiations; chatting with government, all need to be faced head on. Hitchens has started to do this, but a lot more is going to be needed.

18. James Cameron finds grave of Jesus & Son

Comment #23180 by zoltix on February 26, 2007 at 4:08 pm

Although atheists will maybe smile or have a told you so attitude, the ones who will use this as serious propaganda will be the Islamists. They won't wait for any proper evidence/proof. The likes of Bilal Philips and Zakir Naik will already be working out ways to use it in their muslim dawah training programmes.