God versus Atheism Part 2

OK I have been very diplomatic before with regard to the debates over atheism, but now I just feel annoyed about the attacking nature of atheists on Twitter specifically. People will claim that atheism is not a belief, that it is a disbelief yet it has so many over zealous champions the faith-hood nature it has taken on is difficult to deny. Most people get annoyed by Jehovah's Witnesses knocking on their door and who can forget that infamous Christian preacher on Oxford Street given an ASBO some years ago? ('Don't be a sinner, be a winner' Ring any bells?) Yet they do not see attacking believers in God as intolerant and irritating and of an extremist nature. They arrogantly claim it as 'truth telling'. As an advocate of free speech in a world where sometimes that's all we have, I believe people should be allowed to say what they please, but I just don't think that people should dress up their preaching as some sort of self-righteous good. If you are a tool, please recognise!

This year, so many things have happened, the world has woken up and people are dying every day to fight corrupt governments. Generalising generally never helps but from my young therefore admittedly limited perspective, the causes of most cruelty, past and present, are government self-interest, greed, tyranny, corruption, nationalism and intolerance. Note, the same intolerance some atheists are exhibiting. Not belief or disbelief in God.

One claim was that organised religion causes genocide, I asked which genocides, the tribalistic Rwandan? The communist Khmer Rouge? The atheist Nazi extermination of Jews? As I have said before the biggest genocide which killed more people than all of the genocides in the 20th Century is the selective abortion of foetuses with chromosomes of the XX variety. These have nothing to do with religion/God.

Yes there are plenty of so-called religious nut jobs but the common denominator of said nut jobs is not religion, they twist ideologies to suit their own purposes. Thinking that your beliefs or sweeping generalisations alone have the answer to the world's problems? Sounds familiar, like hmmm... religious extremists?! If nuns, priests, monks and all devoted religious people stopped believing in organised religion, probably because they were convinced by some OTT atheist preaching of course, would the world become better, would there be no cruelty and tyranny? No don't think so.

Admittedly, I have found Biblical quotations in a public sphere cringey but this new no God preaching and writing anti-religion quotes from public figures is equally vomit inducing. FYI snooty arrogance will rarely convince someone of whatever your argument may be. Both sides can be arrogant and human beings have been this way since the dawn of time. We have always thought we have known it all no matter how limited our education. If you told a foetus there was a world outside the womb, they would probably not believe you. Judging from the past, just because we have not discovered something, like the discovery of the shape of the earth, other planets, entities smaller than microscopic, does this mean that they do not exist?

Apparently being a liberal lefty is not compatible with believing in God, in the world where we must define our being in 160 characters or less, yet why should I have to fit into the box that people want me to. I am educated, I live in secular Britain, a society where most people are atheist or agnostic, I hardly have any religious friends and yet I believe in God and justice in the afterlife. Unless that is affecting your life please leave your ridiculous preaching/ ignorant generalisations to yourself. There are peaceful protesters and 84-year-old women being pepper sprayed in the face, whistle blowers being punished and ostracised more than war criminals and apartheid in the Middle East being championed because powerful corporations and lobby groups control the government in the land of the free. Surely these issues should take priority over your 'liberal' godless crusading?

See also http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/

I don't want to hate right-wingers but they make it so hard not to!

*Inspired by Twitter and 'Cross Talk' on Russia Today*

I have fairly recently joined Twitter, so I have had to discover and refine the art of summarising my musings in 160 characters or less. I usually hate social media as I am an unsociable sort but I find the phenomenon of Twitter quite fascinating. It proves that there is a market for everything as it appears that you can find people all over the world who are exactly like you, or near enough. This has proven spectacular results with regards to mobilisations such as the Arab Spring and Occupy.

I also love reading people's twitter descriptions about themselves, and as an OCD wannabee wordsmith of sorts, I fiddle with mine on a weekly basis. How to summarise ones entire being in 160 characters? 'Die-hard lefty' me thinks and I love that there are so many other liberals in the world, if not in governments, at least they are on Twitter! So what defines left and right-wing? Well the terms originated from the French revolution according to the seating of Parliament. Those who advocated secularisation and eradicating social and economic inequalities sat on the left, those who believed inequality was inevitable and natural and were pro-aristocracy, monarchy and Church sat to the right. It is a fascinating and exhausting divide to this day and one in which more social media interaction can just exacerbate. (The tweets from @moronwatch, dedicated to exposing right-wingers on twitter is particularly informative and hilarious.)

I also notice that there are some who state that they do not want followers who do not have the same views, this is disappointing to me as the only way to change people's minds is through dialogue and if possible embracing them in a way. Plus personally, although sometimes it is torturous and near enough heart-attack inducing, I seek out right-wing views to see what their views are on certain things, it always unsurprisingly serves to remind how stupid and brainwashed they can be and at times just outright disgraceful. One American right-winger invited to today's 'Cross Talk' on Russia Today, on the subject of Newt Gingrich said he 'did not like the Palestinians anyway' and cited the 'fact' that on 9/11 'THEY danced around when 9/11 happened'.

WOAH NELLY (sound of cars screeching to a halt). No he diduuuunt. Yes he did. Cue me effing and blinding at the TV. It's no shocker that right-wingers are typically anti-immigration, pro-Israeli to the point of defying common sense and generally just stupid, but this crossed the line to outright racism.

FIRST of all, 'that' footage was long ago found out to be misinterpreted, i.e. it was filmed before 9/11 so 'they' were in fact dancing over something totally unrelated. The fact that the footage came out in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 to further demonise Muslims when surely there were more important things to be concerned about is deeply suspicious not to mention disconcerting.

SECOND of all, even if this obvious fact was not pointed out to this douchebag more than a decade after 9/11 had surpassed, can you blame an entire race of people on the actions of few? Bigot much?

THIRDLY, the crimes against humanity that the US government has perpetrated on the Middle East is of microscopic proportions in comparison with celebrating the murder of innocents, as sick as that would be, which I repeat THEY DID NOT ACTUALLY DO.

FOURTHLY, it would be almost be funny if it was not so tragic, that so many people do not even think that outsiders have a reason to hate America. Of course I would never advocate hating an entire people for the crimes of its governments, cos then I'd be just like right-wing douchebag of the day but the reasons why 9/11 occurred to begin with, must be acknowledged. The fact that this has not happened and that politicians have simply said that 'the terrorists are jealous of our freedom' is an absurdity and a gross lie perpetuated to the masses to redirect the hate and absolve state liability. To use a British example, when little Madeline McCann was abducted, who were the blameworthy? At first, there was much animosity toward the slow reaction of the Portuguese police in investigating the missing child. Then there was the obvious indignation that her parents should not have left a small child alone in the first place, no matter how near they were and how safe the place was meant to be. In all the hubub that ensued, not much was mentioned of the evil perpetrator(s), although admittedly he/she has yet to be found. Yet when it comes to the ability to surpass lax airport security and the interventionist and immoral foreign policies of some Western governments, the blame is attributed solely to the terrorists who take advantage and take revenge.

Who is to blame? The incitement to hatred or the ensuing hatred? Is it an either or? Although I am a die-hard lefty, I can stomach the right, what I CANNOT stomach, is the downright WRONG.

  

See also http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/

Women's Role in the Arab World

*Inspired by the encircling & protection of women protesting in Tahrir Square*

Many in the West deride women's rights in the Arab world or lack thereof, I am not defending it but everywhere in the world there is sexism in various different forms.

In Yemen, the current president Ali Abdullah Saleh criticised women for protesting because this indicated that they were fraternising with the opposite sex. Firstly, this statement was clearly made in a pathetic attempt to deflect criticism from his own actions onto Yemeni women and secondly, any footage you see will show that the women protest only with each other and their children.

Women are oppressed in Nepal, a Buddhist country for goodness sakes, through avenues such as inheritance rights and access to education. There was even an incident where a nun was expelled from her sect and refused treatment at a state-run hospital, what was her crime? Having been gang raped then robbed by a bus driver and four others who were pretending to help her.

In Saudi Arabia, in 2007 a woman met up with a man, unaccompanied, apparently to retrieve some photos of her from him. They were then set upon by a gang of seven strong who gang raped her. The gang was inevitably punished with imprisonment for up to a measly four years, yet she was also sentenced to six months imprisonment and 200 lashes for meeting up with a man who was not her relative. She was eventually pardoned by the King of Saudi because of the media furore and global criticism it caused.

There was a recent report of a woman in Afghanistan who was raped at the age of 18, as fate would have it, she became pregnant from this rape. She reported this to the authorities, who charged and imprisoned the perpetrator. However the rape victim herself was imprisoned for her role in the 'moral crime', about half of the female Afghan prison population are there for similar so-called moral crimes. She has been in prison for over a year with her child in tow and she was offered early release if she marries her attacker. She was unwilling of course at first, but she says she is now willing to do so for the sake of her child to not be incarcerated any longer.

Although thank goodness there is not such overt atrocities in the UK, sanctioned by the state anyway, there is sexism in every country. Here, like other countries that continue to ignore legislation, women are still paid less for the same job as a man. They are also exploited nationally every day in the most popular 'news'paper in the country. Women in the entertainment industry must look as good as possible and say as little as possible, that is meaningful anyway. Despite all the advancements of women's rights in this country, what is the first thing that a man will say to a woman who he is having a conflict with? I have lived in a working class area my whole life and when any couple has a domestic on the street, even with kids in tow, the first thing he will call her is a slag, whore and the ilk. This sexism crosses class divides, a self-proclaimed Conservative activist hash tagged a North African journalist referring to her as an 'Arab whore'. The police refused to investigate the case, she cited selective investigation compared with the recent racist football spat. (see 'Why Are We All Racist?'). Also, let us not forget the worst atrocity against females, the biggest genocide in the 20th Century; the selective abortion of female babies.


Just as men would have women believe that they are all terrible drivers or they cannot do this or that, women will conform to stereotypes that men create. Women should not let men define what they should be, that should be for us to determine. One of the most important steps in the Arab revolutions, if not the most important, is for women to play a greater role, for when you educate the women, you educate the whole nation*.





See also http://raraproductions.blogspot.com/ & http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/

*Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)

Internet - platform for evil and good

It is undeniable that the internet has changed lives, on the smaller scale; if you need to know anything in an (almost) instant, there's no need to go to a library (ay?) phone a friend or ask the audience, but the most reliable source (sort of) is an extended, all encompassing version; asking an audience which comprises of millions or billions i.e. Google, Yahoo, Ask Jeeves etc. So what questions do you ask Google et al? Mundane but necessary things including directions, looking for jobs, comparing prices of big purchases and insurance, holidays.

But for me Google's best and worst invention is their sometimes ridiculous drop down suggestions, e.g. when I typed in Adam and Eve, one of their helpful suggestions was 'How did Adam and Eve make black people?' more racist suggestions I've found when typing in 'Why do black...' come up with 'Why do black people commit more crimes?' 'Why do black people have that black people smell?' 'Why do black people have big lips?' amongst other even more crude topics. I say best because it's good to know that whatever question you have asked has already been asked, but worst because it exposes just how stupid, ignorant and brain-dead apparently so many people are. You only have to look at the comments on any video on youtube to see how obsessed people are with race and being racist, for example, the tragic video of the two-year-old Chinese girl Yue Yue, run over and left to die served as an excuse for an American to launch a tirade on the entire Chinese race and to claim that this type of incident would never happen in the US as it is against American morals. We all also know the infamous video of the Malay student caught up in the London riots who was beaten and then robbed by people pretending to help him, somebody commented 'I felt so sorry for him but when I found out he was Muslim I then thought DIE BITCH DIE'.

I intended to write this as a counter to my previous doom and gloom blog but this is turning out differently... BUT on the upside, this particular victim had a twitter group set up for him to donate money and things to him whilst the Malay embassy was inundated with calls to help him out. All in all, this fund received £30,000, which he promptly donated to charity. In a cash-strapped era, this money was raised in a matter of days for one person! Not to mention, the people that came out to clean their streets after the havoc caused by the riots. So all faith in humanity is not lost! 

Furthermore, on a larger scale, it is an undeniable fact that the cheesily-named Arab spring would not have grown to the extent it has if not for the internet. The only region on the planet which did not even have pretend democracies finally had the chance on a wide scale to have their voice heard, and the world was actually interested. It was not conducted or coerced by the powers that be but actually by the people, their camera phones and the Libyan tweets that begged for a no-fly zone. Even in the countries which have very little internet access, we would never have known that people young and old are willing to demand for themselves what many of us around the world take for granted, which according to the last prophet of Islam is the greatest jihad (meaning struggle not war) 'speaking the truth to a dictator, even if you are killed for it'.

To conclude, the internet preserves that old chestnut that we all need to feel human - 'free speech' even if it means we have to be subjected to rants by loony hateful idiots, I would still say it's a worthwhile trade-off.

See also http://raraproductions.blogspot.com/ & http://anbarrockny.blogspot.com/