Evidence of Delusion: Cartoon Inspired Riots

The cartoon-inspired riots in the past few weeks over the reprinting of the infamous Danish Cartoons of Muhammad are clear evidence of religious delusion. Why else would someone call for the death of a cartoonist who drew and inked the image of another person who’s been taking a dirt nap for nearly two thousand years? The dumb-asses who riot and burn effigies and flags of Danes and Denmark don’t even know if the cartoonist was event close at approximating Muhammad’s likeness!

And what’s this fetish with creating effigies and buying flags for burning? That they truly think this hurts peoples’ feelings shows how ignorant, backward, and deluded these people are. If they weren’t so bent on killing someone over a bloody cartoon, it would be comical! Just this past week, about 150 nutjobs of the local Muslim cult in Jakarta, Malaysia  Indonesia demonstrated in front of the Danish and Dutch embassies after a reprinting of the infamous cartoons (one of which is shown above) by a Danish publication.

Are they that stupid? Don’t they realize that the Danish embassy has no connection to a publisher that happens to be in the same nation the embassy represents? Being so wrapped up in their own sharia bullshit, banana court system and government, do they think that the rest of the world works the same way? Probably, which is still more evidence of their delusion by thinking that concepts of free press, freedom of expression, and free thought are non-existent.

Muslims are free to believe whatever batshit, superstitious nonsense they would like. So are Christians, Jews, Hindus, Fulani, and Wiccans. If they want to believe that creating an image of their silly prophet (penis be unto him) is offensive and against their religion, that’s fine. But they don’t have the right to bully, pressure, threaten and otherwise mandate that free press and the publications in free nations observe their batshit superstitions.

Sorry for the rant. I just ran across the story above and, having read several others recently, I had to get it off my chest. And its another good reason to publish a picture of Muhammad’s ugly mug. Next thing you know, I’m going to start using the word “theistard.”

Young Muslims – A Growing Danger to Western Society?

In recent comments to two articles I wrote previously on Breaking Spells, the28 wrote that Islam-Watch.org is a site that cannot be used as a reference since the authors at that site (there are many) do not “really know Islam trully is (sic).” My response was, of course, to point out that the authors at Islam-Watch.org are former Muslims who are very well informed about Islam and are in the best position to actually criticize the cults of Islam because of their insights. Indeed, it would be fallacious to argue that the site should be disregarded since the commenter hasn’t demonstrated their lack of knowledge -in fact, it is very easy to see that the authors are very knowledgeable about the topic simply by reading their works, which stand on their own merits.

But the28 also implied that the media (assuming he means news outlets, newspapers, blogs, etc.) are biased to believe that all Muslims are like Iran in their beliefs. I don’t think this is the case. Indeed, I don’t get that feeling from the media either. If anything, Muslim superstitions are down-played in media reports (except, perhaps, ultra-conservative and Christian sources -particularly blogs) and the focus is on alleged extremists and hard-liners. I think the media has intentionally ignored the irrational and dangerous nature of a large number of Muslims living in western nations.

To support this contention, I cite the following report: Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the Paradox of Multiculturalism (Mirza, Senthilkumaran, and Ja’far 2007). The report was written based on survey data compiled by the authors and separated into various age-groups. Their intent was to explore the attitudes and beliefs of Muslims living in Britain. In general, they found that the majority of British-Muslims desire integration and acceptance and do not seek to dominate British culture -just maintain their own.

This is consistent with the criticisms that the28 gave me in another comment on the same day, which was to refute the claim that I asserted that the Muslim religion seeks to dominate the world. Yet I still stand by that claim. And you’ll see why.

While many of the Muslims polled were moderate and answered questions rationally, there were some surprising figures among 16-24 year olds. For instance, the question was posed, “would you prefer to live under Sharia law or British law?” Most British-Muslims chose the latter (59%), but when you segregate the age groups, 16-24 year olds were more in-favor of Sharia law than any other single group at whopping 37%! And this trend is consistent with nearly every question asked, making younger Muslims in Britain more hard-line than older Muslims.

The number of Muslims living in Britain is thought to be at least 1.5 million and possibly as high as 2 million. What that implies, assuming that the survey is a representative sample of British Muslims, is that 500,000 or more Muslims in Britain prefer Sharia law to British.

But what does Sharia Law entail? Among the most commonly identified “laws” in this theocratic form of governance are the wearing of veils for women and the prohibition of apostasy. So how do Muslims in the 16-24 year old age group to these issues in Britain?

A full 53% of all Muslims in all age-groups surveyed believe women should wear the veil. That’s more than half. But this is a cultural issue, right? Fair enough. What about apostasy (leaving your religious faith for another, or no other, religion)?

36% of Muslims between the ages of 16-24 believe that conversion to another faith, abandoning your faith, or the act of converting a Muslim from Islam is wrong and punishable by death! That could be a figure as high as 450,000 Muslims living in Britain -assuming there aren’t actually 2 million rather than 1.5 million. Admittedly, I don’t have the precise number of the total population of Muslims in the 16-24 age group, so I’m relying on the total responses in the survey that were in agreement, which was 31%. The point of the hard-line younger generation isn’t lost in this concession.

Across the board, only about 7% of the Muslims surveyed agreed with the statement, “I admire organizations like Al-Qaeda that are prepared to fight against the west.” But look at the difference among the 16-24 year olds:

Clearly, resentment of western culture and hard-line mentality is on the rise among the younger generation of Muslims in Britain and probably the West in general. This generation is likely having a noticeable influence on their elders, encouraging a revival of Islamic fundamentalism.

Islam is an evangelical religion, whether those that pretend to call themselves “moderate Muslims” care to admit it or not. Otherwise, Islamic cults would not have spread so efficiently from the Near East to the other continents and regions of the world, particularly Africa and Indonesia and, now, Europe and North America. The Muslim populations that are there wish to remain segregated and under their own laws, independent of local governments. They want to allow conversion into their own religion but not out of. They want Muslims to marry only Muslims and, in extreme cases, use terrorism and violence to prevent otherwise.

I’ll agree that not all or even most Muslims in western communities act or believe in such a way. However, there are, apparently, enough Muslims, deluded by their superstitions, who live in Western communities that rational thinkers need be aware and cognizant of the danger that lurks within.

References:

Mirza, Munira; Senthilkumaran, A.; Ja’far, Z. (2007) Living Apart Together: British Muslims and the Paradox of Multiculturalism. London: The Policy Exchange.

Watching Islam: Let the “World be Warned!” (Previous Post)

The Threat of Theocracy: Islam and World Domination (Previous Post)

Give me a child until he is seven and I will give you the man

That was the Jesuit motto, alleged to be attributed to Francis Xavier, the co-founder of the Jesuit Order. The implication is that the best opportunity to indoctrinate a person in a lifetime of belief and devotion to religious dogma is when they are young.

The Christian Science Monitor ran a story a few days ago that alleges “terrorism experts say radical groups are targeting teenagers as young as 14.”

“As I speak, terrorists are methodically and intentionally targeting young people and children in [Morocco]. They are radicalizing, indoctrinating, and grooming young, vulnerable people to carry out acts of terrorism,” said Jonathan Evans, the director general of the British MI5, the security service, in November.

He warned that teenagers as young as 15 and 16 have been implicated in “terrorist-related” activities as a result of a deliberate strategy pursued by radical Islamist groups.

I’ve seen first hand the affect that indoctrination into street-gang culture can have on adolescents -and they start getting this indoctrination in some large cities at a very early age. Kids in this predicament are generally from low-income, single-mother households and are usually desperate for authority figures that they can put their trust and loyalty in.

I wonder how the uncertainty and economic strain of chaotic nations in the Middle East affect adolescents there? Could it be any different? Could being raised in a war-torn nation, a theocratic nation, or one in which the only existence you’ve ever known is that of occupation by an oppressing and repressive authority affect your psychological well-being?

Then again, are the young participants of indoctrination camps like the Jesus Camp or the well-to-do students of Mullahs at any less risk of being indoctrinated into a cult of hatred?

The Threat of Theocracy: Islam and World Domination

Make no mistake. Muslims seek to dominate the world.

I’m not simply using hyperbole in that statement or exaggerating the threat that Islam poses to freedom and secular choices. Various cults of Islam are devout in their intent to spread their cults to all of humanity and publically state these intents. Moreover, it is written in their mythology, which they accept as unquestioning truth, that Muslims should seek to share their delusion with the entire world.

Mawlana Abul Alla Mawdudi, the founder of Pakistan’s fundamentalist movement, has said:

Islam is not a normal religion like the other religions in the world, and Muslim nations are not like normal nations. Muslim nations are very special because they have a command from Allah to rule the entire world and to be over every nation in the world. Islam is a revolutionary faith that comes to destroy any government made by man. Islam doesn’t look for a nation to be in better condition than another nation. Islam doesn’t care about land or who owns the land. The goal of Islam is to rule the entire world and submit all of mankind to the faith of Islam. Any nation or power in this world that tries to get in the way of that goal Islam will fight and destroy. In order for Islam to fulfill that goal, Islam can use every power available every way it can be used to bring worldwide revolution. This is jihad.

Of course, so-called moderate Muslims will object and say that “jihad” simply means “struggle” and that each Muslim “struggles” to bring peace, harmony, etc. Unfortunately, theirs is a voice, even if it is a majority, that isn’t heard nor is it loud. It is, after all, the Koran itself that teaches what jihad is truly about in passages like those found in Surah 8:

When you fight with disbelievers, do not retreat. Those who do will go to hell (8:15-16); those that the Muslims killed were not really killed by them. It was Allah who did the killing (8:17); Fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah (8:39); and, don’t let the disbelievers think they can escape. They are your enemy and the enemy of Allah (8:59-60).

Passages like these are what inform the violent interpretations of “jihad” with Muslims; but what of global domination? What justifies this evangelism of terror in the eyes of the Muslim? Further looks at Koranic verses is revealing:

Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress limits…And slay them wherever ye catch them. And turn them out from where they have turned you out; for persecution is worse than slaughter; But fight them not at the sacred Mosque unless they first fight you there; But if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, Allah is oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more persecution. And the religion becomes Allah’s. But if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression (2:190-3)

Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward (4:74).

And when the sacred months are passed, kill those who join other gods with God wherever ye shall find them; and seize them, besiege them, and lay wait for them with every kind of ambush: but if they shall convert, and observe prayer, and pay the obligatory alms, then let them go their way, for God is gracious, merciful (9:5)

Nor is there any encouragement within the Koran to tolerate those that don’t accept the delusion of Islam:

Thou seest many of them making friends with those who disbelieve. Surely ill for them is that which they themselves send on before them (5:80).

Jihad explains the few extremists that have “martyred” themselves by flying planes into skyscrapers, detonating themselves on trains, or those caught before they could detonate bombs in the United States and Europe. But the jihad that threatens to introduce Islam in staggering numbers across Europe is far more subtle than a suicide bomber. This jihad is playing on secular ideals and the cry for tolerance on the left in the wake of the more violent versions of jihad. The subtle version seeks to introduce Muslim practices and culture in the secular nations of Europe by changing laws and policies making it difficult for opposition to question, criticize or restrict Muslims. On the surface, it seems a good thing not to restrict someone based solely on their religious beliefs. But, looking a bit deeper, one sees more than a mere longing for religious equality. A recent outcry in the United States by the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF) complains of new TSA requirements at airports to search large head-coverings that include cowboy hats, straw hats, turbans and berets. In particular, TSA security personnel can now pat down these types of headgear even if the metal detectors didn’t alert in order to check for non-metallic, dangerous items.

Pressure against government agencies in the United States has less impact, however, than in Europe, where Muslims have made it difficult to be critical or restrictive on their religious superstitions without being “hateful” or “discriminatory.” In Scotland, doctors and nurses at a hospital have been instructed not to eat in front of Muslim workers during Ramadan. Food trolleys are to be moved away from their sight and Muslim workers are to be given time to pray. This is an example of religious tolerance gone too far, but that isn’t the furthest reaches of what is desired by Muslims in Britain. Muslims there wanted a law passed that would essentially make it a crime to criticize or blaspheme Islam. What passed was apparently a “watered down” version which restricts “threatening” comments designed to incite others against a religious group. I suppose referring to Islam as a delusion responsible for violence and terrorism would ostensibly qualify as an illegal comment if made in public.

Islam is a presence in Europe that uses violence to influence both Muslims and non-Muslims. In France, radical Islam is being blamed for violence in hospitals –physicians have been assaulted by men for “touching” Muslim women during the course of examinations and Muslim men are demanding “virginity certificates” for young girls. Muslims are also attacking the police in Muslim neighborhoods with stones and Molotov cocktails. For his efforts in documenting the nature of Muslim violence against Muslim women, Theo Van Gogh paid with his life. Upon completion of the 10 minute film, Van Gogh received death threats. On Nov. 2, 2004, the threats were carried out by a Muslim, deluded by superstitions of jihad and his holy duty to his god. In 2006, riots broke out across the Muslim world in response to cartoons depicting Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper. People died. Over cartoons. In an effort to appease Muslims, much has been done by non-Muslims in the West to present an air of tolerance, which is just what Muslims want. Tolerance is a step towards acceptance. Once Islam becomes as accepted as any other religious superstition, there would be less opposition to conversion. And in the largely secular Europe, Islam might well fill a void and experience little real opposition compared to that in the United States.

But it’s interesting to note that the very non-Muslims (theists and atheists alike) who called for “respect” and “tolerance” for Islam in the wake of the cartoon riots had little to say about the riots that ensued. Didn’t they notice that this “religion of peace” was both threatening and carrying out violence, primarily because some of the cartoons they objected to depicted Islam as violent? The irony is deep.

Islam expects tolerance for their delusions. The Koran dictates that those unbelievers that accept them can live, particularly if they convert. Those that refuse to accept them must die.

Watching Islam: Let the “World be Warned!”

What do you get when you take a handful of well-educated Muslim apostates that left Islam because they were tired of Islam’s “bigotry, mindless rituals and its barbaric and draconian punitive measures;” add to that a sense of responsibility and love for the remaining 1.4 billion Muslims still living in fear or delusion within the Islamic faith; then provide an internet server and a domain name?

Answer: islam-watch.org
For the new reader and Muslim with the courage to question the doctrine of Islam or at least read about the experiences of those who did question their faith and arrive at some different conclusions, Islam-Watch.org offers some interesting reading material. Ali Sina discusses leaving Islam in Why I left Islam and Abul Kasem writes Making of an Unbeliever. Both writers share very personal thoughts, feelings, and conflicts that caused them to question the validity of Islam and ultimately reject it as a way of life.

The writers, editors and contributors at Islam-Watch.org have concluded:

“that Islam is not at all a religion of peace as touted by many smooth-talking, self-serving Islamists and the Islamic apologists. The core of Islam, that is, the Qur’an, Hadis and Sharia are filled with unbound hatred for the unbelievers, unbelievably intolerant and exceptionally cruel and merciless to those who dare to deviate an iota from its doctrine.”

Among the many articles and op-ed pieces listed at Islam-Watch.org, I found this one: Jihad against ham dust from backyard BBQ in Birmingham. The article is written tongue-in-cheek but discusses a very real issue for the residents of Cotton Park, Rugby, in Warwickshire, UK. Rugby is near Birmingham, so the reference in the title had me thinking about an Alabama BBQ, particularly with the accompanying photo of Jed and Granny Clampett of the Beverly Hillbillies. The real issue, however, is in regard to the proposed pet food factory planned to be opened by Butcher’s Pet Care, which would produce pet food. Local Muslims in the area are seeking to block the construction and subsequent operation of the factory because pet food is made with pork. This, they believe, will end up in their chimneys and become airborne as microscopic particles of pork only to “rain down” on their neighborhoods, thus making everything touched by rain impure.

Apparently, Butcher’s Pet Care has the go-ahead to build the factory and the article quotes at least one protestor as saying:

“In this country we are allowed the right to follow our religion and religious beliefs,” cried one protestor. “By allowing this plan to go ahead our religious rights are being swept to one side for what appears to be economic greed.”

Surely a single religious cult can’t get its way and impose its beliefs on secular society, right? Wrong. The same article mentions another story in Great Britain that I’d heard elsewhere: “[i]n Scotland, Doctors and health care workers have been ordered not to eat lunch at their desks during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan because it might offend Muslim workers.”

Following this line of reasoning, it should soon be problematic to drink coffee in the workplace since it would offend Mormons; school cafeterias will need to offer all kosher foods all the time; and I really don’t even want to think about Lent. It’s bad enough I can’t buy a six-pack of beer on Sunday.

Go visit Islam-Watch.org. If nothing else, you’ll find some very interesting reading. I guarantee you bookmark the site for later returns if the subject of Islam at all interests you as an atheist-humanist (indeed, it probably has its share of regular Christian readers).