Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Rioting For Dummies, "Religion Of Peace"-Style
Turns out that at least "several" of the people who incited the violence in the wake of the Mohammed cartoons never actually saw the cartoons. From the Copenhagen Post:

In a new documentary film, the violent protests in the Middle East over the infamous Mohammed cartoons in 2005 are proven to have been instigated by Islamic leaders who never actually saw the drawings themselves.

Danish director Karsten Kjær travelled throughout the Middle East to investigate who and what was responsible for the wave of violence released from the cartoons for his documentary ‘Those Damned Drawings’ (‘De Forbandede Tegninger’). He said the primary theme of the film is freedom of expression and its boundaries.

‘I’ve sought to be objective about the crisis’ factual events,’ Kjær told public broadcaster DR. ‘But it is also a very personal film that portrays my travels around the Middle East and my own impression of both the causes and consequences of the conflict brought about by the 12 drawings.

The film suggests the crisis began full-force when the man many consider to be Islam’s most powerful figure, Sheik Yussuf Al-Qaradawi, declared 3 February 2006 as ‘Anger Day’ on his TV programme. A wave of violent protests across the globe unleashing followed in the wake of that transmission.

In the documentary, Kjær shows the Mohammed drawings to Al-Qaradawi, who views them for the first time.

Kjær also shows the cartoons to Ali Bakhsi, the Iranian who spearheaded demonstrations in Tehran that led to the burning of the Danish embassy there. Bakhsi laughingly says the drawings look nothing like Mohammed but rather like an Indian Sikh.

Ho. Ho. Ho.

Posted by aalkon at October 6, 2007 10:24 AM

Comments

Why should they let the facts get in the way of a good grievance? Isn't that the core teaching of the group identity politics movement?

Who says Arabs and muslims can't learn about Western democracy?

Posted by: brian at October 6, 2007 9:29 AM

I think the would-be "tolerant" have no idea what primitives they're trying to support. And then, as you point out, there are striking similarities to western identity politics.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 6, 2007 9:53 AM

Recently I was speaking with an acquaintance who I know attends a fundamentalist Christian church. All-around nice guy, helpful, you'd like him if you met him, until he starts talking about machine-gun 'n bible camp, where the faithful indoctrinate the kiddies into the importance of killing for Jesus and how to use a variety of automatic weapons against the nonbelievers.
Is it just me, or does every one of these monotheistic bloodthirsty desert religions hold a view of the creator as not-quite-almighty-enough to smite the Enemy on his own?

Posted by: Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at October 6, 2007 11:48 AM

Religion really is for dimwits. A woman this morning told me there was evidence god exists. What evidence? A piece David Wolper wrote. And he heard Einstein talk when he was young! Woweee! She said Wolper claimed Einstein believed in god. He did not and stated so clearly:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/arguments.html#einstein

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

This conversation with lint-for-brains started when I told her about a recent accomplishment -- soon to be announced -- and she said something my accomplishment being evidence there is a god. No, actually, it's evidence I work my ass off as a writer, but thanks for attributing it to some imaginary figure in the sky.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 6, 2007 11:57 AM

PS Famous people we all respect for one accomplishment or another may sometimes say dumbshit things. Einstein is falsely accused in this, however. Nevertheless, people who make such arguments -- "I believe because Mr. Noteworthy does" -- should be told that it's not an argument, merely a lame excuse for refusing to think for oneself.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 6, 2007 12:00 PM

"Is it just me, or does every one of these monotheistic bloodthirsty desert religions hold a view of the creator as not-quite-almighty-enough to smite the Enemy on his own?"

It's just you. BIG differences between Islam and the other two. Sharia and Dhimmitude being two of the biggest differences.

The "They're all the same" idea is foolish and dangerous.

Posted by: winston at October 6, 2007 4:13 PM

"Religion really is for dimwits."

I wish it were that simple. Certainly it is a dimwitted or irrational idea, but it's one that is held by quite a number of people who are otherwise intelligent and sometimes even educated.

A large percentage of the population seems to have a need for these irrational ideas. If it's not religion it's socialism, organic food, "traditional" medicine or whatever. Having chucked religion and socialism (I was never socialist by name, but did hold mainstream political views.), I wonder what big irrationalities I still hold.

Posted by: Shawn at October 7, 2007 3:57 AM

Shawn - there is a biological need in most humans to believe in something incomprehensibly large.

People like you and Amy seem to think that only mental defectives believe in God, or practice religion. You are wrong.

And if science was ever able to definitively prove the lack of existence of God, I'd bet that more than 50% of all humans would kill themselves. Humans don't deal well with uncertainty. The existence of God offers a certainty that there's something that is out of their control, and is also watching them and keeping order.

The various secular movements (socialism, environmentalism) are merely replacements for the human urge to form religion.

The only difference between secular humanism and Christianity is where God lives.

Posted by: brian at October 7, 2007 4:55 AM

Brian, we appear to have hard-wired morality -- which is the only way we could have lived together in the small bands we evolved in. Here's a link I posted on another entry:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/science/18mora.html?ref=health

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 7, 2007 7:35 AM

"there is a biological need in most humans to believe in something incomprehensibly large."

Chaplain: O Lord…
Congregation: O Lord…
Chaplain: … ooh, You are so big…
Congregation: … ooh, You are so big…
Chaplain: … so absolutely huge.
Congregation: … so absolutely huge.
Chaplain: Gosh, we're all really impressed down here, I can tell You.
Congregation: Gosh, we're all really impressed down here, I can tell You.
Chaplain: Forgive us, O Lord, for this, our dreadful toadying, and…
Congregation: … and barefaced flattery.
Chaplain: But You're so strong and, well, just so… super.
Congregation: Fantastic!
Chaplain: Amen.
Congregation: Amen.

Posted by: Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at October 7, 2007 8:03 AM

The way religious nutters put it, it's like god is the bully of seventh grade; i.e., something really bad will happen to you if you don't sit around saying, "God, you are soooo cool," and then give the members of his gang your lunch money.


Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 7, 2007 8:26 AM

Why do some Iranians have Arab names, when Farsi is related to Hindi, and Arabic is not an Indo-European language? If I'm not mistaken, Ahmadinejad is an Arab name. Do Arab Muslims prosper in Iran?

Posted by: DaveG at October 7, 2007 5:02 PM

Wish Joe were here to answer that.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 7, 2007 5:16 PM

"People like you and Amy seem to think that only mental defectives believe in God, or practice religion"

I can't speak for Amy, but what I was trying to say in my post above is that intelligent people still frequently hold defective ideas. That, to me, is a lot more subtle, scary and interesting problem than if those defective ideas were only held by stupid people.

It's your call whether holding a defective idea qualifies a person as mentally defective.

Posted by: Shawn at October 8, 2007 11:03 AM

Leave a comment