Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Yorktown
Yorktown's Journal
Yorktown's Journal
November 4, 2015
I followed up on a related link (OK, it's Hannity, but the raw interview is still valid)
American Muslims saying Sharia should ideally take precedence over the Constitution.
Fundamentalist Christians, now Muslims; what's not to love?
Weird videos about Sharia in the US
Mark Dice is a media analyst who shoots a 'Man on the Street Monday' series.
The routine goes like this: he takes
(A) a respected public figure: Obama, the Pope (respectable?), Elie Wiesel,..
(B) an outlandish claim: aliens just landed, Kim Il Jung is a cool guy,..
then goes to people and asks: (A) says (B), do you agree?
Example: Elie Wiesel says "Kim Il Jung is a cool guy", do you agree?
Latest installment (Nov. 2), Hillary supports Sharia Law in her platform, do you agree?
And again, people just hear Hillary, and say they agree:
I followed up on a related link (OK, it's Hannity, but the raw interview is still valid)
American Muslims saying Sharia should ideally take precedence over the Constitution.
Fundamentalist Christians, now Muslims; what's not to love?
November 4, 2015
The Costs of Hindu Extremism
The dismay that many ordinary Indian citizens feel about Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s willingness to tolerate, even encourage, the Hindu hard-liners in his own party has now spread to the financial community. Last week, Moody’s Analytics, a division of the bond rating and risk management company, warned that Mr. Modi “must keep his members in check or risk losing domestic and global credibility” — meaning, in so many words, its attractiveness to international investors.
Indian business leaders are no less alarmed. Over the weekend, N.R. Narayana Murthy, a co-founder of the Indian technology giant Infosys, lamented that “the reality today is that there is considerable fear” in the minds of the minority in India, and Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw, chairwoman and managing director of Biocon, said business leaders are “concerned with what’s happening all across the country.”
Among the sparks that have set off an extraordinary outpouring of citizen reaction are the August killing of Malleshappa Madivalappa Kalburgi, a 76-year-old critic of Hindu idolatry, and Mr. Modi’s tardy condemnation of the lynching of a Muslim man in September by a Hindu mob enraged by a rumor that his family had killed a cow and eaten its meat.
Continued
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/opinion/the-costs-of-hindu-extremism.html
October 28, 2015
O'Reilly's book on the attempted assassination of R. Reagan savaged by historians.
Silver lining for O'Reilly: his book sells like hot buns, top of the Nielsen sales charts.
But I don't remember a book mauled so badly by the experts.
The wiki article is brutal:
Following the release of Killing Reagan: The Violent Assault That Changed a Presidency, Reagan biographers Craig Shirley, Steven Hayward, Paul Kengor and Kiron Skinner, along with a handful of former Reagan aides, immediately began a broadside to challenge the book on its factual inaccuracies and historical fabrications. Those four Reagan Biographers, who have written 19 biographies on Ronald Reagan between them, penned an op-ed for The Washington Post that highlighted some of the major historical inaccuracies and outright fabrications used in O'Reilly's book. Additional criticisms surfaced from officials that actually served in the Reagan Administration, who were present at the events discussed in the book, yet dispute what actually happened. AB Culvahouse, who was Counsel to the President from 1987 to 1989, calls one of the key anecdotes of O'Reilly's book describing a meeting focused on President Reagan's fitness to hold office "a debunked myth."
In response, Bill O'Reilly took to the airwaves on October 19, 2015, ducking the criticism and calling his critics "zealots and jealous people." He also called the criticisms "comical," to which Reagan Historian Craig Shirley responded "So far, I've written four books on Ronald Reagan, written dozens of articles, given dozens of lectures, am a trustee of Eureka College, taught a course there [titled] Reagan 101, and have lectured at the Reagan Library and the Reagan Ranch. It is fair to say we probably know a little bit more about Ronald Reagan than Bill O'Reilly. We certainly know the facts of Ronald Reagan."
The following day, Ed Meese, who served as Counselor to the President (1981-1985) and as U.S. Attorney General (1985-1988) penned a joint op-ed with Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation Executive Director John Heubusch detailed even more inaccuracies in O'Reilly's book, saying "we believe that 'Killing Reagan' does a real disservice to our 40th president and to history itself." The same day, President Reagan's Assistant for Political and Intergovernmental Affairs also penned an op-ed for The Washington Times disputing O'Reilly's key thesis as another discredited "senility myth" about Ronald Reagan.
Even more criticisms came from reporters at the Washington Post, who looked into O'Reilly's claim to have "double-sourced everything" in his book. On October 19, 2015, about a month after the book was published, O'Reilly's researcher first reached out to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library to obtain a document that O'Reilly himself called a "key part of the book." On October 21, 2015, it was reported that the fact-checker that O'Reilly and Dugard commissioned to research and fact-check the manuscript for "Killing Reagan" bailed on the project after realizing that the authors were "distorting" material, in her opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Reagan
In response, Bill O'Reilly took to the airwaves on October 19, 2015, ducking the criticism and calling his critics "zealots and jealous people." He also called the criticisms "comical," to which Reagan Historian Craig Shirley responded "So far, I've written four books on Ronald Reagan, written dozens of articles, given dozens of lectures, am a trustee of Eureka College, taught a course there [titled] Reagan 101, and have lectured at the Reagan Library and the Reagan Ranch. It is fair to say we probably know a little bit more about Ronald Reagan than Bill O'Reilly. We certainly know the facts of Ronald Reagan."
The following day, Ed Meese, who served as Counselor to the President (1981-1985) and as U.S. Attorney General (1985-1988) penned a joint op-ed with Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation Executive Director John Heubusch detailed even more inaccuracies in O'Reilly's book, saying "we believe that 'Killing Reagan' does a real disservice to our 40th president and to history itself." The same day, President Reagan's Assistant for Political and Intergovernmental Affairs also penned an op-ed for The Washington Times disputing O'Reilly's key thesis as another discredited "senility myth" about Ronald Reagan.
Even more criticisms came from reporters at the Washington Post, who looked into O'Reilly's claim to have "double-sourced everything" in his book. On October 19, 2015, about a month after the book was published, O'Reilly's researcher first reached out to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library to obtain a document that O'Reilly himself called a "key part of the book." On October 21, 2015, it was reported that the fact-checker that O'Reilly and Dugard commissioned to research and fact-check the manuscript for "Killing Reagan" bailed on the project after realizing that the authors were "distorting" material, in her opinion.
October 27, 2015
Australia: Fury as Muslim students allowed to walk out of assembly during national anthem
The excuse given was that a Shia day of religious mourning.
By that logic, for the mourning of the crucifixion of a Mr 'Jesus' (real name unknown) on a day which is vaguely the spring equinox that European pagans used to celebrate, singing national anthems might be banned if there is a Christian minority around?
Accomodation of religious whims and fancies is getting out of control..
A PUBLIC primary school has come under fire for allowing Muslim students to walk out of assembly while the national anthem is being sung.
Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School principal Cheryl Irving said she was allowing Shi’a children to opt out of singing or listening to the anthem because it was a religious month of mourning and they should not be forced to take part in joyous events.
“Muharram is a Shi’a cultural observation marking the death of Imam Hussein,” Ms Irving said. “This year it falls between Tuesday October 13 and Thursday November 12.
“Prior to last week’s Years 2-6 assembly, in respect of this religious observance, students were given the opportunity to leave the hall before music was played.”
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/fury-as-muslim-students-allowed-to-walk-out-of-assembly-during-national-anthem/story-fni0cx12-1227583278175?sv=25b6f46627b223fb59f60260064485b
Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School principal Cheryl Irving said she was allowing Shi’a children to opt out of singing or listening to the anthem because it was a religious month of mourning and they should not be forced to take part in joyous events.
“Muharram is a Shi’a cultural observation marking the death of Imam Hussein,” Ms Irving said. “This year it falls between Tuesday October 13 and Thursday November 12.
“Prior to last week’s Years 2-6 assembly, in respect of this religious observance, students were given the opportunity to leave the hall before music was played.”
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/fury-as-muslim-students-allowed-to-walk-out-of-assembly-during-national-anthem/story-fni0cx12-1227583278175?sv=25b6f46627b223fb59f60260064485b
October 26, 2015
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/islamist-stabs-jew-punches-rabbi-in-marseille-france/2015/10/25/0/?print
Islamist Stabs Jew, Punches Rabbi in Marseille, France
Interfaith dialogue as usual..
Rabbi Yehuda Malul of the Menuchat Shalom synagogue in Marseilles, France, was attacked this past weekend with another congregant while on their way to morning prayers.
The synagogue is located in the center of the southern French city, where there are many hareidi-religious Jews, synagogues and yeshivot.
According to a report posted on the Hebrew-language website Bhadarei Haredim, the attacker was a “young man of Arab appearance.”
The rabbi, who spoke with a writer at the website, said the attacker yelled, “Yahud, Allahu Akbar!” The attacker punched the rabbi with his fists, and he shouted again, “Itbah al-Yahud!” as the rabbi fell to the ground.
The synagogue is located in the center of the southern French city, where there are many hareidi-religious Jews, synagogues and yeshivot.
According to a report posted on the Hebrew-language website Bhadarei Haredim, the attacker was a “young man of Arab appearance.”
The rabbi, who spoke with a writer at the website, said the attacker yelled, “Yahud, Allahu Akbar!” The attacker punched the rabbi with his fists, and he shouted again, “Itbah al-Yahud!” as the rabbi fell to the ground.
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/islamist-stabs-jew-punches-rabbi-in-marseille-france/2015/10/25/0/?print
October 13, 2015
Meanwhile, Sherif Gaber remains a great guy:
The top 10 lies of Reza Aslan
It's a video which is a bit longuish (50 mns), but worth it while doing sth else.
Meanwhile, Sherif Gaber remains a great guy:
October 12, 2015
Wiki on Sherif Gaber:
Sherif Gaber (full name Sherif Gaber Abdelzim Bakr), born c. 1993 (Arabic: شريف جابر عبد العظيم] is an Egyptian political activist and blogger who was arrested on October 27, 2013 for professing atheism, contempt of religion relating to activities on campus and atheist statements online, and spreading immoral values "defending homosexuality".
In April 2013 Gaber was in his second semester at the Suez Canal University in Ismailia, Egypt. He was enrolled in a science class with a professor named Elsaid Farrag. In one of the classes, Professor Farrag was giving a lecture on homosexuality and stated: “Homosexuality is a sin. Gays and lesbians shall be crucified in the middle of the streets, stoned, and burned to death!" Gaber suggested looking at homosexuality from a scientific perspective since it was a science class, but in response Farrag questioned Gaber's religious beliefs. Gaber responded that science suggested that homosexuality is neither a choice nor unnatural. Farrag then proceeded to ban him from ever participating in class again, threatened to extend his time at school to eight years, and threatened to give him a failing grade in every course. He continued to publicly harass him for the remaining two hours of class.
The following week in class, Farrag with other teachers, one of them called Ramy Mohammad Husien were holding a printed version of everything he had posted to his Facebook page that they felt went against Islam or was in support of free speech. They read the posts aloud to the class and ended by telling Gaber, along with the entire class, that he would take the papers over to the public prosecutor to have him imprisoned. Gaber received an F in that class in June 2013, even though he got an A+ in the first term "Jan. 2013"
- on October 27, 2013, three armored state security cars and an army vehicle arrived at Gaber's house. (..)
- On February 16, 2015 Gaber was found guilty and sentenced to one year in jail. (..)
- Gaber's whereabouts are unknown, but in July 2015 the blog Patheos reported that Gaber had been releasing pro-science and pro-human rights videos on YouTube.[10]
Egyptian (sentenced for atheism) shreds islamic 'miracles' to pieces
#t=254Wiki on Sherif Gaber:
Sherif Gaber (full name Sherif Gaber Abdelzim Bakr), born c. 1993 (Arabic: شريف جابر عبد العظيم] is an Egyptian political activist and blogger who was arrested on October 27, 2013 for professing atheism, contempt of religion relating to activities on campus and atheist statements online, and spreading immoral values "defending homosexuality".
In April 2013 Gaber was in his second semester at the Suez Canal University in Ismailia, Egypt. He was enrolled in a science class with a professor named Elsaid Farrag. In one of the classes, Professor Farrag was giving a lecture on homosexuality and stated: “Homosexuality is a sin. Gays and lesbians shall be crucified in the middle of the streets, stoned, and burned to death!" Gaber suggested looking at homosexuality from a scientific perspective since it was a science class, but in response Farrag questioned Gaber's religious beliefs. Gaber responded that science suggested that homosexuality is neither a choice nor unnatural. Farrag then proceeded to ban him from ever participating in class again, threatened to extend his time at school to eight years, and threatened to give him a failing grade in every course. He continued to publicly harass him for the remaining two hours of class.
The following week in class, Farrag with other teachers, one of them called Ramy Mohammad Husien were holding a printed version of everything he had posted to his Facebook page that they felt went against Islam or was in support of free speech. They read the posts aloud to the class and ended by telling Gaber, along with the entire class, that he would take the papers over to the public prosecutor to have him imprisoned. Gaber received an F in that class in June 2013, even though he got an A+ in the first term "Jan. 2013"
- on October 27, 2013, three armored state security cars and an army vehicle arrived at Gaber's house. (..)
- On February 16, 2015 Gaber was found guilty and sentenced to one year in jail. (..)
- Gaber's whereabouts are unknown, but in July 2015 the blog Patheos reported that Gaber had been releasing pro-science and pro-human rights videos on YouTube.[10]
October 9, 2015
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/15/we-need-to-talk-about-islam-s-jihad-problem.html
We Need to Talk About Islam’s Jihadism Problem
We Need to Talk About Islam’s Jihadism Problem
It’s time to confront Islamism head on—without cries of Islamophobia. Holding Islam up to scrutiny, rationally and ethically, must not be confused with anti-Muslim bigotry.
Talking about Islam today is a dangerous business. Disagreements about the role this religion plays in the world have become a wellspring of intolerance and violence. Cartoonists have been massacred in Paris to shouts of “We have avenged the Prophet!” Secular bloggers have been hacked to death in Bangladesh. (..)
For years, Western politicians and commentators have struggled to understand this phenomenon. And many have struggled not to understand it, denying any link between “Muslim extremism” and the religion of Islam.(..)
What most discussions of “Muslim extremism” miss, and what is obfuscated at every turn by commentators like Glenn Greenwald, Reza Aslan, Karen Armstrong—and even Nicholas Kristof and Ben Affleck—is the power of specific religious ideas such as martyrdom, apostasy, blasphemy, prophecy, and honor. These ideas do not represent the totality of Islam, but neither are they foreign to it. Nor do they exist in precisely the same way in other faiths. (..)
The underlying ideology—we call it “Islamism”—has metastasized and must be confronted directly. After more than a decade of conventional, physical wars, we must finally wage an effective war of ideas. Islamism, often referred to as “political Islam,” is the desire to impose a version of Islam on the rest of society. (..) After more than a decade of conventional, physical wars, we must finally wage an effective war of ideas.
Political Islam is an offshoot of religious Islam and draws much of its inspiration from the Quran and the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad). To be sure, it does not represent the faith in all its forms, but unless challenged, the underlying problems of religious literalism, dogmatism, and pious intolerance are left untreated and continue to spread. A poll in 2014, published in the Saudi-owned newspaper al-Hayat, found that 92 percent of Saudis believe that ISIS “conforms to the values of Islam and Islamic law.” Clearly, ISIS has something to do with Islam. (..)
Of course, the Bible contains barbaric passages, as well. But there are historical and theological reasons why Christians and Jews can now easily ignore them. Unfortunately, out of excessive concern not to appear biased, many liberals consider any discussion of the special problem posed by Islamism to be a sign of bigotry. This attitude helps bar the door to reform.
To call ISIS “un-Islamic,” as President Obama has repeatedly done, and as Prime Minister Cameron recently stopped doing, is to play a dangerous game with words. Calling out and combating the ideology of Islamism is the only way that non-Muslims can help those liberal Muslims who wish to reform their faith from within. And failing to do so means abandoning the most vulnerable in Muslim communities—women, gays, apostates, freethinkers, (..)
It’s time to confront Islamism head on—without cries of Islamophobia. Holding Islam up to scrutiny, rationally and ethically, must not be confused with anti-Muslim bigotry.
Talking about Islam today is a dangerous business. Disagreements about the role this religion plays in the world have become a wellspring of intolerance and violence. Cartoonists have been massacred in Paris to shouts of “We have avenged the Prophet!” Secular bloggers have been hacked to death in Bangladesh. (..)
For years, Western politicians and commentators have struggled to understand this phenomenon. And many have struggled not to understand it, denying any link between “Muslim extremism” and the religion of Islam.(..)
What most discussions of “Muslim extremism” miss, and what is obfuscated at every turn by commentators like Glenn Greenwald, Reza Aslan, Karen Armstrong—and even Nicholas Kristof and Ben Affleck—is the power of specific religious ideas such as martyrdom, apostasy, blasphemy, prophecy, and honor. These ideas do not represent the totality of Islam, but neither are they foreign to it. Nor do they exist in precisely the same way in other faiths. (..)
The underlying ideology—we call it “Islamism”—has metastasized and must be confronted directly. After more than a decade of conventional, physical wars, we must finally wage an effective war of ideas. Islamism, often referred to as “political Islam,” is the desire to impose a version of Islam on the rest of society. (..) After more than a decade of conventional, physical wars, we must finally wage an effective war of ideas.
Political Islam is an offshoot of religious Islam and draws much of its inspiration from the Quran and the hadith (the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad). To be sure, it does not represent the faith in all its forms, but unless challenged, the underlying problems of religious literalism, dogmatism, and pious intolerance are left untreated and continue to spread. A poll in 2014, published in the Saudi-owned newspaper al-Hayat, found that 92 percent of Saudis believe that ISIS “conforms to the values of Islam and Islamic law.” Clearly, ISIS has something to do with Islam. (..)
Of course, the Bible contains barbaric passages, as well. But there are historical and theological reasons why Christians and Jews can now easily ignore them. Unfortunately, out of excessive concern not to appear biased, many liberals consider any discussion of the special problem posed by Islamism to be a sign of bigotry. This attitude helps bar the door to reform.
To call ISIS “un-Islamic,” as President Obama has repeatedly done, and as Prime Minister Cameron recently stopped doing, is to play a dangerous game with words. Calling out and combating the ideology of Islamism is the only way that non-Muslims can help those liberal Muslims who wish to reform their faith from within. And failing to do so means abandoning the most vulnerable in Muslim communities—women, gays, apostates, freethinkers, (..)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/15/we-need-to-talk-about-islam-s-jihad-problem.html
October 9, 2015
Ancient Pastafarian Relic Unearthed
Albania's Directional Driller was recently touring the ancient Illyrian city of Apollonia in present day Albania when he came across a tablet that depicts his noodliness. If you look closely you will see at the bottom of the tablet his holiness the FSM is getting drunk via Illyrian wine jugs.
Blessed be the Holy Flying Spaghetti Monster (may pesto be upon it),
which has been rightfully venerated since the dawn of time immemorial (insert cliché here)
http://www.venganza.org/2015/10/albanian-relic-unearthed/
October 7, 2015
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2015/10/05/renoir-haters-picket-outside-museum-fine-arts/e0ybbZMdhVclxN01wfmaYM/story.html
God hates Renoir (the painter)
God hates so many things, it doesn't come as a shocker...
Renoir haters picket outside Museum of Fine Arts
A group of playful protesters picketed outside the Museum of Fine Arts on Monday, expressing their dislike of painter Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s work.
By Mark Shanahan GLOBE STAFF OCTOBER 05, 2015
It’s nothing personal, says Ben Ewen-Campen, he just doesn’t think French impressionist Pierre-Auguste Renoir is much of a painter. Monday, the Harvard postdoc joined some like-minded aesthetes for a playful protest outside the Museum of Fine Arts. The rally, which mostly bewildered passersby, was organized by Max Geller, creator of the Instagram account Renoir Sucks at Painting, who wants the MFA to take its Renoirs off the walls and replace them with something better. Holding homemade signs reading “God Hates Renoir” and “Treacle Harms Society,” the protesters ate cheese pizza purchased by Geller, and chanted: “Put some fingers on those hands! Give us work by Paul Gauguin !” and “Other art is worth your while! Renoir paints a steaming pile!”
A group of playful protesters picketed outside the Museum of Fine Arts on Monday, expressing their dislike of painter Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s work.
By Mark Shanahan GLOBE STAFF OCTOBER 05, 2015
It’s nothing personal, says Ben Ewen-Campen, he just doesn’t think French impressionist Pierre-Auguste Renoir is much of a painter. Monday, the Harvard postdoc joined some like-minded aesthetes for a playful protest outside the Museum of Fine Arts. The rally, which mostly bewildered passersby, was organized by Max Geller, creator of the Instagram account Renoir Sucks at Painting, who wants the MFA to take its Renoirs off the walls and replace them with something better. Holding homemade signs reading “God Hates Renoir” and “Treacle Harms Society,” the protesters ate cheese pizza purchased by Geller, and chanted: “Put some fingers on those hands! Give us work by Paul Gauguin !” and “Other art is worth your while! Renoir paints a steaming pile!”
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2015/10/05/renoir-haters-picket-outside-museum-fine-arts/e0ybbZMdhVclxN01wfmaYM/story.html
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Jan 28, 2015, 04:59 AMNumber of posts: 2,884
