Recent Comments
RSS feed
New ‘Draw Mohammed’ subReddit is up and running!
September 23, 2012 — xanthippa‘Reddit – the front page of the internet’ has a new section: DrawMohammed!!!
Check it out – and subscribe!
UPDATE: This subredit has now been marked ‘private’….and even though I have contributed more than one post to it myself, I no longer can get in myself. Sorry.
I guess Obama was not bluffing:
The French got it right – and wrong – at the same time
September 22, 2012 — xanthippaFree speech is paramount to the continuation of our society.
Finally, even our elites are beginning to realize this, even if they are not willing to express it openly – yet.
Even a few in the media are begginning to acknowledge this, even though most are still confused about what ‘incitement to riot’ is.
Aside:
Just for the record, saying “Your Mama wears army boots!” is an insult, not incitement to riot, violence or murder. Saying “Kill those who say My Mama wears army boots!” is incitement to murder.
Even if you replace ‘your Mama’ with ‘Your Prophet’ and ‘wears army boots’ with ‘rapes little girls’.
And offering money to anyone who kills ‘Steve X’, because ‘Steve X’ said or wrote or drew or filmed something, is conspiracy to murder…and a criminal act.
I’m only explaining this because so many policymakers in the USA and UK and media members everywhere seem to have trouble understanding this simple distinction.
Back to the French…
Last week, the satirical magazine ‘Charlie Hebdo’ published some more ‘Mohammed cartoons’. Good for them.
What is more, they announced ahead of time that they were going to do so.
The response of the French government: send riot police to guard the magazine from rioters, because, as they quite correctly said, free speech must be protected. And, they beefed up the security at their Embassies, in case there was a backlash there.
That is what the French got right.
It’s the next bit I have a problem with: the French banned all protests against the cartoons!
I’m sorry, but that is just as wrong as banning the cartoons themselves!
Peaceful protests are a necessary expression of the freedom of speech and no government may ban them, on any grounds.
EVER!
Sure, if the protests turn violent, the police are obligated to arrest those who break the law and riot. That goes without saying. But banning a protest just because it might – even if it is very likely that it might – turn violent is a violation of the very principles that were upheld by protecting the publication of the cartoons!
You cant’d punish pre-crime and you cannot limit someone’s rights because of what they might do.
Well, obviously, you can – the French just did it.
What I mean is that it is wrong to do so…
Freedom of speech is for everyone.
It is especially important that we protect the freedom of speech of those who say things we don’t like.
Sure, the protests were likely to turn violent. Pretending otherwise would be naive.
But the power of the government does not extend to limiting the freedoms of their citizens to commit crimes – only to arrest them and punish them in accordance with the laws after they break the law!
Yes, there is a problem in many places with protests turning violent: but that is because in the past, the police have been negligent in apprehending and punishing those who break the laws during protests. That is a problem which needs to be acknowledged and dealt with.
But past negligence in enforcing the laws sufficiently does not give any goverment the right to abrogate the rights of its citizens – especially a core right, like freedom of speech.
So, what happens to atheists in Muslim countries?
September 22, 2012 — xanthippaWhile checking out Reddit, I came across this post:
‘I’m planning on telling my parents that I’m an atheist. I live in a Muslim country, so you can guess that they’re Muslim. I need help with some points though. Things said in the Quran that are definitely wrong, like that Noah talked to ants (ants do not talk, they use chemicals to communicate.) and such. The more you know the better. I need to know things that Islam got wrong. Muslims say that Muslim women have tons of rights, and I want to prove them wrong. Help a guy out will you.’
All the comments – at least, when I read it, I’m sure more will be posted soon – advised against this,if the young writer wants to live…
At last, people are finally understanding that in Muslim countries, there is no ‘freedom from religion’. It’s a first step, but an important one and I am glad to see that people do know this and understand that the existential danger to atheists in Muslim countries is very, very real.
I don’t know how to help this one individual.
But, I do realize that if we do not stop the stealthy creeping of Sharia into our societies, we, too, may face this fate.
Sooner than we are willing to admit…
Flag-burning: OK, let’s!
September 21, 2012 — xanthippaBurning a flag is a very clear way of sending a message: fuck you and the horse you rode in on!
Or, for the more dainty among us: we reject you and what you represent.
OK, fair enough.
Except the hose bit – cruelty to animals is never OK.
The sentiment, however, is validly expressed by the burning of the flag that represents the despised ‘rider’.
Sure, it is not a pleasant sight to see the symbol of one’s culture (and, by extension, values) so unambiguously rejected. But, that is rather the point, isn’t it!
As is burning someone in effigy: it is an unambiguous rejection of who they are and what they stand for.
As a political statement, flag-burning is not only a valid form of expression, it is one that must be protected at all costs, whether it is directed at us, our allies or our enemies. Regardless of whoose jimmies it rustles!
What is not valid is violence against actual people and property damage (unless, of course, it is your property you are damaging – then that is your business entirely)!
For clarity’s sake – raping and murdering a country’s ambassador falls into the ‘not OK’ category…it being an act of war and all. As is raiding a foreign embassy, ripping down their flag and putting yours in its place. After all, every embassy is legally the soil of the country of that embassy, so using violent means to enter the embassy grounds and replacing its country’s flag with your own quite literally means the conquering of a part of that country’s sovereign territory and annexing it to your political entity, as symbolized by your flag.
In other words, storming an embassy and replacing its flag with your own is also an unequivocal declaration of war.
Pretending otherwise is past naive. It is criminally negligent or actively complicit or a host of other unpleasant things, but it is past even wilfully naive.
Luckily, you and I are not the people who have to make the call about what is an appropriate response to an act of war – against your country (if you are an American) or that of your allies (if you are part of the Western World) – we are just the people who will have to live with the aftermath of whatever decisions those in power will make.
And, this is certain: whether you are an American, a Westerner or live in another part of the world – whatever the response (or lack thereof) is, you and I will have to live through the consequences.
A war has been declared.
Whether or not those in power send it the troops (literally or figuratively), it is happening…
What is within our power, however, is to let our leaders know what our opinions are.
In order to do that, in order for the mesage to cut through the clatter and chatter, in order for it not to be misunderstood or misinterpreted, the message has to be clear, visible and unequivocal.
I suggest that at all the anti-Islamism protests planned in the Western world, we include the burning of the Islamist flag.
Remember, this flag does not represent Islam in general: it represents exclusively political Islam.
And, as it was the flag raised over the US Embassy in Egypt, it is fair comment to burn it here, during our protests, in order to send the clear and unambiguous message that we rejcect it and what it represents.
After all, flag-burning is a message that is understood by all.
It’s about time we started sending it!
Daniel Hannan: The looters are now in government
September 20, 2012 — xanthippaAnd, in the meanwhile in Europe:
An urgent message from ‘One Law for All’ about child marriage in the UK
September 18, 2012 — xanthippaThis is the email I received from One Law for All, whose urgent message needs to be seen by as many people as possible (please, spread the word!):
Dear Friend,
We are writing to you today to ask for your urgent and immediate support.
As you may have seen in the papers recently, there is growing evidence that young children – some as young at 5 years old – are being “married” to older men in Sharia courts across Britain. This is increasingly being sanctioned by the Islamists who run Britain’s network of Sharia courts, and there is evidence that this practice is growing.
Recent Investigations
A recent undercover investigation by the Sunday Times found imams in Britain willing to “marry” young girls, provided this was carried out in secret. The imams had been approached by an undercover reporter posing as a father who said he wanted his 12 year old daughter married, to prevent her from being tempted in to a “western lifestyle”.
Imam Mohammed Kassamali, of the Husaini Islamic Centre in Peterborough, sanctioned the marriage, but stressed the need for total secrecy. He stated: “I would love the girl to go to her husband’s houses (sic) as soon as possible, the younger the better. Under sharia (Islamic law) there is no problem. It is said she should see her first sign of puberty at the house of her husband. The problem is that we cannot explain such things (the marriage) if the girl went tomorrow (to the authorities).”
Abdul Haque, who officiates at weddings at the Shoreditch mosque, east London agreed to carry out the formalities of the wedding. However, he told the reporter that he should “tell people it is an engagement but it will be a marriage”. He added: “In Islam, once the girl reaches puberty the father has the right, the parents have the right, but under the laws of this country if the girl complains and says her marriage has been arranged and she wasn’t of marriageable age, then the person who performed the marriage will be jailed as well as the mother and father”.
Earlier this year, it was also reported that at least 30 girls, some as young as 9, were “married” in sharia courts in one London borough alone.
Clearly, child “marriages” are an abomination; they are nothing short of religiously-sanctioned child rape and paedophilia.
Sharia proponents deceptively say that forced marriages are unacceptable under Sharia and that both bride and groom must choose to marry as if that is the issue at hand. Islamists have gotten away with years of misogyny against Muslim women under cover of “choice” and are now using similar language with regards children. Nonetheless, child welfare must take precedence irrespective of religious beliefs. This is something we must urgently remind the Government of. Sharia courts are a scandal and must be stopped.
Arbitration and Mediation (Equality) Bill
One important way to tackle this matter is to galvanise support for the Arbitration and Mediation (Equality) Bill introduced to the House of Lords last year by crossbench peer, Baroness Caroline Cox. The Bill is due for a second reading in October.
The Government has so far declined to support Cox’s Bill. They do not believe there is a parallel legal system in operation. They also insist that everyone has full right of access to the British courts. This is simply not the case. There are many with little or no English language skills, trapped by community pressure, who believe Sharia courts operate as real courts and who regard their decisions as legally binding. The idea that they can easily instruct a high street solicitor to help them access their full rights under UK law is far from reality.
The Government must be pressured into taking immediate action, including by supporting Cox’s Bill, and shutting down Sharia and religious courts. If child welfare takes precedence then the Government is duty-bound to take action.
Sign our new petition in support of Baroness Cox’s Bill; tell the Government that enough is enough! Please sign it now.
Help Us
Baroness Cox has said in the past that her Bill was inspired by One Law for All. To donate to our important work, please either send a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal. We need regular support and also for supporters to commit to giving at least £5-10 a month via direct debit. You can find out more about how to join the 100 Club here.
If you shop online, please do so via the Easy Fundraising’s website. It won’t cost you anything extra but can help raise much needed funds for One Law for All.
We look forward to your immediate intervention in this matter.
Best wishes,
Maryam Namazie and Anne Marie Waters
Spokespersons
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX, UK
Tel: 
+44 (0) 7719166731
onelawforall@gmail.com
www.onelawforall.org.uk
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 