Facebook Postings Lead To Arrest for Heresy In the West Bank 496
forand writes "Using screen shots of a customer's Facebook profile, owners of a West Bank internet cafe helped Palestinian intelligence forces capture a man accused of heresy." According to sources quoted in the story, residents of both Gaza and the West Bank face ongoing scrutiny of their online activities; in Gaza, "Internet cafe owners are forced to monitor customers' online activity and alert intelligence officials if they see anything critical of the militant group or that violates Hamas' stern interpretation of Islam."
I am shocked. (Score:5, Interesting)
A mysterious blogger who set off an uproar in the Arab world by claiming he was God and hurling insults at the Prophet Muhammad is now behind bars — caught in a sting that used Facebook to track him down.
I found myself surprised that Palestine is so easy to troll. Then I was even more surprised that I was surprised even for a second.
Many in this conservative Muslim town say that isn't enough, and suggested he should be killed for renouncing Islam. Even family members say he should remain behind bars for life.
I have never respected trolls before, but I guess there's a first time for everything. If he does get executed, someone should really saint him. Pastafarians maybe.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Barbarians... (Score:5, Insightful)
...is what they are! This shows how dangerously crazy these people are. They are the enemies of freedom like all religious fanatics! Anybody who thinks people should be locked up for life or even murdered because of antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values. The problem is that we have no good way of dealing with these lunatics when large parts of entire societies are thinking like this. It's like the West in the Middle Ages.
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Funny)
I agree, Mary. By the way, you doing anything for dinner tonight?
Sincerely,
God
Re:Barbarians... (Score:5, Funny)
Wow, I'd never thought I'd see a celestial drunk dial of an ex-girlfriend.
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that we have no good way of dealing with these lunatics when large parts of entire societies are thinking like this.
Sure there is: separation. If you happen to live in a western democracy, don't let your freedoms slip away. Make sure your democracy stays one (as in eternal vigilance). Don't vote for people who want to remove personal freedoms or democratic rights. If you vote for someone & they do, don't vote for them again. Ever. Period.
If people in other countries want to subject themselves to religious law, let them. If that makes them 'lose contact' with the rest of the world, and economic consequences puts them back in the middle ages, that's mostly their problem. If they do want to join the rest of us: shape up in the personal freedoms / democratic department first. In the mean while, they can take the freedoms that my ancestors fought for, from my cold, dead hands.
Re: (Score:2)
If you vote for someone & they do, don't vote for them again.
Those lying politicians are expendable like ammo rounds in a belt-fed machine gun, and just as plentiful. Sure, you won't vote for that one any more, but there are twenty more waiting to replace him. And each politician chips another speck of freedom away. Give them time and nothing will remain.
If they do want to join the rest of us: shape up in the personal freedoms / democratic department first.
The most modern theory of political corr
Re: (Score:2)
It's like the West in the Middle Ages.
An amazing reversal, no?
LK
Re:Barbarians... (Score:5, Insightful)
"... antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values. ..."
Are you so sure that "western values" are that much better? There are far too many people in "western culture" promoting "western values" who sincerely believe that "western values" dictate an implicit Judeo-Christian underpinning to government and law, and that everyone else deserves to die, or at least be subjugated.
I think we need to coin the phrase "MODERN values" as something which goes beyond "western", "eastern", "southern" or "northern" values (notice how some of those don't really evoke any specific meaning?). This new phrase would embody the implicit expectation of freedom FROM religion -- more than the current standard freedom OF religion. It's a fallacy that everyone has to choose sides amongst the various bronze-age sky-god belief systems.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason why we call them "Western values" is because, like it or not, but humanism (which is a foundation of them) as a coherent philosophy is a Western development. It does not necessarily imply choosing sides etc.
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Insightful)
One thing that Levinas defines as universally bad is "causing suffering and humiliation" (unwanted of course, BDSM folks are obvious exceptions). But in this case, this is not enough. One might claim that the offending facebook post caused him undue mental torment. Levinas also has a positive definition of ethics. As I said, "Totality and Infinity" is one of the most difficult books I ever read, so this short summary doesn't do justice for its complexitiy and richness. However, I'll try.
Basically, he says that we have to have an infinite desire for the Other - which includes the desire for the Other's otherness as well. Sounds redundant, I know, but bear with me for a moment. This desire has two components, one is the desire to know (that is, basic human curiousity) and the other is the desire to preserve the otherness of the Other. An opposing movement is what he calls a totalizing movement. He defines it by the presumption that we can have total knowledge of the Other, that is, we can strip the Other of all it's secrets, achieving a total knowledge of the other (therefore robbing it from it's very otherness: once we believe that our knowledge of the other is Total, the image we have and It becomes the same). At this point he introduces the metaphor of the Face of the Other, and the movement towards the other as communication (we question the other to know more). In fact, he says that this otherness is the very basis of communication - once the Other has no secrets, there isn't much to talk about. Therefore we question the Other to know more (curiousity) but also question the totality of our knowledge at every point, simultaneously possessing the desire to preserve some measure of otherness.
I know all this seems far fetched, but the point, I believe, is that curiousity is one leg on which ethical behaviour stands on, the other being not only a respect for the otherness of the Other, but even love for this otherness, that feeds back to our own curiosity, keeping the discourse on going. The first step of every authoritarian entity is to deny the possiblity of discourse, to forbid language so to speak, the very means by which otherness can be expressed, approached, and cherished.
Levinas himself was religious (jew) - but interestingly, according to his own tenets, one can deduce that religions in general are totalizing - they do not allow for an infinite universe. Well, of course I don't know all religions, but let's just say that all religions that pose an entity that possesses a totality of knowledge, an All Knowing God are by nature totalizing. In an infinite universe, such totality is impossible. In fact, the very definition of infinity is something beyond (+1), something that is not part of the totality of any system. The Other's secret that must be preserved as well as approached via discourse.
Anyway, I'm not sure this all makes sense to anybody, but if you want to read an intellectually challenging book, I highly recommend Totality and Infinity. As far as I know, it's one of the very few attempts to define ethics in absolute terms... most of what we consider "western values" are relativistic, their truth(s) easily traced back to a very specific context, to an ontology.
Re:Barbarians... (Score:5, Insightful)
We, ourselves, are not free from this. Look at the amount of "kill brown people" posts that topics like this brings up every time on slashdot. The true root of barbarism is an unreflected "We are different, therefore you are inferior". This mechanism exists entirely independent of religion, though I agree that religion mostly does not help.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Airdrop internet enabled cellphones. Lots of them. Access to all ideas and the ability to post undeletable photographic evidence of all shit going on. Think "Singularity Sky"...
Why? I mean what good would that do here? I thought the Internet itself was supposed to bring enlightenment across the world? It spreads information, not truth. People choose what to believe based on the worst possible logic. If we jacked everyone's brain directly into the thing would that finally do it? Look at the bullcrap in ONE Slashdot forum. Does the Internet really solve the problem you think it does?
Maybe you just don't understand what makes people tick.
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Insightful)
Western values?
haha.
Like the West in the Middle Ages? Not now?
I love how apparently the West now has a peaceful culture. The past 500 years of genoicde and slavery apparently dont count ..those 2 countries we're occupying now, you know us peaceful Westerns with the nuclear weapons, who have 700 miltary bases and who spend a trillion dollars on weapons were peaceful...its those muslims...they're the ones trying to take over the world!
really? Do you actually believe what you're saying? Please a read a world history. Try RM Roberts...read it from cover to cover, get some perspective
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When's the last time someone was jailed in the US for saying bad things about Jeebus?
Certainly you wouldn't have quite so many calling for indefinite imprisonment (or death) for such a little thing.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, because 2010 is so much like 1928. You just bolstered my point.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The problem is that we have no good way of dealing with these lunatics when large parts of entire societies are thinking like this. It's like the West in the Middle Ages.
We do have a good way of dealing with these lunatics--don't deal at all with them. The problem of the West vs. Islamic fundamentalists is just that these people are sitting on oil. If it weren't for that, we could just break off relations and let them figure it out for the next few centuries. Instead, we dirty ourselves by dealing with t
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Insightful)
Anybody who thinks people should be locked up for life or even murdered because of antireligious religious statements are people that are enemies of western values.
What western values wold those be then? The values that allow us to invade other countries, killing 10's of thousands, just so rich old men can be richer, and then pass it off a few years later as an unfortunate mistake (haha! oops!) and let's never mentioned that again? Have we advanced beyond barbarism ourselves? What's the difference? And what's the difference between their fanatics and our own secular fanatics - you know, the ones who will not permit anything to be done about climate change because it might cost us money Do you imagine our crimes to be less barbarous, our fanaticism less damaging then theirs?
Re:Barbarians... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Barbarians... (Score:5, Insightful)
The accomplishments you speak of aren't attributable to Islam any more than the Renaissance is attributable to Christianity.
Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm glad to know that this is the kind of freedom the brave Palestinian fighters are fighting Israel for. To have a Taliban lifestyle imposed on themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, if they weren't, they might not have voted Hamas in in the first place.
A common misconception. Hamas was voted in not because of the anti-Israel agenda, but because they promised to fight the extremely corrupt Fatah regime that preceded it. That was the focus of their election campaign, and that was what actually got them the votes. That would have happened whether they were oppressed (with or without quotes) or not.
Shachar
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Insightful)
A SERMON ON ETHICS AND LOVE
One day Mal-2 asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to approach the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice. Shortly afterwards the radio came on by itself, and an ethereal female Voice said YES?
"O! Eris! Blessed Mother of Man! Queen of Chaos! Daughter of Discord! Concubine of Confusion! O! Exquisite Lady, I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!"
WHAT BOTHERS YOU, MAL? YOU DON'T SOUND WELL.
"I am filled with fear and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are hurting one another, the planet is rampant with injustices, whole societies plunder groups of their own people, mothers imprison sons, children perish while brothers war. O, woe."
WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH THAT, IF IT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO?
"But nobody Wants it! Everybody hates it."
OH. WELL, THEN STOP.
At which moment She turned herself into an aspirin commercial and left The Polyfather stranded alone with his species.
Re: (Score:2)
You gonna offer up evidence for that accusation? Last I heard, Israel has free speech.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
haha.
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=251&year=2009
Israel trails Kuwait (ranked 60th), Lebanon (ranked 61st) and UAE (ranked 86th) in its region. Overall Israel was ranked one behind Guinea-Bissau and right before Qatar.
Recently they made a law requiring non-Jewish citizens to take loyalty oath to "Jewish state of Israel"
http://www.thejewishweek.com/blogs/political_insider/israels_loyalty_oath_time_bomb
Both groups have their share of religious fantics, the difference is the Palestenians wer
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Insightful)
Way to go shifting the base of the argument. The statement in question read: "Blasphemy is illegal in Israel as well." This is a blatant lie. Find me in the Israeli law code anything banning blasphemy. Everything else you quote--the loyalty oath recognizing Israel as a Jewish state--is wholly irrelevant to this matter. Stick with the subject without resorting to strawmen to try and bolster your argument.
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:4, Interesting)
Having to take a loyalty oath to the "Jewish" state or risk losing your citizenship sure seems like a type of Blasphemy...as it only applies to Non-Jews and they have to swore to loyalty to a "Jewish" state.
but as you and I well know the only difference between Israel and Hamas is one are fanatics with good PR the other are just poor refugees.
Lets see what the the Rabbis have to say
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t_LxpCY2G8&feature=player_embedded
According to the book’s author, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, “Non-Jews are “uncompassionate by nature” and should be killed in order to “curb their evil inclinations.” “If we kill a gentile who has has violated one of the seven commandments there is nothing wrong with the murder,” Shapira insisted. Citing Jewish law as his source he declared: “There is justification for killing babies if it is clear that they will grow up to harm us, and in such a situation they may be harmed deliberately, and not only during combat with adults.”
And this fits right into thinking of Israels current President who in the past few weeks has been speaking Population transfers of Non-Jews out of Israel...which of course is necessary if Israel is to remain a "Democratic" and Jewish state. If you're going to lose your majority in the state, you just forcibly remove the people living there. Thats democracy, right?
Ah, Israel, why are the Palestenians so angry with you, is it really that hard to understand? Really?
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-presents-plans-for-population-exchange-at-un-1.316197
Penal Code 170 & 173 (Score:4, Informative)
The Israeli penal code does make blasphemy illegal (output from Google Translate):
170. Destroying, damaging, or desecrating a place of worship, or any object held sacred crowd of people, deliberately degrade their religion, or knowingly that they may see this act an insult to their religion, Dino - three years imprisonment.
173. Makes one of the following countries - one year's imprisonment; (1) Publishes advertising that injure blatantly religious beliefs or their feelings of others; (2) Makes a public place and in the hearing of a certain word or sound that may harm the faith or gross violation of religious feelings. (3) Harm our sons public tombstones
Not as severe as Islamic blasphemy laws, but they still make blasphemy illegal.
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Informative)
As an Israeli I have no goddamned fucking idea what you're talking about.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You actually arguing with someone from Israel over Israeli laws? Does the pit of arrogant ignorance of Slashdotters even *have* a bottom?
#declare "metrix007" = "complete shithead"
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, exactly, If you go around saying judaism is fake, absolutely nothing is going to happen to you. Well, some people may be pissed off, but that's it. Nobody is going to arrest you, send Mossad after you, have black helicopters take you to secret prison. Some people may yell at you, that's about it.
Yes, I am Israeli and lived in Israel for 13 years, and I know what I am talking about. Looks like you do not.
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I second Katz above me in the request for any substantiation to that claim. Not only am I not familiar with any anti-blasphemy laws, anti-religious public commentators have actually moved on to become members of parliament in the past.
As for criticizing the government, not only is that not forbidden by law, it is being actively practiced, including going as far as advocating boycotts on Israel, including by people whose paycheck is largely funded by the Israeli tax payer (government backed academic institut
Re:Isn't freedom great? (Score:5, Insightful)
Please re-read what you wrote:
Mordechai Vanunu "revealed details of Israel's nuclear weapons program". Now, I don't care /what/ his motive was; the fact is, he was convicted of treason and endangering national security after he revealed confidential, strategic information. There's not much to argue about that.
Regarding the Ariel boycotters, where in the article does it mention that under Israeli law, what they are doing is illegal (or 'ILLEGAL')? That's a lone Israeli politician Avigdor Lieberman expressing his opinion that the boycotters should be denied Government funding. No mention of 'illegal' there.
Regarding Emily Henochowicz, that is tragic.
Anyway, I see your posts here and notice you consistently temper blatant falsehoods with sob stories (however true). I encourage you to please remove emotion from your argument if you want to be taken seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
The freedom to be batshit crazy and burn alive people who disagree with you is still a freedom
Er... not so much for the ones burning...
It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:4, Informative)
This is not an issue specific to PA territories: in any islamic country you would be screwed if you logged in to Facebook as God and criticized islam. The same would have happened in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey etc. Sadly, the problem is with islamism (and maybe with islam).
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is with theocratic governments, it doesn't matter in the least what the actual religion is.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is with theocratic governments, it doesn't matter in the least what the actual religion is.
Sure it does. When the religion has a set of laws that are supposed to be divine and therefore immutable, and said laws prescribe various gruesome forms of corporal punishment and execution, the problem is with the religion. Spain under Franco also had a very real state church, but they didn't stone people to death for adultery.
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:5, Informative)
You know that Islam doesn't recognize the separation of church and state, don't you? In the early years, the entire domain of Islam was ruled by a caliphate, which is essentially the pope and king rolled into one. I'm afraid that Islamic areas are always going to run into this problem because of the bad precedent set early in Islam's history - when church and state were one entity, and presumably, that's the way "God wanted it". The only hope is that people become so modernized that they stop caring about trying to recreate the imaginary golden-age of Islam.
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:4, Interesting)
You know that Islam doesn't recognize the separation of church and state, don't you?
Neither do mainstream forms of Judaism, and a lot of really influential branches of Christianity in the US - especially the fundamentalist ones - don't either. In practice, this manifests itself as the incorporation of large chunks of Jewish religious law into state law in Israel and systematic, organised attempts to create a religious state in the US by powerful groups linked to the Republican party.
Actually, what's odd about Islam is that Muslims, like Christians, are generally supposed to recognise and obey the laws of the state. (What's even weirder is that in theory Jews aren't meant to recognise the laws or courts of non-Jewish states in which they reside. In practice this is generally ignored, with the odd exception. For example, the reason that sharia courts are legal here in the UK is because of a law created to allow the establishment of Jewish religious courts. The reason we can't change the law to stop sharia courts is because the Jewish population will kick up a fuss, not the Muslims.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not the particular religion that's the issue, it's the development level of the countries. I'm too lazy to elucidate the whole argument right now, but in a nutshell: look at the extreme forms of Christianity practised by some in Africa.
And yet the development level of Saudi Arabia - one of the strictest practitioners of Sharia in its most extreme, literalist forms - is way above many Latin American countries, for example; and yet the latter do not stone people to death for homosexuality, or amputate hands and feet for theft. Ditto for Iran.
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly, the only time you'll run into religious oppression like this is from muslim communities. Mozambique has a large muslim population (especially the north of the country) and there are many people who are oppressed because of their decisions to leave islam there.
I think islam has specific tendencies that lead to specific abuses. I think christianity has specific tendencies that lead to specific abuses. They often overlap but in this area they don't. At the core of each religion, neither promotes these tendencies or abuses. Yet because people get corrupt and are power-hungry you get wild derivations from central ideas in a religion. For example, for some reason, christian leaders who get large followings, often end up taking advantage financially of their followers who come looking for a blessing of some kind (healing, personal financial blessing, etc.) and I've never seen that in islam. Islam, by contrast, when embraced at a government level tends to overbear followers and suppress voluntary belief or non-belief. Neither religion teaches these things in their basics yet men (usually not women) who end up in religious leadership often abuse those they lead.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The same would have happened in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey etc.
Turkey, no; Turkey's government is officially secular. Indonesia, quite possibly, depending on the province. Syria, probably, although it matters whether the person saying it is Islamic, and there are multiple court systems. Saudi Arabia, definitely yes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's not just in the Palestinian territories (Score:5, Insightful)
Sadly, the problem is with islamism (and maybe with islam).
No, the problem is with god botherers in general.
You forgot to include Ireland up there in your list. You can be fined 25,000 euros if you renounce the Sacraments, etc.
Here in the States, there are people clamoring to bring our country into some sort of religious theocratic throwback to the 12'th century. Some of them even sponsor "prayer breakfasts" for our esteemed legislators.
Google "Dominionism" and "The Family" (The so-called "Christian" group that incited Uganda to kill gays), Focus on the Family, Christian Coalition, etc.
Talibanistic fundamentalism is only just below the surface just about everywhere. It only takes a little bit of tipping the table to have it spring full force to the surface.
--
BMO
There's a saying... (Score:2)
Those who want peace with others must first make peace with themselves.
Re:There's a saying... (Score:5, Interesting)
Dude, honestly? Given that kids there grow up watching a rabbit puppet wax enthusiastic about eating Jews[1] and a Mickey Mouse-alike raving about martyrdom on the phone with kids[2], then it's quite obvious Palestinians do not give a crap about their children.
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm8w7_P8wZ0&feature=related [youtube.com]
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gi-c6lbFGC4&feature=related [youtube.com]
Re:There's a saying... (Score:4, Interesting)
Palestinians can't even handle interactions among themselves peacefully when they're busy throwing rival politicians off roofs[1] in Gaza and viciously beating their own civilians[2].
If that surprises you, them you obviously haven't looked at (for example) just what the IRA got up to during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. We're only just starting to track down a decent number of the corpses of civilians who were taken from their homes by IRA hit squads never to be seen from again. Then there's the kneecappings and the extortion and the general organised crime. Fraternising with members of the wrong Christian sect was very bad and often fatal idea. The IRA, at their peak, made Hamas and co look positively pleasant - and their equivalents on the Unionist side weren't exactly better.
Oh, and did I mention that US politicians have been protecting IRA members from being extradited for their own political advantage? The IRA had a lot of political and financial support within the US, and an awful lot of their weapons came from there IIRC.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The case of American Indians is quite complex and modern enough to be well documented. Much like many modern programs of attack on a particular group, there were people seeking financial advantage (land speculators and gold seekers, etc.) and people motivated by hatred (Andrew Jackson, a favorite of many Americans, especially Democrats, is a prime example). Of course, many people were dupes, didn't care, or actually opposed the attacks. The fact that the Amerinds were not particularly advanced ("savages") w
Another example of US myopia (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile a family was evacuated from his house in Jerusalem where he lived for 30 years to make way for a settler family last week. A peaceful protest was broken up in Bil’in by tear gas and riot police.
Extremist settlers burned a Jerusalem church
Settlers spray graffiti on mosque in Nablus,
run over a man in Qalqiliya,
attack a teenager in Hebron
and the IDF assasinates two people in Gaza last week
but what do we read about that in the US? No, of course not. That would be too much reality for Americans. Instead we get a story about how those Hamas fiends are cracking down on the internet cafes. We get stories about bad the Iranians are to their women. Its as if they only perspective we get is one that shows us that these 'people' have a archaic, violent culture....ignore the 60 year occupation, ignore the two wars that US just launched over there, lets pick apart and find fault in THEIR culture. They're the violent people! Yeah right...
Theres a great film on You Tube called 'Planet of the Arab', check it out sometime.
http://mondoweiss.net/
Re:Another example of US myopia (Score:5, Insightful)
"ignore the two wars that US just launched over there"
The US is in Iraq & Afghanistan. This atheist blogger incident took place in the West Bank. I feel like you're trying to be misleading when you deliberately confuse these two pieces of information or try to turn into a "West vs Arab" attack comment.
This isn't some childish game where both parties can erase their crimes by making longer lists of the other side's faults. If person A steals 5 cars, person B doesn't get a free pass to steal 4 cars and yell like a crazy person when they get caught and always trying to deflect attention to person A's crime. Both are guilty of what they have done wrong.
You seem to have forgotten this. And I feel like you're trying to deceive me.
Re:Another example of US myopia (Score:4, Insightful)
I am not trying decieve you.
re-read the comments...90% of them didn't comment on the West Bank..they went off about 'how Islam is dangerous and bad' and 'its not compatible with the West' blah, blah....
there is memme thats been building in the US, especially in the past year about how threatening Islam is to us! That doesnt stand up to scrunity of History..be in the far past or recent events.
It only serves to demonize the people we have gone or will go to war with...
Whether this is how America is going to collectively deal with the hangover from Iraq or whether its purposeful seeds being planted for a war with Iran....I dont know.
You should consider this whenever you read the news. Before it was the muslims it was Commies, then it was Yellow Peril, then it was remember the Maine and on and on....
Right now there is a poster in Times Square about Iran and how we shouldnt let them get a nuclear
weapon. Somebody paid a lot of money for that ad, yet they seemingly arent selling anything. Why? Whats in it for them?
Not to ramble, but when I see a story about how Hamas is abusing Palestenians, and I see the knee jerk reactions from people. I wonder what would be the reaction if 100X other stories I know happened there, that I read about on mondoweiss.net were more distributed? And how come I never see those stories outside of niche blogs? Why are the only stories the ones that make it to wider public ones that make the muslims seem barbaric?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Not now. But low cost handheld devices using encryption over public networks will go a step in the right direction.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not using Facebook will.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No religious freedom is hard over there... (Score:4, Insightful)
how so? shouldn't you have the right not to be forced to believe whatever religion is the fad? the freedom to worship also means the freedom not to be forced to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
I am agnostic, so the religious freedoms don't affect me
Oh, but they do. If the white Christian lunatics (the very same ones who protest about mosques) in the US got their way you wouldn't be allowed to be agnostic. Don't think for a minute that an explicitly noted right to religious freedom doesn't affect you; it is the very underpinning of your being allowed to be agnostic (undecided - since, in the context of your post it sounded like you meant atheist).
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree.. if western cultures defended freedom with the same vigilance (not the same methods) as hamas, hamas wouldn't exist..
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
And if the queen had balls, she'd be king.
If "western cultures" "defended" "freedom" with the same "vigilance" as Hamas, then they wouldn't be cultures worth defending.
It bugs me when people write shit because it sound noble, but don't think about what it means.
How do you "defend freedom" anyway? Is "by making sure a mosque can be built on private property in Lower Manhattan" anywhere on the list of "defending freedom"?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm not sure what you mean.. I just meant that we need more testicular fortitude when dealing with wannabe tyrants like hamas...whether they live inside or outside our borders is immaterial. I'm a fan of individual liberty.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
well if you're a stateless refugee than you have no individual liberty...if objectively looked at who Hamas are and what they are fighting for, you'd see they have everything in common with people who want freedom.
try doing it sometime. Imagine you come from another planet, look at the worlds conflicts from an outsiders perspective...you'll see things arent as clean cut as what the TV tells you.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
From the article:
The media in the Palestinian Authority, as in the Arab world in general, are largely government-controlled, driving dissenting voices to the relative freedom of the Internet. The blogger's arrest showed a willingness on the part of the Palestinian government to clamp down on freedom of speech on the Web as well. He now faces a potential life prison sentence on heresy charges for "insulting the divine essence."
Many in this conservative Muslim town say that isn't enough, and suggested he should be killed for renouncing Islam. Even family members say he should remain behind bars for life.
"He should be burned to death," said Abdul-Latif Dahoud, a 35-year-old Qalqiliya resident. The execution should take place in public "to be an example to others," he added.
Few have come forward to defend him. One was Zainab Rashid, a liberal Palestinian commentator, who wrote in an online opinion piece that Husayin had made the important point that "criticizing religious texts for their (intellectual) weakness can only be combatted by ... oppression, prison and execution." ...
Gaza's Hamas rulers also stalk Facebook pages for suspected dissenters, said Palestinian rights activist Mustafa Ibrahim. He said Internet cafe owners are forced to monitor customers' online activity and alert intelligence officials if they see anything critical of the militant group or that violates Hamas' stern interpretation of Islam.
Freedom. I do not think this word means what you think it means.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
s/in accordance with their religion//
I agree that this a violation of freedom, but this is a case of religion being subverted for political reasons, not a problem with the religion. Almost every religious group has had its fanatics at one time or another.
Admittedly I don't know a large fraction of the worlds Muslim population (something like 18.5% [wolframalpha.com]) but the Muslim folks that I know don't interpret their religion that way.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that this a violation of freedom, but this is a case of religion being subverted for political reasons, not a problem with the religion. Almost every religious group has had its fanatics at one time or another.
Religion is a political subversion.
The Quran, in isolation, is not a religion. Same goes for the Sunnah, or the Bible, or other "primary sources." Human language is not a programming language, where one word corresponds to one action. No text of sufficient complexity can be understood in a uniform, objective, everyone-sees-the-same-thing way. Same goes double if the text is ancient, translated, or literary.
Instead, there are many interpreters--scholars, imams, clerics--who stand in the way and impose their own views, knowingly or unknowingly, on the original texts. Their own views create a new version of the text in their minds and the minds of those who listen to or read them. Simply by citing a certain passage and omitting a less compelling passage, they are creating a new narrative with its own strengths and foibles. Each narrative is built upon previous narratives (it is difficult to read one of these holy books in isolation without somehow being exposed to other believers, teachers, footnotes/annotations, or the media). Despite the differences (minute or extreme) between narratives, each narrative shares a lot in common with one another.
As opposed to an individual's narrative, the religion can be found in the complex web of relationships between books, theories, and people. Just like no one computer comprises the Internet, the entire network of relationships makes up the religion (and the Internet). And that complex web--the religion--is also a web of political relationships. Those politics are replete with broken promises, exaggerated fears, and insipid bullying--human problems from human politics. It's impossible to exonerate one's own narrative from the sticky web of human politics. You can't stand on the sidelines, because you're in it, no matter how badly you distance yourself from the ugly politics of it all.
Those fanatics you mention can't be so easily dismissed when they live in your web. Humanist Christians and liberal Muslims, take note: you need to own up to and speak out against your most destructive members. Especially when those members rule countries, lead political parties, and fund extreme acts of violence.
Not exactly (Score:3, Insightful)
If it were that you were granted the right of "freedom of religion" th
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
You've fallen into the same classic trap as a lot of conservative thinkers. Tyranny and freedom are opposites. Tyranny of the majority is tyranny. Therefore, they are not free in any meaningful sense of the word.
More importantly, such tyranny is unsustainable. In a few hundred years, when the Catholic, Jewish, or Buddhist minority population explodes (and this is a likely scenario---minorities tend to have lower income, and people with lower income often produce more offspring), at some magic point, the Muslims will be in the minority. You can safely assume that at this point, the oppressed will turn on their oppressors and pass laws that oppress them in turn. Eventually, equilibrium will be achieved, but can the human race really be expected to have the patience to wait that long while people commit heinous acts of murder in the name of God?
See, here's the thing. As far as I'm concerned, if you're killing someone for God, you're not reading your scripture correctly. Those rules were not written by God. They were written by man in a time that rightfully should be left in the past. Ask yourself this: if Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet, how can they ignore his teachings so willingly? The good Samaritan, for example, preaches religious tolerance; the man Jesus chose to uphold as an example of how to live was of a people that his apostles would despise, in part due to religious differences, and who would have despised the man he helped because of similar differences.
There are many, many more examples of this---so much so that anyone who requires death over differing religious beliefs has blinders on, focusing on a tiny section of their religious text to the exclusion of the majority of it. In short, those who would kill in God's name, by doing so, blaspheme it, and should, by their same standards, be put to death. There's some irony for you.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly the same right and authority that they have to tell me how to read mine, and more to the point, the exact same right and authority that they have to kill people who do not subscribe to their belief system. None, in other words.
I am merely expressing an opinion. They can have different opinions. It's when those opinions become manifest in real-world actions that they become good or evil, and killing those who merely express differences of opinion falls pretty clearly on the evil side of the line i
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Interesting)
In this case, it means the freedom to be oppressive and violate the freedom of others, in accordance with their religion.
Blasphemy as a crime is common in most religious societies. John William Gott [wikipedia.org] was the last person in Britain to be imprisoned for heresy, in 1921. The last person to be executed for heresy in Britain was Thomas Aikenhead [wikipedia.org] in 1697. Both had been critical of Christianity. The fact that Hamas are only going to imprison this man, rather than execute him, suggests that their law is only 90 years behind that of Britain.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Freedom. I do not think this word means what you think it means.
Or you. Try living in a country that is actively oppressed, where the supply of practically everything is subject to the whims of some outside force, which invades every now and then with military vehicles and just might shoot your friends, bulldoze your house, or yourself. Freedom gets a much more simple and immediate meaning there than "freedom of speech on the web". That's how the human mind works - you need to have your base desires satisfied before you start thinking about more abstract things.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Insightful)
That "country" is oppressed because that "country" is at war with Israel and these sort of people given more freedoms would be wiping the Israelis out with even greater enthusiasm than wiping out their own heretics.
If you think they're just going change and be so nice to Jews, Christians and pagans you should take a really close look at the history of Islam.
If they don't change their popular core beliefs you will always have problems with them:
http://www.tawfikhamid.com/abcs-test-for-radical-islam/ [tawfikhamid.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My point was that muslims first have to deal with the "ABC"s as per the link. If they continue to hold those beliefs, they will continue cause problems.
And as long as most Palestinians hold on to these "ABC"s they contribute to the Palestinian problem.
I'm not a huge supporter of Israel at all, but I sure understand why they do what they do. It's like you fighting with someone, if he:
1) Doesn't promise to not kill you.
2) Keeps hitting you and trying to kill you whenever you let him go.
It's pretty understanda
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:5, Insightful)
Cause and effect? (Score:3, Interesting)
Try living in a country that is actively oppressed, where the supply of practically everything is subject to the whims of some outside force
Considering what the Hamas government does, I think those outside forces aren't so whimsical at all.
That's how the human mind works - you need to have your base desires satisfied before you start thinking about more abstract things.
The problem here is that what you call "base desires" and "abstract things" aren't as clearcut as that.
From the religious fanatic point of view, the "base desire" is their religion, things like food or medicine are "abstract things" for them.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm afraid I can't take you seriously if you think that Hamas is thing restricting freedom from the Palestenians.
Besides a 60 year occupation...2 million people in Gaza have been living in virtual open air prison for the past 4 years. Israel controls every product that enters gaza to the extent that they recieve just enough food not to starve, but too much so they reproduce.
The fact that we're reading an article about Hamas restricting freedom and not this, if you know the area, is absurd.
Here is article
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If Palestinians want to govern themselves, they have to prove to Israel that they can guarantee Israel's security, and they have to prove to the rest of the world that they can be considered a legitimate government. That's just the facts. They are failing on both accounts.
And you're right that this being an Islamic government is responsible for people in the West not supporting them, because nearly all Muslim governments are highly intolerant of other religions and intrinsically undemocratic. Why should
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about what you're saying.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Insightful)
If Palestinians want to govern themselves, they have to prove to Israel that they can guarantee Israel's security, and they have to prove to the rest of the world that they can be considered a legitimate government
That's exactly what we said about another country, a bit over 200 years ago.
-- The British Government
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"fighting for liberty"
I don't know how old you are, but seriously at some point you have to understand the difference between the image and the reality.
"fighting for liberty"
thats the image you're taught...the reality is slavery, no sufferage for women, genoicde of native americans.
Its important to reconize that as its all over history and current events...Image = Operation Iraqi freedom! Reality = see wikileaks
Image= Our great democratic ally and bastion of freedom in the Middle East..Reality=Israel who ha
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Liberties like being able to steal land (Americans were very pissed off at King George for wanting to treat the natives the same as everyone else), not have Roman Catholics in the government (Americans were very pissed off after Quebec joined the British Empire and the oath to the King was changed to allow Catholics in the government) and the liberty to undemocratically force the majority to go along with them.
You guys were just lucky that between independence and the writing of the constitution that a bunc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How about this one:
Image= The downtrodden Palestinians being occupied by the genocidal Israelis. Reality: Hamas is a terrorist organization bent on the destruction of an internationally recognized state while hiding behind the suffereing of their people who's leadership lives free in Syria.
Hamas is a the child of a war declared by The Arab States to eliminate the State of Israel (The State being created by the UN). They lost the war but still will not recognize Israel's right to exist. Their main goal is
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If they want my political support, these people need to start separating church and state.
The separation of Church and state in the United States was a wonderful idea of the Founding Fathers, but it is not something that is common throughout the Western world. England has the Church of England [wikipedia.org], Finland has the Church of Finland [wikipedia.org], etc, and when it comes to the separation of politics and religion, there are many Christian political parties [wikipedia.org] that wield power in government.
Given that we have not yet achieved a complete separation of Church and state in the West, I think it is somewhat unrealistic to t
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You can criticize Israel for its blockade, for its demolition o
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm afraid I can't take you seriously if you think that Hamas is thing restricting freedom from the Palestenians.
I'm afraid I can't take you seriously if you think that it's a binary issue. Because the Israelis are doing bad things, Hamas must be pure and good?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, playing (relatively) clean against people who are willing to play hardball does not help us.
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Interesting)
If there is anything to the claim that we represent the "free world", we have to play relatively clean, lest it becomes nothing but shallow rhetoric.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
War is won by the most violent -- Clausewitz
Re:Not like cowardly Westerners (Score:4, Funny)
Meh. I'm sure this is Israel's fault, somehow. After all, everybody knows that all the human rights abuses in Gaza are the result of military action by Israel. They must have put hamas up to it, and forced them to monitor this Internet cafe, and then forced them to arrest the guy. :-/
They also forced his family to publicly say all those things about keeping him behind bars.
Re: (Score:2)
any ideology that ties its self to government will screw the people. it doesn't matter if it is islam or christianity or batshit political ideologies... the results are generally the same.
Re:Oh hey... (Score:5, Informative)
Supporting terrorists as our government might have been a bad idea after all... who could have known?
Bad idea? The locals seem to be quite rejoiced at the thought of this little witch hunt. From TFA:
Many in this conservative Muslim town say that isn't enough, and suggested he should be killed for renouncing Islam. Even family members say he should remain behind bars for life.
"He should be burned to death," said Abdul-Latif Dahoud, a 35-year-old Qalqiliya resident. The execution should take place in public "to be an example to others," he added.
When these folks elected Hamas, they knew full well what they were getting into. Keep that in mind next time Israeli steamrolls over the place after a bunch more missiles launched from there land in Israeli towns.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course... the locals aren't allowed to say otherwise, now are they?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, considering Christianity has about 600 years of a head start on Islam they seem to be pretty much at the same stage respectively.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Old Testament God was pretty interesting. He's a very human (albeit mentally deranged) character who likes to play games with the mortals and isn't afraid to personally come down and kick some arse. The basic message was "I'll do whatever the hell I want, and maybe that includes fucking you up". The sequel became a bit too preachy, and they clearly cast a new actor to play the part of God, but there are still parts in which the old "fuck you all and your donkeys" attitude of God shines through.
By the way. I