In defence of burning books

So a gun-toting yeehah Southern-fried man of God in the good ole U S of A is going to hold a Koran-burning ceremony.

Not particularly respectful or in good taste, I'm sure you'd agree. Downright offensive to Muslims, one might think. Possibly inflammatory, in fact.

Lots of people are getting very upset about that prospect, and everyone from Hillary Clinton to newspapers in the Arab world have called for the event to be cancelled.

While some people have expressed their distaste for the offence offered to Islam, most are more concerned about the possible ramifications of this activity. They have raised the spectre of the riots across the Muslim world that followed the publication of the Danish Mohammed cartoons being repeated.

Amid all of this, almost no one has pointed out that burning books in itself is distasteful and ignorant and achieves nothing in real terms. The knowledge contained therein does not die, just the dignity of the arsonists.

But while Pastor Jones is undoubtedly a fool, he has one valid point to make. Why should the West continue to tiptoe around the psychosis of radical Islam for fear of offending people who are, at the very least, as idiotic and backward as the Pastor himself?

"Instead of us backing down, maybe it's time to stand up. Maybe it's time to send a message to radical Islam that we will not tolerate their behaviour," he told Associated Press.

It seems to me that the reason he shouldn't burn the Korans is because burning books is an act of profound ignorance. But he should not be prevented from doing so for fear of offending Medieval lunatics like the Taliban, the mass murderers of Al Qaeda or the Wahhabist psychotics running Saudi.

If Islam is truly a religion of tolerance, then its adherents will see this act for what it is - attention-seeking by a retard - and ignore it.

If however, Islam is dominated by those keen to seek out offence, quick to anger, ready to riot at the perception of a slight, and prepared to refute the pluralism and tolerance that permits their freedom of religion in the West, then they will indeed set fire to their own towns, protest at embassies and issue fatwahs demanding Pastor Jones' head on a spike.

And if that does occur, then Pastor Jones will have succeeded in a very real way in exposing the hypocrisy at the heart of Islam - a creed that demands to be tolerated where it has no rule but tolerates no plurality where it rules.

Let us not forget that a woman accused of adultery still faces death by stoning in Iran. Let us not forget the oppression offered by the Talibanin Afghanistan. Let us not forget that there is no freedom of religion in many Muslim-dominated countries.

It's time for Islam to grow up, and they can demonstrate that maturity by ignoring Pastor Jones' little stunt.

Napoleon's complex

It shows you how utterly irrelevant feminism has become when short-arsed misogynist Frenchman Nicolas Sarkozy is doing more for women's dignity than that entire movement.

Paralysed as always on the crux of multiculturalist relativism, feminists have said nothing and done nothing for the plight of women across the majority of the planet who remain in illiterate, uneducated, abused, indentured poverty.

Instead, dazzled by their own petty concerns, they have adapted what was supposed to be a liberation movement into a shopping list of entitlements they want the state to pay for, like child care, or their endless quangos.

Meanwhile, the man with the Napoleon complex, the model Mrs and the platform shoes has decided correctly that there is no room for the Muslim full face veil in France.

There is no room for it because it erodes female dignity, despite what some token female Muslims might spout about it giving them freedom from sexualisation and so on. There will always be the house niggers who are happy to support their own slavery. They must be ignored, and Sarkozy has rightly done so.

Let's remember that there is no provision in Islam demanding that this shameful item of clothing be worn by women. Only in despotic Medieval regimes like Saudi or Somalia is it the norm, and even there only because of the existence of drug-crazed militias or morality police to enforce the law.

People are knocking on the doors of Europe all the time. They seem desperate to come here and sample European living. Well, it's long time past that everyone was reminded that living in Europe is not compatible with living in the Seventh century.

Well done, Nicolas. Let's hope the rest of Europe follows suit.

Bury the dream with this poor girl

I've been to Turkey, and I've nice memories of the place.

It was full of beautiful ancient Ottoman buildings, and earlier remnants of other awe-inspiring eras like the Greeks and Romans and Persians.

The people were urbane and friendly, the beer flowed freely, the transport infrastructure was impressive by Irish standards and the food was wonderful.

So I can see what people mean when they claim that Turkey is a European nation, that deserves to take its place in the European Union.

But of course, when I was in Turkey, I didn't leave Europe. I was in Istanbul, a city under its previous incarnations as Byzantium and Constantinople that was for long periods European in culture and still is by geography.

But on the other side of the Bosphorus is another Turkey - the real Turkey. The huge Asia Minor bulk of the country. Their cultural practices are not so obviously in tune with European norms as those in Istanbul are. Unless, of course, we're talking about European values back in the Dark Ages.

Turkish police found the dead body of a 16 year old girl in a pit in a village. She had died through inhalation of large quantities of soil, indicating that she had been alive when buried.

Her own family did this to her, to preserve their 'honour', because she had been seen transgressing their cultural rules.

What was her crime, this unnamed creature of woe? She was seen talking to boys.

There may be room in the EU for Istanbul, should it and it's Euro-hinterland ever choose to secede from Turkey, not that it seems likely.

But there will never be room in Europe for the redneck lunacies of the hillbilly Anatolians.

Application denied.

Battlestar Galactica as modern theology

With the recent end of long-running sci-fi series Battlestar Galactica, many of the nerds were unhappy with the apparent theological conclusion to the space opera.

Moans of 'God did it! What a cop out!' seem to me to expose the huge gulf in understanding between those of a sci-fi (or scientific) bent and those of a more religious one.

One of the things I greatly appreciated about this fine TV show was its many attempts to incorporate difficult contemporary debates into its story arc.

It questioned the nature of democracy and its tendency towards demagoguery. It examined the legitimacy or otherwise of terrorist insurgency when under occupation. These were brave, maybe even dangerous discussions to hold in Dubya's America.

And by bringing them to the TV-consuming sheeple, one might even say that the producers and scriptwriters of BSG were serving a vital purpose in providing a platform for such essential debates in the US at that time.

But the element that intrigued me the most was how BSG, of all recent dramas, gave serious airtime to relative theologies.

The human contingent of the colonies were clearly depicted as polytheist, worshipping a Greco-Romanesque pantheon known as the 'Lords of Kobol.' They believed their Gods appeared, like the Roman and Greek pantheons, to be amoral, flawed and constantly interceding in their lives.

But in many ways, the classical names masked a more Eastern polytheism. From the Gayatri Mantra that was the show's theme music, it is clear that Hindu elements played a part too.

Seers, visions, prophecies all fulfilled important roles in the human theology, implying a much more Hindu vision of polytheism than the names Ares, Apollo and so on might indicate.

On the other side of the war, the Cylons were depicted as rigid monotheists, believing in a one true God. Their Abrahamic theology is particularly focused on predestination and fate, indicating a Calvinist or Jansenist vision of progression that is at odds with the concept of free will - which makes sense in the context of software for a brain.

Others have discerned elements of Mormonism in the show, while some have even posited the thought that the a la carte approach to belief systems presented in BSG could be a template for the future of religious faith in America.

And in its depiction of how women gathered around Gaius Baltar, the programme showed clearly how guru cults are formed, which is the point of origin for all religions we know today, be it an Abraham cult, a Jesus cult, or a Krishna, Buddha or Mohammed cult.

The ending of the series, however, resolved itself in a concept of human history as cyclical, requiring enlightenment of those involved in order to break a cycle of suffering, illusion and destruction.

This, in a nutshell, is the core belief of Buddhism. But even that Buddhist finale was undercut by a vision of angels on the streets of Manhattan, speculating about the amoral, Manichean nature of a solitary godhead.

The result is that the series offered a melange of theological positions, and gave each its own space to be considered in conjunction and in opposition to others.

It's rare these days to see such serious considerations of theology outside of factual documentaries featuring Michael Wood or the like. I for one welcome it.

I hope that one day someone qualified will produce some good academic research that teases out all of the relative theologies and their relationships with science and technology in this superlative TV show.

Some people have made initial attempts, and I suppose this post is mine.

In the meantime, perhaps it will have provoked pause for thought among its many viewers, who may not have been exposed, or taken seriously, other theological positions before. It's possible that the viewers may also take the same a la carte approach to religious beliefs as the authors of the show did while writing it.

I don't see that as anything other than positive. Exposing oneself to alternative beliefs is a creative and productive process, one that destroys sectarian interests and broadens the mind and one's conception of the universe.

And for the nerds who moaned about the presence of God in a fiction, I think they've missed the point and been blinded by their own blinkered attachment to the concept that science is atheistic.

It need not be, as recent research indicates.

I'm an atheist, but I loved the spirituality and relative theologies present in BSG. I hope the debates it raised will run in its viewers' minds long after the show is consigned to late-night satellite station re-runs.

PS: I claim 'Geek of the Week' for learning off the Gayatri Mantra as set to the music of the BSG soundtrack. Maybe that's enlightened of me, or maybe it's just sad. I dunno. But I do find it very soothing.

Is the Indo systemically anti-Muslim?

Certainly, some Muslims seem to think so.

As far as I'm aware, there have been at least two complaints to the Press Council and Ombudsman from Irish based Muslims about articles that appeared in the Irish Independent.

One was a somewhat inflammatory piece by commentator Kevin Myers, whose flights of fancy I've previously examined here.

The other complaint apparently relates to Ian O'Doherty (airbrushed above), whose otherwise interesting and light-hearted column I-Spy is regularly marred by his blinkered defence of all things Neo-Con or Israeli, and his blanket demonising of Islam.

After yet another crack about Shariah law in Ireland from Ian, a large number of Irish Muslims finally had enough and collectively wrote a letter to the editor, which was published in today's edition.

What I found intriguing, though, is that the grammar of the letter was sporadically abysmal. Not consistently so, just sporadically so, almost as if errors had been deliberately inserted to make the writers look stupid.

What errors JC, I hear you ask with my now well-known superpower of being able to hear your thoughts over the interweb?

Errors like: "Let us start with Saudi Arabia as an example quote by himcountry in the world named after a family..."

Or "We would also like to point out to yourMuslims were unmatched in the advances in the fields of mathematics..."

Or "It is similar to what the British didthe IRA was bombing Britain."

Now, some of the signatories included at least two consultant surgeons, not to mention other doctors, as well as 'students, shopkeepers and housewives.'

Either we are to believe that they took it in turns writing a line each, which might explain why a letter that is otherwise coherent and eloquent could include a series of incomprehensible grammar clangers.

Or we could assume that the Indo butchered the letter for their own impenetrable reasons.

I wonder which it is? Could the Indo be so systematically anti-Muslim as to deliberately make a community of Muslims out to be illiterate?

Fitna

There are fears of a major, violent reaction to the release on the internet of the short film, below, by bouffant blond Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders.

Nevertheless, it is always wrong to bow to threats of violence.

Therefore, with the aim of supporting freedom of speech, I am reproducing 'Fitna' below.

It's short, and it seeks to examine the influence of Quranic verses on contemporary Islamic terrorism.

In that way, it is simplistic. It is also provocative. But like Richard Dawkins, I believe that religions are not exempt from criticism, nor are religious faiths or teachings immune to critical appraisal.

This is what Wilders has sought to do. For that he can be commended, debated or condemned.

But it is wrong for anyone to be physically harmed or threatened because he has sought to do this, and I hope that does not arise.

I have loved every Arab nation I ever visited. I have spent contemplative time in many mosques. I have no less respect for Islam than any other religion, ie I have none for any of them.

I do feel that the grip of fundamentalist Islam on some people is the single worst aspect of Arab states, never mind places like Iran, Bangladesh, the 'stans.

Muslims need to accept, as increasingly Judaism and Christianity have done, that their religion is not impervious or immune to criticism.

If Muslims can respond to Geert Winders differently to how they responded to the Danish cartoonists and Salman Rushdie, by debating rather than destroying, that would be progress towards alleviating Western fears of Islam.

By their silence, their nonchalance, their refusal to be provoked by Winders, they can prove themselves better human beings.

I give you 'Fitna'.

You know you're a global joke

... when even Uganda is laughing at you.

Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, whose career as Libyan dictator has been punctuated by a series of eye-watering gaffes, has done it again.

This, let us recall, is the lad who attempted to set up a united Africa under his own leadership not once but repeatedly. The lad whose London embassy staff thought it was a smart idea to take potshots at female cops. The lad who trained the world's terrorists and gave them weaponry.

You'd think, after the assassination of his daughter by American bombs, that he'd work out to keep his head down in future. After all, even his fellow Arab neighbours can no longer stand him or his ego.

But no. On a recent visit to Uganda, he called the Bible a forgery because it didn't mention Muhammed.

Presumably it hadn't dawned on him that the lack of a mention for the Islamic prophet may have something to do with the Bible being written centuries before Muhammed was born.

Now even the Ugandans are laughing at him. How low can a dictator go?

Happy Hajj

Belated happy holidays to everyone. I had a suitably grumpy Christmas, and am now back online to rant again.

First up, though, let's move away from the Christian fairy tale for a moment to consider some other ones. Apparently six million people celebrate Kwanzaa in North America each year.

It's a week long celebration of pan-African culture that runs, conveniently for those seeking to extend their Christmas break into New Year, from the 26th of December to the 1st of January.

It's also totally made up. Some random Marxist invented it in the heady counterculture days of the late Sixties, because he reckoned that 'Jesus was a psychotic' that black people should distance themselves from.

Fast forward to today and George Bush is dishing out the patronising 'Happy Kwanzaa' wishes.

Maybe black citizens of the US and other places should pay more attention to their African origins (which are predominantly West African rather than the East African celebrations pastiched in Kwanzaa, incidentally). But spoof festivals made up by muppets who can't even spell in Swahili surely aren't the answer.

A much bigger party is set to kick off over at Mecca/Makkah though. The annual Hajj, wherein the world's Muslim population is encouraged to gather in a tent city in the Saudi desert and re-enact the trials of Abraham, is this coming week.

No doubt, the duty of a Muslim to pay this pilgrimage weighs heavily on many. And many save for years and dedicate their lives to the experience of doing their hajj. And equally no doubt, hundreds of those who attend this once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage will die as a result.

Surely it is time for someone, either in Islamic religious authority or in the Saudi regime, to stand up and say that it is no longer practical for a community that now numbers over 1.2 billion people to converge on a desert for a week at a time this year, all circling the ka'aba at once, all stoning the pillars at once, all listening to the sermon in the desert at the same time.

Of course, the full 1.2 billion Muslims do not all attend the hajj at once. But at least 2.5 million do each year, plenty more than the authorities can cope with. And the annual mass deaths that occur as a result of stampeding and crushing are the evidence that no infrastructure exists to deal with the movement of so many people.

Let's review recent statistics, kindly gathered by the BBC:

2006: 345 die in a crush during a stone-throwing ritual

2004: 251 trampled to death in stampede

2003: 14 are crushed to death

2001: 35 die in stampede

1998: At least 118 trampled to death

1997: 343 pilgrims die and 1,500 injured in fire

1994: 270 killed in stampede

1990: 1,426 pilgrims killed in tunnel leading to holy sites

1987: 400 die as Saudi authorities confront pro-Iranian demonstration

That's a lot of deaths for what should be a celebratory religious festival. One wonders how come people consistently die in their hundreds at the Hajj when 70 million can gather in the one spot for the Hindu Kumbh Mela in 2003 with only 39 deaths due to stampeding.

Yet somehow, mass deaths and the Hajj seem to go hand in hand, more years than not. So to anyone heading for the Hajj, I wish you all the best. Keep those elbows out and don't fall over, whatever you do.

For some, the real problem with the Hajj is that the lack of a quota system means that some affluent Muslims can fly in for the pilgrimage annually, while others never get a hope of going throughout their lives.

For others, it's putting their safety in the hands of the Saudi authorities, the same guys who have overseen all the stampedes listed above. Already there has been one large fire in Mecca, injuring 16 people. How many more will die this year?