Recent Comments
RSS feed
Best Buy sponsors fundraisers for Hamas
April 20, 2012 — xanthippaHowever you slice it, Hamas is a terrorist organization. Supporting Hamas is on par with supporting Breivik. Breivik was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia: Hamas has no such excuse.
CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) has consistently funded and supported Hamas. Through its actions, it has supported terrorism. It is not an organization that ought to be permitted any legitimacy in our society. It claims to speak for all Muslims, but, when good, moderate Muslims denounce terrorism, CAIR attepts to intimidate them into silence. Perhaps as a result of its actions against moderate Muslims, perhaps because of its persistent ties to international terrorism, even the FBI and multiculturalism-friendly White House have cut all their ties with the increasingly disgraced CAIR.
Yet, it is CAIR’s 5th annual banquet that Best Buy decided to become a ‘Platinum Sponsor’ for.
It’s not like there is a dirth of respectable Islamic organizations one could support (some can be found in my links on the right sidebar): it’s just that CAIR is not one of these.
We need a separation between the UN and Islam
April 19, 2012 — xanthippaWe, in the West, have taken for granted that there should be a separation between The State (government) and religious organizations. This is, in no way, a universal sentiment.
To the contrary: throughout human history, tyrants have relied on religious control over their populace to stay in power. In the dawns of our civilization, we had ‘priest kings’, individuals who held the reins of State and religion firmly within their grasp. Up until quite recently, European monarchies accepted the authority of the Catholic Pope to be the Kingmaker: these mutually supporting tyrannies effectively enslaved the population. It was not until the development of religious plurality in Europe that these shackles were broken and the age of enlightenment and reason brought us the modern era of prosperity and freedom.
It would indeed be difficult to argue that had we not rejected the collusion of State and Religion, we would be enjoying our current standard of living.
Yet, we must never forget that separation of State and Religion is the exception, not the rule in human societies. Even today.
Therein lies the peril in ‘world government’ schemes, like the United Nations.
Because secular governments built on the consitutional democracy principle represent a minority of human population, it would be unreasonable to expect any government which is representative of all the world to reflect this minority trend.
This is why we should not be shocked by UN’s attempts to pass anti-blasphemy laws.
Since religious control over government is the norm, not the exception, it is not surprising that religions from outside the constitutional democracies would be jockeying for control over the UN. And, since they are the only ones in the race, it ought not be surprising that they are indeed succeeding.
Islam, of course, forms the largest ‘block’ in this effort: it really is only a question of time before Sharia will be imposed by the UN on all its member states.
Does this sound too far fetched?
Time to leave the UN – unless it is already too late!
Ezra Levant and Pamela Geller on New York Time’s dhimmitude
March 16, 2012 — xanthippaAll religions ought to be treated equally – and fought equally.
Thunderf00t: a ‘moderate’ Muslim speaks out
March 8, 2012 — xanthippaPerhaps you have been following the free speech debate which has been happening on YouTube – or, at least, oe of them: the one involving Thunderf00t.
Thunderf00t is a scientist who became famous on YouTube because of a series of videos he made ‘Why do people laugh at creationists’. It took some of the more outrageous statements made/published on YouTube by Christian young-Earth creationists, contrasted their statements with reality and closed with the catch-phrase: ‘Why do people laugh at creationists? Only the creationists don’t know!’ (I am working from memory, so my wording may not be 100% on, but the gest is there.)
Soon, some of these young-Earth creationists took notice and began to react. Different ones reacted differently. Some invited him to debate them – even live. And he did – and thesedebates are published on YouTube.
Others, however, sought to shut him up – to get his videos flagged and banned. When they could not censor his content as ‘inappropriate’, some sought to use the copyright laws to censor him – claiming infringement where none existed.
Thunderf00t continued his videos, highlighting religious non-science nonsense as well as religious bigotry and intolerance.
Because he criticized not just Christian intolerance bur religious bigotry from all the directions he saw and experienced it, he soon came under attack from the Islamist corner. This time, there was no invitation to debade the worth of ideas: instead, he was doc-dropped, he and his family were publicly threatened with violence and the Univesrity where he works was bullied in an attempt to have him fired. Oh, and his videos were flagged and accused of copyright infringment in an attempt to censor him.
So, now that you have a sketch of the background: here is his latest video documenting his fight for free speech on the internet:
Walker takes a second look at the Individual Rights Party of British Columbia
February 28, 2012 — xanthippaIn the environment of ever-increasing encroachment on civil liberties from many, many directions, is it surprising that I get excited to hear (read) about any pro-individual movement/party/thought ‘out there’?
It seems I am not alone.
Walker, over at The Blog of Walker, has just done a lengthy piece taking a second look at their message. It consists of a number of questions Walker posed to the founders of the nascent party, their replies – and, perhaps most critically, Walker supplies the logistics of how it all ‘fits together’. Interesting.
When Walker took a first look at the party, he got some comments from ‘anonymous’, which were critical of the Individual Rights Party Of British Columbia’s (IRPBC’s) official policy on Islam (which acknowledges the political aspect and considers it to be more defining of the doctrine than its ‘spiritual’ or ‘religious’ aspects). Walker and I both responded to the comments only to encounter trollish responses from ‘anonymous’.
Trolls may be annoying, but they can also be amusing – and, at times, useful.
The ‘second look’ attracted the same troll back. I don’t know if he is trolling because of the subject matter or if he is Walker’s pet troll, but I took care not to feed him this time around. However, Frank Hilliard of the IRPBC, took the time to defend his party’s position on Islam – and had done this so eloquently that (with permission), I would like to reproduce his comment in full (F.H’s response to ‘anonymous’ has been bolded by me):
“Anonymous said…
So you didn’t ask about the Muslim thing, eh? Can’t say I’m surprised.
So when someone in Canada starts an Islamist Party of Canada, and part of their platform is to remove the constitutional protection to peaceful religion practice from Jews and only Jews, I assume that when you interview them the question will be restricted to asking who the treasurer is, right?”
Nice bit of sarcasm Anonymous, but you’ve dodged around the issue if Islam’s political ambitions. Most other religions have moral rules, but Islam has Sharia law which defines not just personal morality but every aspect of private and public life. As such, it conflicts on multiple levels with Canadian civil, criminal and parliamentary law. The Individual Rights Party of BC simply says that if Islamic communities want to change Canadian law, they should accept the obligations and responsibilities of political organization and run candidates in elections.
We don’t have any problem with Islam as a religion but we totally reject Sharia law weather imposed by incrementalism or by force. I’m pretty sure you would too if you realized your right to comment on this issue would be denied if Sharia were already in effect.
Thought provoking, is it not?
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 