posted 11-30-2007 12:07 PM            

quote:

---

KHARTOUM, Sudan — Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and knives, rallied Friday in a central square and demanded the execution of a British teacher convicted of insulting Islam for allowing her students to name a teddy bear “Muhammad.”

The protesters streamed out of mosques after Friday sermons, as pickup trucks with loudspeakers blared messages against Gillian Gibbons, the teacher who was sentenced Thursday to 15 days in prison and deportation. She avoided the more serious punishment of 40 lashes.

They massed in central Martyrs Square outside the presidential palace, where hundreds of riot police were deployed. They did not try to stop the rally, which lasted about an hour. “Shame, shame on the U.K.,” protesters chanted.

The protesters called for Gibbons’ execution, saying, “No tolerance: Execution,” and “Kill her, kill her by firing squad.”

---

posted 11-30-2007 12:34 PM            

The people marching against this teacher do not know the facts of the case. They only "know" what they've been spoon-fed: that she teaches her students to hate Islam and that she insulted the prophet. Even if all those things were true, however, they're still calling for her death over a religious disagreement.

Does anybody recall any mobs of Christians marching in the street and calling for the death of the guy who photographed Piss Christ?

posted 11-30-2007 01:51 PM            

The prevailing sentiment was probably more along the lines of "there ought to be a law", which doesn't seem much different to me other than the position on the muddy slope.

posted 11-30-2007 02:22 PM            

we are talking about a small fraction of rational humans. Not a country, nor, even an ethnic group.

posted 11-30-2007 02:51 PM            

"Piss Christ" == deliberately as offensive as possible.

Teddy bear == no indication any offense was intended.

"Piss Christ" == Christians calling for punishment for offensive art; don't know what penalty they called for, but probably not shooting.

posted 11-30-2007 02:52 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by LaneH:
we are talking about a small fraction of rational humans. Not a country, nor, even an ethnic group.

---

posted 11-30-2007 02:58 PM            

I am having problems with what the solution is...

I would like diplomacy prior to killing. But I am not sure that there is a diplomatic solution.

So I am locked in a catch-22.

posted 11-30-2007 05:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by KGB:
"Piss Christ" == Christians calling for punishment for offensive art; don't know what penalty they called for, but probably not shooting.

---

I don't recall that any punishment was called for by Christians. Many thought that he shouldn't get NEA funding for stuff like that (I don't recall that he did get taxpayer funding for that particular piece anyway), but such sentiments were hardly limited to Christians. That was the point of my comparison: Not that there is any similarity between that and the teddy bear, but the difference in reaction. Muslims (a significant minority of them anyway) go completely psycho over even an imaginary insult. Christians are offended by offensive things, but you won't find mobs of bloodthirsty Christians wanting to shoot Maplethorpe. You'd never know there's a difference from the MSM though.

posted 11-30-2007 05:43 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sam Mc Kee:
I don't recall that [b]any punishment was called for by Christians. Many thought that he shouldn't get NEA funding for stuff like that (I don't recall that he did get taxpayer funding for that particular piece anyway), but such sentiments were hardly limited to Christians.
[/B]

---

That's what it takes to be called an extremist Christian in the West. Oppose government funding of offensive art.

posted 11-30-2007 06:28 PM            

I am not, of course, saying that because we did it in 1965 the Sudanese should be condoned for doing it now. In fact, I'd be delighted if we could get the Moslem world to show the same degree of tolerance the American south had in 1965. I just get a cheap thrill from moral ambiguity.

posted 11-30-2007 07:32 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sam Mc Kee:
I don't recall that [b]any punishment was called for by Christians. Many thought that he shouldn't get NEA funding for stuff like that (I don't recall that he did get taxpayer funding for that particular piece anyway), but such sentiments were hardly limited to Christians. That was the point of my comparison: Not that there is any similarity between that and the teddy bear, but the difference in reaction. Muslims (a significant minority of them anyway) go completely psycho over even an imaginary insult. Christians are offended by offensive things, but you won't find mobs of bloodthirsty Christians wanting to shoot Maplethorpe. You'd never know there's a difference from the MSM though.

[/B]

---

Haven't been around the evangelical portion of my family I guess.

I would rejoice in their demise, although I am so completely isolated from them now that I don't even consider their presence, except as an entity to be avoided.

posted 11-30-2007 07:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by KGB:
I'm not sure the two cases are a fair comparison.

"Piss Christ" == deliberately as offensive as possible.

Teddy bear == no indication any offense was intended.

"Piss Christ" == Christians calling for punishment for offensive art; don't know what penalty they called for, but probably not shooting.

Teddy bear == shooting.

---

posted 11-30-2007 09:28 PM            

quote:

---

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, Nov. 30 (UPI) -- Netherlands authorities are commissioning a study to determine why Moroccan men target gays in Amsterdam, considered one of Europe's most gay friendly cities.

Amsterdam has experienced a growing number of attacks on gays and lesbians, Der Spiegel reported Friday. In 2006, the Dutch metropolis registered 32 hate crimes directed at gays, but during the first half of 2007, 26 had already been counted, the newspaper said.

Mayor Job Cohen commissioned the University of Amsterdam to conduct a study on the motives behind the attacks.

Half the hate crimes were committed by men of Moroccan origin. Some researchers believe they lashed out at local gays after feeling stigmatized by Dutch society, the newspaper said.

---

So its the fault of Dutch society that Moroccan immigrants attack gays.

posted 12-01-2007 03:47 AM            

Get him here.

posted 12-01-2007 12:26 PM            

Well, they did get a reaction, including verbal confrontation from the gas station owner and her customers, and a threat that the owner would call in some of "the boys". A few minutes later, "the boys" showed up, with several shirtless rednecks arriving in the back of a pickup truck.

The Brits made a hasty retreat being pelted with stones.

Spoiler Alert: In case you're wondering, the cars were adorned with such phrases as "Hillary for President", "Country Western is Rubbish", "Nascar Sucks", and in pink letters on a white pickup truck, "Man Love is OK".

posted 12-01-2007 05:56 PM            

15 days in jail and deportation.

Better than the savages that wanted her dead, but...
------------------
lane h. can be reached at laneman@erols.com
"Never let your mind remain so open that your brain falls out."

posted 12-01-2007 09:32 PM            

Stupid REALLY needs to be more painful.

posted 12-02-2007 02:34 PM            

"Among the visitors and residents of Mecca in the time of the prophet were Jews as well as Christians. Muhammad's thinking was further heavily influenced by these followers of Abraham, as well as by special revelations which were (it is said) communicated to him by the angel Gabriel." Click here for the complete essay.

Islam is a late comer to the religious game. If it was informed by both Christianity and Judaism, why is it so anti-antithetical to both?

I absolutely do not understand how "The Cradle of Civilization" located between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (which, of course, meet in Iraq. Does not 'civilization' imply being simply civil and going forward in the spirit of gaining knowledge or both the physical and spiritual worlds? There were city-states that grew and came into conflict with the over lapping boundaries of other city-states. Were the seeds of tribalism and boundary limits sown here? As 'muricans become more contentious are we not creating the same situation: NIMBYers, urban/suburban, PCers v every damned thing? (Ex: War on Christmas).

Sheesh. You folx are entirely too provocative. It's time for a long discussion at Flo's Intergalactic Cafe -- where drinks are always on the house, food is rife with transfats and smokers are welcome. The lemon meringue pie is to die for. Somehow I can envision us defining all the problems in the world and never agreeing on solutions.

Fine Sunday too all. Sorry for all you folx boxed in by global cooling.

Anne

I seem to be operating in period of screwing up UBB stuff. Thanx to those who clean up behind me.

posted 12-02-2007 02:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by annef:
Islam is a late comer to the religious game. If it was informed by both Christianity and Judaism, why is it so anti-antithetical to both?

I absolutely do not understand how "The Cradle of Civilization" located between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (which, of course, meet in Iraq. Does not 'civilization' imply being simply civil and going forward in the spirit of gaining knowledge or both the physical and spiritual worlds?

---

posted 12-03-2007 01:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casper:
More concerned with bottle rockets?

hehe, had to go there
---------------->

---

I think you meant Heh Heh. That would close the circle and make it a classic twit moment. You need some work if you aspire to rise to the level of Beavis and Butthead.

posted 12-03-2007 04:48 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by WattKid:
I think you meant Heh Heh. That would close the circle and make it a classic twit moment. You need some work if you aspire to rise to the level of Beavis and Butthead.

---

posted 12-03-2007 04:52 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SPQR:
Because, IMO, Islam originated in the Arabian peninsula, rather than Mesopotamia, and had its roots in a harsh, tribal desert bandit culture. At times, it was "civilized" by extended time in a more urbanized culture during the Middle Ages, but the last century has seen a large injection worldwide of missionary work by well-funded Wahabbi sects reintroducing the desert Arabian peninsula cultural version of Islam.

---

posted 12-03-2007 11:35 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casper:
I disagree, not necessarily because of the obvious determinism, but because Judaism emerged from the very same Arabian polytheism (although from an earlier time). The Babylonian/Persian influences come later. The difference in the three is the degree and scope of the syncretism.

---

posted 12-03-2007 12:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Casper:
... but because Judaism emerged from the very same Arabian polytheism (although from an earlier time).

---

Whatever your views on early Judaism and the veracity of the historical elements of Genesis, the story of Genesis suggests both Egyptian and Babylonian influences early on. Genesis claims that Abraham, the father figure of the Semitic tribes, came from Mesopotamia, and that both Abraham and his descendants who became the Jews had frequent contact with Egypt. Set could speak with greater authority, but I think a fair number of early common cultural elements support the Egyptian connection -- surprisingly, not all one way: The Egyptisns borrowed some cultural elements from the Semites.

In addition, Judaism has never been a world religion. There is little doubt the Jews occupied Palestine for several centuries without going much outside their own boundaries, except for the forceful transportation of their elites to Bablyon. This First Diaspora preceded both the Second Disapora (duh) and the rise of Christianity by some centuries, so the Mesopotamian influence was there before either Judaism or Christiany had much presence on the world stage. In addition, the Greco-Roman elements of creedal Christianity are obvious.

Islam shares the claim on Abraham and an early Mesopotamian influence, but not convincingly, in my opinion. It figuratively parts ways with Judaism early on (Ishmael versus Israel) and in its early setting it contended with local fertility cults of the kind that has ceased to dominate Palestine a millenium earlier. From there it very rapidly becomes a world religion, largely by force.

posted 12-03-2007 01:33 PM            

Some of the points that seem to have pretty strong secular backing:

1) The cross-cultural exchange that one would expect from biblical or legendary account is not suggested by the actual shared culture between the Egyptians and the early Hebrews. Certainly not enough to support an exodus story, but that isn't supported with other evidence either. The linguistic crossovers are easily covered by phoenician-egyptian contact and commerce. Circumcision is one notable exception.

2) The early polytheism of the arabian peninsula is very rich, and it is shared across the levant as well. Yahweh and Baal, for instance, were probably two cultural manifestations of the same deity. There is debate about whether the deity was a "storm god" or a "sea god" or a fusion of both (or more). There are other similarities that give early polytheistic Hebrew culture more similarities with the Southern Peninsula. This point is often used as "evidence" to support a dual exodus theory, or minimalist exodus; that some Egyptians migrated East, while many more migrated from the South to eventualy become the "Israelites"

3) There is considerable persian influence in the polytheistic phase, Asherah (Ishtar?) being a good example. But that same influence exists across arabia. In the monotheistic phase, after the return of the patriarchs, you find much more Eastern (Babylonian) influence. This is where the divergence occurs IMO. Not long after that you have first greece and later Rome marching through, which tended to make the Hebrews somewhat standoffish; who can blame them?

4) at about that same time though, while Judaism begins to close itself off from outside influence (strong machinations between the hellenists and anti-Hellenists are abundant), Arabian polytheism is growing into a rich cultural tapestry. The divergence is more pronounced.

5) It comes full circle with Muhammed. The earliest texts in islam were not original to islam, they were Jewish. As a political force, Islam was highly succesful in "standardizing" religion and religious practices. Pagan rites and temples are replaced quietly or assimilated into the new faith just as Easter is assimilated into Christianity. The roots are still the same.

posted 12-03-2007 01:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SPQR:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Casper:
[b] I disagree, not necessarily because of the obvious determinism, but because Judaism emerged from the very same Arabian polytheism (although from an earlier time). The Babylonian/Persian influences come later. The difference in the three is the degree and scope of the syncretism.

---

[/B][/QUOTE]

Yemen. Not exactly a desert at the time, thriving and prosperous, and very much similar in religious aspect to the Levant.

I don't know of much of any hard and fast Egyptian influence other than secondary, and circumcision, which itself was a way to distinguish other groups. The whole circumcision thing is a very interesting phenomenon, with some arguing for multiple sources and others arguing for single source spreading, and not always egyptian.

Language, pottery, custom, all very dissimilar between Egypt and Palestine.

posted 12-03-2007 06:46 PM            

Egyptian are Semites; Ancient Egyptian is a Semitic language.

There's a depiction of a circumcision in an Old Kingdom tomb painting. It is the oldest known depiction of any surgical procedure.

The Egyptian word "khabirw" was originally thought to mean "Hebrews", based on context describing the "khabirw" as desert raiders. It turns out a better translation is "exiles". It is interesting to note that in the King James version of the Bible describing the conflict between Saul and David, the followers of David (i.e., the "exiles") are usually called Hebrews while the followers of Saul are usually called Israelites.

The name Moses is a perfectly good Egyptian name; it means "born to" or "son of" or "descendent of" (which is not the etymology described in the Bible). This same root is found in Egyptian names like Rameses, Thutmosis. Amenmese, Ramose, etc. The implication is that Moses originally had the name of an Egyptian god at the beginning that was latter expunged.

The famous Merenptah stela mentions Israel (ysyr'ar; more convincing if you realize that the Egyptians had no letter "l" and used "r" instead). This is an account of the military campaign of Merenptah in the Levant. Interestingly, the other places conquered by Merenptah (such as Ashkelon) are written with a "city" determinative, while Israel is written with a "people" determinative.

A temple relief of Amenhotep III mentions "yhw in the land of shashw", "shasw" meaning a band or group of people; nomads. "Yhw" may mean "Yaweh".

There is no Egyptian evidence for Abraham and Sarah, Joseph and his brothers, or the Exodus, despite repeated attempts to try and find or manufacture it.

posted 12-04-2007 03:21 PM            

quote:

---

When you see the people under a brutal government protesting in the streets because the government was insufficiently brutal, don't take that at face value as a spontaneous display of fanaticism.

Innate fanaticism may play a role. State propaganda may also play a role. State-created social conditions that limit opportunity and drive people to extremism may play a role. Deliberate state suppression of more liberal strains of religion may also be at work. And then there's always the state-funded "agents provacateurs" in the crowd.

Anyway, these are complex phenomena. Don't just assume that "all those people are crazy" or that their leader is the "reasonable" one here.

---

Good point. I think we might have fallen into the trap of their protests and demonstrations are like ours...not the product of the government.

posted 12-04-2007 04:05 PM            

quote:

---

"...have to go catch a bus."

---

posted 12-04-2007 06:33 PM            

quote:

---

I think we might have fallen into the trap of their protests and demonstrations are like ours...not the product of the government.

---

True, but no sale.

When people call for a woman's execution because of a religious difference, "He told me to do it!" does not hold water as an excuse.

I stated earlier that the mob did not know the facts other than what they were spoon-fed by the government, but there's still no excuse. If somebody held a gun to a guy's head to force him to march and carry a sign, that would be one thing, but I believe the people in the mob were absolutely sincere in their calls for this woman's death. At some point even people living in the dark ages have to be responsible for their own actions.

posted 12-04-2007 08:48 PM            

What exactly makes you put on a white sheet and a funny hood and go out and hang people? I can't imagine myself doing that, but who knows what I'd be thinking if I grew up in a different place and time. I imagine the Sudanese lynch mobs are probably more or less the same:

• The conviction that your problems are all due to "them".

• Peer group pressure. Everybody else is doing it, so it must be OK.

• Religious influence. We've had somebody in the US convince several hundred people that it was a great idea to drink poisoned KoolAide. We are probably fortunate that he didn't send them out to murder school teachers instead. The religious leaders in Islam sometimes seem to be like gang bosses. They take groups of young men with no jobs or prospects and give them something to belong to and protection against the outside. Instead of shooting somebody because they're wearing the wrong color hat, you lynch people because of what they named a teddy bear. The idea that it's a good thing to belong to a group against "the others" has probably been selected for since the Pleistocene (now that I think of it, probably long before that - any animal with a social structure usually has a tendancy to reject outsiders). And, like with gang bosses, unless you periodically demonstrate your power - by organizing a mob or having somebody blow himself up - you are no longer the alpha male.

• Some governmental connivance, but perhaps less than is commonly thought. After all, the last thing any dictator wants is mobs in the streets - a little pressure in the wrong direction and it's Bastille Day or the October Revolution instead of Krystalnacht.

posted 12-05-2007 03:29 AM            

I find your response rather...disappointing.

posted 12-05-2007 06:21 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve_V:
Sam,

I find your response rather...disappointing.

---

I started this mess, and I have stayed out of it recently.

Throwing Set' horrific experience, I am not quite so disappointed about Sam's point.

I kinda agree.

posted 12-05-2007 06:40 AM            

Steve,

posted 12-05-2007 03:26 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by LaneH:
I started this mess, and I have stayed out of it recently.

Throwing Set' horrific experience, I am not quite so disappointed about Sam's point.

I kinda agree.

---

I still think you are assuming similarities in cultures and politics that simply may not exist.

Jeff,

Think of it this way, suppose I held you children hostage...what wouldn't you do to get them back? Might it include some distasteful things possibly?

It is all well and good to be sitting in our comfortable homes saying, "They should do something about that kind of stuff", and fail to take into account that the people in power are quite willing to do very ugly things to not just you, but those you love as well.

quote:

---

I hate to say it but perhaps the best thing to do with the Middle East is surround it with a wall. Every few year, look over the top and see if there's anybody left. If there is, throw in more ammunition.

---

Considering just the outcomes, I fail to see much difference between the above and simply carpet bombing.