The View from Number 80

Amityville: A Pack Of Lies - the notorious "haunted house" that featured in the movie The Amityville Horror: A True Story is on the market for $1.15 million. Whether potential purchasers will be deterred by the place's history remains to be seen. The house was certainly the setting for a real horror - the murder of a family of six by the only surviving member, a son, Butch DeFeo. That much is fact but claims of subsequent hauntings and strange events are in fact bullshit, very lucrative bullshit but bullshit none the less. The ghost stories were propagated by a family, the Lutzes, that bought the house a year after the murders. Investigator Joe Nickell tells us "They claimed they were driven out by sinister forces that ripped open a heavy door, leaving it hanging from one hinge; threw open windows, bending their locks; caused green slime to ooze from a ceiling; peered into the house at night with red eyes and left cloven-hooved tracks in the snow outside; infested a room in mid-winter with hundreds of houseflies; and produced myriad other supposedly paranormal phenomena, including inflicting a priest with inexplicable, painful blisters on his hands." There was an "investigation" by assorted psychics who, surprise, surprise, confirmed the house was demonically possessed. A book was subsequently written, selling well enough for the movie and its sequel to be made. That those who lived in the house after the Lutzes moved out report no supernatural activity speaks volumes. The Lutzes had cooked up the entire story "over many bottles of wine." with the lawyer who represented the murderer Butch DeFeo. As well as Nickell's piece in Skeptical Inquirer about the hoax there is also Ben Radford's Reel or Real? The Truth Behind Two Hollywood Ghost Stories - those being The Amityville Horror and White Noise. Also see this entry on Haunted Houses from the Skeptic's Dictionary.

Martin Gardner 1914-2010 - I was saddened to hear of the death of Martin Gardner, a mathematics and science writer and so much more. I first discovered him at the age of twelve when I became entranced with his Annotated Alice. Lewis Carroll's Alice stories are full of references which were obvious to a Victorian and Edwardian audience that no longer mean much to the modern reader. By explaining and expanding on these Gardner managed to make the stories even more fascinating and intriguing for new generations. Another discovery for me was his Fads and Fallacies In The Name Of Science, first published in 1952 (as In The Name Of Science) and revised and expanded in 1957. In it Gardner gave skeptical scrutiny to many things including the Flat Earth, Flying Saucers, Dowsing, Atlantis, Reincarnation and Pyramidology - the book is still in print and is as relevant now as when it was written as sadly pseudoscience and flummery are still very much with us. Two other outlets for Gardner's energy and intellect apart from numerous books were his columns in Scientific American on mathematics which were later published in 15 volumes and his pieces for Skeptical Inquirer magazine, called Notes Of A Fringe-Watcher. He will be greatly missed by those who care about logic and rational thinking but he has left a body of work of which he could be proud. Here is a profile of the man from Scientific American and this Wikipedia entry gives some idea of his range of interests. James Randi expresses his grief at the loss of a friend saying My World Is A Little Darker. For a good collection of Gardner's pieces I recommend The Night Is Large, Collected Essays 1938-1995.

This is not Mohammed

Draw Mohammed Day - is today, May 20th, according to the Facebook group whose page already "...contains over 200 images, many of them certain to offend Muslims, who consider all depictions of the prophet to be blasphemous." The Guardian report has this wrong because there are plenty of Muslim images of Mohammed stretching back over many years, see these for example. Naturally Pakistan has jumped onto the "offended" bandwagon by blocking Facebook indefinitely, thereby turning it into forbidden fruit and therefore all the more attractive. (Update - also YouTube gets blocked) The puzzle is how can Muslims be offended? No one knows what the inventor of Islam looked like so how do they know when to throw their toys out of the pram? The crime, in Pakistan's eyes, must be the labelling not the picture, as it is only the label that identifies any representation as being one of Mohammed.

The reason for the ban on Mohammed's representation is supposedly to counter any tendency to idolize him, as Muslims say Christians have done with Jesus. It is therefore deeply ironic that Muslims are doing just that, as Mohammed is held up as the perfect man, to be emulated in every way. By the way, the artist who came up with the original Draw Mohammed Day has backed out, saying "I said that I wanted to counter fear and then I got afraid."  Update - "A Facebook page that was considered offensive to Islam and led to a Pakistani ban on the site has been removed, possibly by its creator." according to MSNBC. How the hell can something be "offensive to Islam" ? - firstly Islam is not a person therefore it cannot be offended, and secondly there is no single monolithic Islam - as evidenced by the willingness of Shia and Sunni Muslims to kill each other at the drop of a hat.

Liar! Update - here is a good piece on that old fraud, Prahlad Jani, who claims that he can live on sunshine alone (see Liar!). Sanal Edamaruku, president of the Indian Rationalist Association, writing in the Guardian provides some much needed background to this daft story. Dr Sudhir Shah, the neurologist who conducted the test of Pralad Jani has some previous history concerning breatharians. It was he who brought to the world's attention the claims of another inediate fraud, Hira Manek (see Breathing Lies). His "study" then was bankrolled by the Indian Defence Institute of Physiology and Allied Sciences, which also picked up the tab for this latest exercise in gullibility. It is noteworthy that neither of these studies have appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Edamaruku points out flaws in the testing regimen which left plenty of room for the old boy to have a surreptitious sip and a nibble and says that Shah likely has religious beliefs which prejudice his impartiality. (For more see the Indian Rationalist Association's report. Don't miss below James Randi Speaks: Powered by Sunlight)

Still Wriggling - despite the Pope's announcement on his recent trip to Portugal that "The greatest persecution of the church doesn't come from enemies on the outside but is born from the sins within the church. The church needs to profoundly relearn penitence, accept purification, learn forgiveness but also justice." It was a first sign that the pope was prepared to stop church officials trying to blame the abuse scandal on a supposed conspiracy hatched by outsiders, including pro-choice and pro-gay marriage groups." So how does this admission sit with the latest news that "The Vatican has insisted it is not responsible for sex abuse cases in the United States because bishops are not technically employees." Not very well is the answer. The buck does not stop with Ratzinger in ongoing clerical child-rape cases in the US - in fact it doesn't come anywhere near him. "... Vatican lawyers have said they will argue that bishops are not paid by Rome and therefore not technically its responsibility. ...their relationship with the Vatican was "religious" rather than "civil" so they were not liable under normal employment laws." This would seem to be a maneuver to keep Ratzinger himself from having to appear in court. Meanwhile the ongoing scandal has affected his popularity in Italy where "...a new survey has showed that Italians' faith in the papacy and the Church has dipped to a historic low, with less than 50 per cent saying they had trust in Benedict XVI and the Church. The survey, conducted by Demos, found that while 77 per cent had faith in the previous Pope, John Paul II, only 47 per cent regard his successor as credible."

Science and Religion - Francisco J. Ayala, geneticist, ex-Dominican priest and latest recipient of the Templeton prize has written a piece in the Guardian which seeks to define the border between science and religion. This is somewhat of a re-hash of the idea promoted by the biologist Stephen J Gould, that of non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA). This posits that science and religion have their own entirely separate areas of dominion or as Gould put it "...the magisterium of science covers the empirical realm: what the Universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap, nor do they encompass all inquiry (consider, for example, the magisterium of art and the meaning of beauty)."

Ayala starts by asking the question "Are religion and science incompatible?" and then answers it by saying that he believes "Science and religious beliefs need not be in contradiction. If they are properly understood, they cannot be in contradiction because science and religion concern different matters." Note that "properly understood", means as defined by him. He even puts his finger on the problem with that belief "Science has nothing to say, either, about religious beliefs, except when these beliefs transcend the proper scope of religion and make assertions about the natural world that contradict scientific knowledge." Here of course is where the NOMA idea breaks down in that when religion, as it frequently does, makes assertions about the physical world it opens itself up to scientific scrutiny.

In attempting to prove his point about the scientific view Ayala quotes from Richard Dawkins' book, River Out Of Eden "The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." He uses this to illustrate his belief that "Some scientists deny that there can be valid knowledge about values or about the meaning and purpose of the world and of human life." This does not follow, as Dawkins himself acknowledges that at least one part of the universe has become self-aware, human beings, and they can make the choice not to be tied to a path dictated by their selfish genes (the use of contraception being one example). Whether they actually make that choice is another matter.

In trying to show that science can say nothing about areas considered to be part of the domain of religion Ayala seems to be ignoring the research on humans and other primates that shows such qualities as kindness and empathy are not something magical, something outside of the physical world, but are the consequence of our living in social groups, and arises from the complex interactions between members of such groups. An external, non-physical "spiritual" cause is not required. As more is learned about say, bonobo culture, the more we find traits that were once thought to be the exclusive reserve of homo sapiens, and a god-fearing hom. sap. at that. This process of discovery (and dethronement?) is a biological version of the Copernican Principle and the removal of the Earth from its privileged place in the center of the universe. Research shows human beings to be to be an outcome of the process of evolution and not some special being occupying a niche halfway between the animals and the angels.

When Ayala asserts that "Religion concerns the meaning and purpose of the world and human life, the proper relation of people to their Creator and to each other, the moral values that inspire and govern their lives. Science, on the other hand, concerns the processes that account for the natural world: how the planets move, the composition of matter and the atmosphere, the origin and function of organisms." he is making the mistake that supernatural belief is necessary to understanding "...meaning and purpose of the world and human life..." It is entirely possible to ponder these things without insisting on the existence of something entirely outside the physical universe. His assumption that there is a "Creator" with which humans can have a relationship is only begging the question and for him to decide that "Successful as it is, however, a scientific view of the world is hopelessly incomplete. Matters of value and meaning are outside the scope of science." is merely an assertion unsupported by the current evidence.

This is where the real difference between science and religion shows itself. Religion relies upon argument from authority and the espousal of eternal verities. Holy writ is changeless and not to be challenged, at least in the Christianity that Ayala is using in his argument. Science, on the other hand, is an ongoing quest for truth and its conclusions are always tentative and liable to change in the face of new evidence. Science, unlike religion does not claim to to have "The Truth" but only ever more accurate approximations of how things are. The scientific method is to acknowledge its imperfections and seek to correct them. Science is constantly remaking itself by a process of inquiry and experiment that compensates for the fallibility of its practitioners. It does not offer certainty - only religion claims to do that. In reading Ayala's piece I am reminded of the words of the sadly missed Douglas Adams, “Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?”

...And In Happy News - "Americans have become increasingly less tied to formal religion in recent decades, with the percentage saying they do not have a specific religious identity growing from near zero in the 1950s to 16% this year and last. This upward trend in the percentage having no religious identity has been evident for a number of years in Gallup and other surveys." from pollsters Gallup.

Quote - “Where is the justice in having religious leaders of one faith from one particular part of the UK? We know why it has happened, but it’s a historical anomaly and indefensible in democratic terms. You have to look to Iran for any equivalent system in operation. A number of bishops are also Church Commissioners, whose job is to maximise profit for the Church. Essentially the Church is defending its own interests in the Lords. Bishops in the Lords have the ear of ministers and they can sway debates.” Jonathan Bartley, co-director of Ekklesia in a Times report about the anachronism of bishops sitting in the House of Lords.

Sex And The City - "Such is the arrogance of this self-congratulatory movie. It takes the Sex and the City girls to the Middle East so they can cavalierly thumb their nose at the region's retrograde gender politics." Ed Gonzalez, Slant magazine. Arrogance? Hardly. Gonzalez seems a little confused here, acknowledging that the treatment of women is "retrograde" and yet thumbing one's nose at it is "arrogance". The subjugation of women by Islamic cultures is to be criticized, condemned and yes, mocked at every possible opportunity. There are many reasons that 80 wouldn't want see this flick (apparently it's crap) but mocking oppressive gender inequality isn't one of them.

Beyond Belief - the human ability to believe nonsense in the face of all evidence has been on display yet again this week. Did you know that the US and Britain are deliberately prolonging the war in Afghanistan? This report tells us "It's near-impossible to find anyone in Afghanistan who doesn't believe the US are funding the Taliban: and it's the highly educated Afghan professionals, those employed by ISAF, USAID, international media organisations – and even advising US diplomats – who seem the most convinced." Apparently the long term plan is to use Afghanistan as a base for the domination of Asia. We learn "Among the things everybody knows are that Afghan national army troops report taking over Taliban bases to find identical rations and weapons to their own US-supplied equipment. The US funds the madrasas both in Afghanistan and in Pakistan, which produce the young Talibs. US army helicopters regularly deliver supplies behind Taliban lines. The aid organisations are nothing more than intelligence-collecting agencies, going into regions the army cannot easily reach to obtain facts on the ground." So, do these people want the allies to leave their miserable hellhole of a country? Actually no, "They don't want Nato to leave for 15, maybe 20 years, anyway. It will take that long for Afghan institutions to be able to survive independently." That people can hold such contradictory beliefs is a perpetual source of of bafflement - at least to this observer - but such idiotic conspiracy theories are depressingly widespread in Muslim countries.

Meanwhile in the UK demons are stirring. Phillipa Stroud, a failed Conservative candidate in the recent UK election has complained to the Guardian about a pre-poll piece which claimed that she "...founded a church that tried to "cure" homosexuals by driving out their "demons" through prayer." She says of this "... that she has never founded a church, let alone a church that tried to 'cure' homosexuals. She has never prayed or advised any person to change his or her sexuality and has never countenanced any person for whom she has had responsibility attempting to question any person's sexual orientation or to re-orient them." Phew, that's a relief then - well, not entirely. She does however believe that "demonic activity" is involved with "violence and sexual abuse" but not homosexuality. Another politico challenged by reality is Nelson McCausland, Northern Ireland's culture minister. This chump "...has called on the Ulster Museum to put on exhibits reflecting the view that the world was made by God only several thousand years ago." He also "...believes that Ulster Protestants are one of the lost tribes of Israel, has written to the museum's board of trustees urging them to reflect creationist and intelligent design theories of the universe's origins." He caps this idiocy by claiming that "...the inclusion of anti-Darwinian theories in the museum was "a human rights issue". This is obviously the human right to not only believe unsubstantiated bollocks but also to insist taxpayer's money is used to promote it. Sadly McCausland is not alone, another Northern Ireland assembly member, one Mervyn Storey, "Last year ... raised objections to notices at the Giant's Causeway informing the public that the unique rock formation was about 550m years old. Storey believes in the literal truth of the Bible and that the earth was created only several thousand years before Christ's birth." More amazing than all of this is the sad fact that the people of NI actually elected these clods.

A campaign group that sounds like a faith-based opticians called Christian Vision for Men (CVM) has a strange belief (no doubt one among many) about falling church attendance - it is that "...sermons dominated by love, compassion and grace do not entice men because they are “not male concepts”." Oh, and furthermore "Popular hymns such as ‘Amazing Grace’ have also been blamed as they are in the wrong key for men to sing." So what is the cunning plan to get male bums on pews? Wait for it - CVM "...is asking vicars to show the World Cup on big screens above the pulpit and even serve beer while the football tournament is on." Right, that'll do the trick. It doesn't seem to have occurred to these geniuses that church attendances are falling because both sexes are just not interested. That is the reality and no amount of booze or soccer will make any difference - both of these delights are available in the pub and there you don't get a guy in dress sermonizing at you just when Wayne Rooney is about to score. One churchman said “There is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support the view that the gender balance in Church of England congregations is getting seriously out of line.” A temporary blip, no doubt, on the way to oblivion. The National Secular Society commenting on a report called Churchgoing in the UK said there has been a "... sixty year decline in church attendance in the UK. UK Church membership was 13.4% of the population in 1980, 9.4% in 2005 and is projected by Christian Research to drop to 4.5% in 2040." After beer and football what else could the increasingly desperate church offer? Lapdancing?

Agricultural Graphics - it's that time of year again and the crop circle makers have been busy in a new medium. Instead of trashing a farmer's crop of wheat or barley the sometimes intricate and beautiful patterns are now appearing on plantings of oil seed rape (canola). The Telegraph has a nice slide show of a dozen recent examples. Of course this being the Telegraph so-called experts on the circles are asked for their opinions. One, a Mr Glickman "...visited his first crop circle in 1990 and is the author of several books on the subject...but after 19 years of studying them, he can offer "no explanation" for how or why crop circles appear." So that's 19 years well spent... (80 wrote about crop circles back in 2000 - see The Cereal Artists.)

June 6th 2010

Not Flushed Away - like a turd that bobs to the surface after being flushed disgraced evangelist Ted Haggard is back in the news. We are told that he is "...about to start preaching again. Haggard, once America's leading evangelical pastor, who was brought down and removed from his own mega-church after admitting to a gay sex scandal, has set up a new ministry and will hold the first service in his new church today." It seems his job as an insurance salesman is not bringing in enough money, as least not as much as fleecing the flock. Maybe he really doesn't know any other way of making a living except from a congregation. We learn "His wife, Gayle, who has stood by him throughout his troubles, will be the church's co-pastor." Stand by your man and all that is very noble but there is a better candidate for co-pastor and that is George Alan Rekers, the man who gave the world a new euphemism when he was caught out travelling with a young gay man who gave him intimate massages and helped "lift his luggage".

Both Haggard and Rekers have preached against the evils of homosexuality thereby giving religious endorsement to the homophobes, queer-bashers and similar human detritus, all the while indulging in gay sex themselves. Both of them are in denial about their sexuality, Rekers flatly stating in the face of the evidence that he is not gay and Haggard "... now says he is heterosexual, but had gay urges because he was molested by a man when he was a child." Haggard is slightly ahead here in the hypocrite stakes here as he not only claims to be "cured" but also manages to conflate pedophilia and homosexuality - a ploy also used by the Roman Catholic church when cornered. One thing that Haggard has managed to retain is the ability to turn 80's stomach with guff like this, "After what I have been through, I see people differently now. Sometimes I just watch the news and cry because my heart is so tender and passionate and filled with love". Pass the sick bag.

                                               

That Was No UFO - it was Spacex's new rocket Falcon 9 on its test flight. This Australian report tells us "The UFO was seen moving through the sky just before Saturday's sunrise in New South Wales, Queensland and the ACT. ABC News Online has received dozens of emails, pictures and videos from those who claim to have witnessed the huge white light." ABC news had the sense to contact an astronomer who, after looking at the spiralling motion of the object said "...it was probably a satellite, space junk or a rocket." This of course did not sit well with the UFO crowd who love a mystery more than the facts. A Doug Moffett from UFO Research NSW made several points that, at least to him, ruled out the object being a rocket stage. These same points are demolished one by one by the Bad Astronomer, aka Phil Plait, in an article called Oh, those Falcon UFOs! Plait has also obligingly posted a video of the UFO/Falcon which shows it to be similar to a UFO spotted earlier this year - a UFO that was also revealed to be a rocket test. So no little green men for the ufonuts, this time, but keep watching the skies!

Cropped Up - when is a picture cropped for reasons other than lack of available space or presentation? One answer would be when the image doesn't fit into a generally accepted narrative, such as images showing Gaza flotilla "peace activists" holding knives. See this page from Little Green Footballs (LGF) on pictures apparently censored/manipulated by the press agency Reuters. While it can be claimed that LGF has its own agenda the pictures tell their own story. Just how impartial is Reuters?

Gaza Flotilla - in the wake of the propaganda coup by Hamas and Turkish jihadis it is instructive to read this report by Harriet Sherwood. 80 is certainly not a knee-jerk defender of Israel, especially with Netanyahu at the helm, but the western media are being fed garbage by the useful idiots who were on board. Also see this from the Jerusalem Post. Meanwhile in Gaza..... Update - Israel and Turkey: It's Complicated is the latest piece by Christopher Hitchens for Slate.

No Mosque at Ground Zero - in his latest piece to camera Pat Condell gives his opinion of mooted plans to build a mosque next to Ground Zero, the site of the terrorist atrocity of 9/11. There is a protest meeting at the site on June 6th organized by The human rights group Stop Islamization of America (SIOA). After watching Pat's video it is worth revisiting Richard Dawkins' essay Religion's Misguided Missiles.

Happy News - "Pope Benedict XVI’s historic visit to Britain is in disarray as the costs spiral and doubts increase over the schedule. The part of the bill that must be paid by the Roman Catholic church is now being put at as much as £14million, twice the earlier estimate, which could lead to events being scaled down or even cancelled." from the Telegraph.

Is the Vatican a Sovereign State? - "Those scrutinizing the nomination of Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court might want to pay some attention to the recent decision of her office—the office of the solicitor general of the United States—to take the side of the Vatican in the continuing scandal of child rape and the associated scandal of a coordinated obstruction of justice." Read the rest of Christopher Hitchens' latest piece for Slate here.

The man who would be King

Seven Pillars of Windsor - the Daily Mail reports on Charlie Windsor's latest big idea - that the world needs to "...follow Islamic 'spiritual principles' in order to protect the environment." We learn "In an hour-long speech, the heir to the throne argued that man's destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions - but particularly those of Islam." This comes from his own study of the Quran - although whether he reads it in the original Arabic is not known. Many Muslim clerics insist this is the only way to understand it. 80 has written before about Windsor's use of his hereditary position to inflict his opinions upon others. Whether he also espouses Islam's misogyny and homophobia is not known but he has revealed his interest in the faith before. He is also a patron of the venue for his speech, the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies. In any case the king-wannabe has not really thought things through. Among many other characteristics Muslims are noted for their fecundity. For example a Times' report notes "The Muslim population in Britain has grown by more than 500,000 to 2.4 million in just four years". Furthermore Muslims "...multiplied 10 times faster than the rest of society, the research by the Office for National Statistics reveals." and "Experts said that the increase was attributable to immigration, a higher birthrate and conversions to Islam during the period of 2004-2008, when the data was gathered."

One factor above all is damaging the environment and that is human overpopulation, which has led to increasing pollution, the depletion of natural resources and loss of biodiversity. Windsor even acknowledges this in his speech. Controlling this one factor would obviously be beneficial for the environment. Which makes it very odd for Windsor to single out Islam as an exemplar in protecting the planet's natural resources and wildlife. Action to curb overpopulation is unlikely to start with religion. All three abrahamic faiths encourage procreation and give humans dominion over the planet's life forms and therefore make a poor basis for environmental concerns. What is needed is science, not superstition. When the "holy" books were written "be fruitful and multiply" was good advice in order to increase numbers and so dominate one's neighbors - today it is a recipe for disaster. A major factor that can lead to a drop in the birth rate is the education and empowerment of women - which is not something normally associated with Islam. Windsor is right in that action is needed to save the environment and preserve bio diversity - but embracing Islam's "spiritual values" is surely not the answer. Educating and empowering women and girls and giving them access to contraception would be far more effective in conserving the environment than following the dictates of any religion. It is a pity Windsor did not comment on the obduracy of the Roman Catholic church on the subject of birth control. (Also see Charles of Arabia’s insane love affair with Islam goes back many years courtesy of The Freethinker) Update - Christopher Hitchens looks at Charles, Prince of Piffle.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor. There's a reason for that haunted look.

Adding Insult To Injury - 80 remarked a short while ago that as the priestly child rape scandal unfolded Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor was absent from BBC Radio where he was a frequent commentator (see Conspicuous By His Absence). 80 assumed his apparent low profile was a sign of some much needed sensitivity on behalf of the Roman Catholic church over the shocking revelations of abuse that kept rolling in. Given the cardinal's role in enabling a pedophile to continue raping children it seemed a reasonable surmise. In this case 80 was a an idiot - any idea of sensitivity has been blown out of the water by Murphy-O'Connor's appointment to the team on a special inquiry into sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in Ireland. The BBC informs us "...Five senior prelates have been named as members of the inquiry panel. They include Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, retired Archbishop of Westminster and Cardinal O'Malley, Boston, USA." Given Murphy O'Connor's disastrous and ghastly conduct over Father Michael Hill he is totally unsuited for the job. He allowed "...a known paedophile to continue working as a priest, despite warnings he would re-offend." The other appointee, O'Malley is not much better. According to BishopAccountability.org “O’Malley’s career ascent has been fueled by his ability to walk into dioceses wracked by horrible revelations of child molestation and enshroud them again in silence." What sort of message does that send to the many victims of pedophile priests?

Quote - "Many in the UK survivor movement would wonder why a bishop with a record of mishandling his own cases could independently look at another bishop's handling of cases. Indeed, he may be the worst possible candidate as it might be judged he will be unable to pronounce justice, since he himself was not called to account." Dr Margaret Kennedy, of the London-based Minister and Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors quoted in a piece by the National Secular Society on Murphy-O'Connor's appointment.

Mr Lion and his Little Friend

Good Grief - P Z Myers has spotted that a Creation Museum is up for sale in Georgia. 80 clicked onto the museum's web site and was instantly taken with the kitsch look of the place. In assembling this collection good taste is as absent as anything approaching science. Hilariously we are told "One of the main attractions of The Gallery of Creation is the realistic artificial talking robotic animals, Mr. Lion and his Little Friend, The Lamb. They will surprise you with their many movements and the special creation messages they present in a most unique dialogue." So much more believable than that evolution stuff with all that evidence. (80 has been reminded of the Woody Allen line "And the lion shall lay down with the lamb, but the lamb won't get much sleep". Thanks, Jeremy)

Deluded or Deceitful? - Following "...a new poll (that) showed that 58 per cent of people associate Islam with extremism and 50 per cent with terrorism" a new advertising campaign has been launched on Tube trains, taxis and busses in London. The group behinds the ads, the "...Exploring Islam Foundation (EIF), a new and privately funded group run by young British Muslim professionals"  has chosen an odd way of going about things. The poster displayed in the Times shows a women wearing a headscarf, a barrister called Sultana Tafadar, with accompanying text that says "I believe in human rights. So did Mohammed". On all the available evidence it is evident that the campaign's definition of human rights differs from the generally accepted version. Perhaps they are referring to so-called Islamic human rights - a stunted religious concept bearing little or no resemblance to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see The Wrong Rights). If this isn't the case then the EIF are being at the very least disingenuous and at the very worst, lying. If these people are so concerned about correcting a perceived problem revealed by the YouGov survey then this poster campaign is hardly likely to be effective. The poll "...showed that 58 per cent of people associate Islam with extremism and 50 per cent with terrorism...". Mmm, one wonders why. Trying to correct such a perception by means of deceitful posters giving a false impression of Islam's attitude to human rights is not the way to go about it. See Women’s Rights: Inspired by Muhammad? by Edmund Standing to see what a nonsense these claims are. Or see this. The Inspired by Mohammed web site is here. By the way, What do we actually know about Mohammed? Update - see Jesus and Mo's take on this. And again here.

Quran
4:11 Allah chargeth you concerning (the provision for) your children: to the male the equivalent of the portion of two females, and if there be women more than two, then theirs is two-thirds of the inheritance, and if there be one (only) then the half.
4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them.

Lest 80 be judged merely anti-Islamic here is an example of the Roman Catholic church trying the same big lie gambit before Ratzinger's (obscenely expensive) trip to the UK. The headline reads "Even atheists should welcome Benedict's visit" which is enough to set alarm bells ringing. The writer, Kevin McKenna, starts out as he means to go on with this sentence "...Benedict's visit is important for the country, believers and deniers alike." Note the use of the term deniers which in today's parlance carries the meaning of denial in the face of overwhelming evidence, such as exhibited by those who say the Holocaust did not take place. Atheists are not deniers about a god or gods - to use the term is to beg the question of a god or god's existence. It is the believers that are making claims for a supernatural omniscient and omnipotent being, therefore the burden of evidence falls upon them. Needless to say the evidence is unconvincing.

McKenna, much like the above EIF, seems to think that dissemblance will serve his purpose. The aim is the same and that is to claim that an ancient dogmatic revealed religion is the source of modern thinking about human rights and freedoms. McKenna has the brass neck to claim "The European Convention on Human Rights didn't waft into our collective imagination by accident. The concepts of equality, democracy and the right to be treated justly rather than be violated by torture or by economic and physical oppression were gifted to the nations by the Bible." This is the same bible that nowhere denounces slavery or rape - in fact rape was encouraged by the god of the bible with a repulsive glee. Barefaced claims that things are otherwise is deeply dishonest. For a church that opposed the Enlightenment to then held up as the source of the advances brought about by that Enlightenment is particularly dishonest and despicable. But then both Islam and Christianity are not bothered by lies so long as the lies are in a good cause - ie winning converts. One lie isn't enough for McKenna as he also claims "The great popular revolutions and struggles of downtrodden peoples were fuelled by ideas that first found light and expression in the writings of Old Testament prophets and New Testament evangelists." Five minutes investigation of the Old Testament is enough to dispel that idea - the god therein is a cruel and capricious monster. The New Testament is hardly better for introducing the vile concept of eternal damnation.

Old Testament, Numbers 31
31:7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
31:8 And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.
31:10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.
31:11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.
 

Pride Maybe, But No Sense - this report from the Guardian tells us that "A delegation of gay residents of Tel Aviv has been banned from joining a gay pride march in Madrid because authorities in the Israeli city have not condemned the recent attack on the Gaza flotilla." Antonio Poveda, of Spain's Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transexuals and Bisexuals said "After what has happened, and as human rights campaigners, it seemed barbaric to us to have them taking part." (One small aside - there was no "attack on the Gaza flotilla". The violence took place on one vessel only and seems to have been provoked by the "peace activists" themselves.) As for allowing the Israeli gays to join the march being described as "barbaric" perhaps Poveda and his chums would like to stage a gay pride march in Gaza and see what sort of welcome they would get from Hamas. These Islamic thugs laid out their stall even before they were voted into power in Gaza. One of the groups founders, Mahmoud Zahar, made clear how things would be when referring to gay rights in Israel, "Are these the laws for which the Palestinian street is waiting? For us to give rights to homosexuals and to lesbians, a minority of perverts and the mentally and morally sick?" The Spanish Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transexuals and Bisexuals reveal themselves as useful idiots, sympathizing with those who would exterminate them. Here's how Hamas treat the Palestinians that they are "protecting". (Also see Israel, human decency, common humanity which provides some welcome perspective and Gaza Flotilla below) Update - a flotilla jihadi speaks.

A House Built Of Straw - at the end Mary Midgley's piece in the Guardian, The Abuses of Science I am left wondering quite what she is going on about. The first paragraph sets the tone of the piece. "Science really isn't connected to the rest of life half as straightforwardly as one might wish. For instance, Isaac Newton noted gladly that his theory of gravitation gave a scientific proof of God's existence. Today's anti-god warriors, by contrast, declare that Darwin's evolutionary theory gives a scientific disproof of that existence and use this reasoning, quite as confidently as Newton used his, to convert the public." Science is a way (the only reliable way) to learn about the physical universe. It is an imperfect but self-correcting means of inquiry and the knowledge gained affects every human being on the planet, directly or indirectly, by means of technology. What science does not do is make claims of absolute truth, of certainty - that is left to arrogant religion. The so-called "anti-god warriors" (I think she means those with the effrontery to question the nonsensical claims of religion) have not declared that evolution by means of natural selection gives a scientific disproof of God's existence. It certainly makes a Designer God less likely, but not even the most dogmatic atheist would claim it as proof. It is Midgley that is putting words in their mouths in order to construct a straw man for her to assault. It would be useful if Midgley defined her terms - which god does she mean, Newton's? The context indicates it is the Judaeo-Christian deity that concerns us here but it would be nice to be told - humankind has had so many deities although most of them have been discarded.

In case you don't get it she repeats the idea in the next paragraph referring to "...today's evolutionary argument – which is often treated as fatal not just to Christianity but to religion generally..." She offers no reference to back up this claim in either instance. What she appears to be doing is not particularly original. These atheists are barking up the wrong tree by engaging with biblical literalists, we are effectively told, because those literalists are a comparatively recent phenomenon and are not theologically sophisticated. What she misses is that it is not the philosophical theists that are a threat to rational enquiry but the primitive bible-bashers. That is why so much atheist writing examines and debunks biblical literalism - that is where the danger lies, not in some theological ivory tower. She calls the literalists' stance "Bible worship" and describes it as a "spiritual phenomenon" which she defines as "...a message felt in the heart". Midgley claims that "...it involves a genuine response to the real wisdom which can also be found in the Bible." and that atheists, if I understand this correctly, need to "...acknowledge this wisdom" when engaging with believers. This argument assumes the bible contains "real wisdom" in the first place and that it can separated from its opposite, which I suppose should be called "unreal wisdom", although Midgley offers no examples of either.

In the last paragraph she tells us "Belief in God is not an isolated factual opinion, like belief in the Loch Ness monster – not, as Richard Dawkins suggests, just one more "scientific hypothesis like any other". (Here she at least names one of her "anti-god warriors) She does not seem to understand that when religion makes claims about god's intervention in the real, physical world it becomes subject to scientific inquiry and is definitely a "scientific hypothesis like any other". She continues "It is a world-view, an all-enclosing vision of the kind of world that we inhabit. We all have these visions. Though they are always loaded with lumber and often dangerous, we need them." Nowhere in the article does she make clear quite why such visions are needed. Just because something is an "all-enclosing vision" does not mean that it should be treated differently from any other type of supernaturalism. An all-enclosing vision of the world built upon the supposed existence of a deity sounds little different from wearing blinkers. To sum up, Midgley is telling us that evolutionary theory cannot disprove the existence of god - but then, so what? No one who knows anything about evolution makes that claim. She effectively says that atheists who wish to engage with believers should make use of the wisdom of the bible - why? Who decides which parts are wise and which are foolish? Midgley? The pope? Ted Haggard? Furthermore, the "anti-god warriors" should take on board these "visions" as we all have them. As stated at the beginning I am left wondering quite what she is going on about - but then perhaps I lack vision. (Jesus and Mo' have got Midgley's number)

The Future Of Islam - is a book by John L. Esposito, a professor of International Affairs and Islamic Studies at Georgetown University. He is also the director of Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal center for Muslim-Christian understanding at Georgetown University. According to Wikipedia "The center has received a $20 million endowment from Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal "to advance education in the fields of Islamic civilization and Muslim-Christian understanding and strengthen its presence as a world leader in facilitating cross-cultural and inter-religious dialogue." Riiight. Campus Watch reproduces an article on Esposito from 2002 called Esposito: Apologist for Militant Islam which supplies some quotes that give the flavor of Esposito's thinking - a flavor that 80 finds completely unpalatable. For example "Interestingly, he accuses those who have identified Islamism as a strategic enemy of having a "secular bias" toward Islam. He claims that their "analysis has been shaped by a liberal secularism that fails to recognize that it too represents a world view that, when assumed to be self-evident truth, can become a ‘secular fundamentalism.'"

Has Esposito learned anything over the last 8 years? His latest work has fallen under the critical eye of the LibertyPhile and suffice it to say it does not fare well. From misrepresentation of poll results to soft-pedalling on the capricious and cruel Islamic sharia "justice" to suggesting the fork-tongued Tariq Ramadan (see The Ethical Islamist) and the despicable Yusuf Qaradawi as "Martin Luthers" (ie reformers)  Esposito seems happy to fudge and blur the outlines of militant Islam to make this intolerant, misogynist, homophobic and violent movement more acceptable. (In passing using the term "Luthers" is particularly apt as the reforming churchman was a rabid anti-semite) Some of Esposito's conclusions brought 80 near to apoplexy such as "…. European governments, he believes, will only gain the trust of the Muslim community when they institutionalize Islam through state sponsorship of Muslim schools, state councils, and mosques." This is not integration or assimilation - it is a takeover. LibertyPhile's lengthy and detailed dissection of Esposito's book and his accommodationist views is well worth reading and shows just how the apologists' arguments are unsustainable when subjected to intelligent and critical scrutiny. Recommended.

On Sunday 20 June 2010 Stand up and be Counted!

Join the Rally organised by One Law for All against Sharia and religious laws
and for secularism and universal rights

Where: Richmond Terrace junction with Whitehall opposite Downing Street (SW1A 2).
(Please note venue change from Trafalgar Square made by police; closest underground: Westminster.)

New Report – Sharia Law in Britain: A Threat to One Law for All and Equal Rights

Big Butter Jesus by Heywood Banks

Graven Images - there is a weird campaign in the US that wants to claim the so-called ten commandments as the basis of that country's laws. As with most biblical admonitions these believers feel free to cherry pick which ones they want to obey. Now it seems that god really meant it about graven images - or at least the bizarre 'King of Kings' statue (also known as Touchdown Jesus or Big Butter Jesus) at the Solid Rock Church, Monroe, Ohio, which appears to show Jesus bursting out of the ground like some kind of giant Holy Mole. This Telegraph story tells us that the 60 foot statue, was struck by lightning and burned to the ground - which is hardly surprising as it was made of glass fiber and styrofoam. Act of god?  But then maybe it is nothing to do with a Decalogue transgression - maybe god zapped the monstrosity on purely aesthetic grounds. Update - Mark Morford offers 19 reasons why God torched Jesus. 80's favorite is Number 9. God: "Wait, what? That was supposed to be Jesus? It looked like Charles Manson after too many marshmallow peeps and a bad peroxide job. Aw, dammit."

Homeopathy Awareness Week - is now upon us. 80 is aware that homeopathy is complete and utter hogwash. Edzard Ernst, professor of complementary medicine at the Peninsula Medical School, is aware that homeopathy's days are numbered - although 80 thinks he is over optimistic. His team has found that "...the Society of Homeopaths even appears to have been in breach of its own code of ethics in attempting to promote homeopathy. On the society's website, numerous statements about efficacy were made that were not backed by science and so were not allowed under its own regulations." Ernst reminds us that in the wake of the British Chiropractic Association's botched attempt to muzzle science writer Simon Singh "...several bloggers and sceptics then went through the claims made by UK chiropractors with a fine tooth comb and subsequently reported around 600 of them to their regulator for violating the rules that regulate their practice." He is now hoping that the same tactic could be used against homeopathy - although his hope that "This could truly be the end of homeopathy" is unlikely to be fulfilled. Belief in the efficacy of homeopathy is a faith position and true believers never give up. 80 would settle for this quackery to be severely damaged and unable to suck up funding from a cash-strapped National Health Service. (Talking of the NHS and its finances did you know that it spends £32 million a year on chaplains? The National Secular Society has a campaign going to have these people funded by the church and not the NHS. Naturally the faith-heads have deliberately misinterpreted this and claim that NSS wants to ban chaplains. Not so. If they were paid for by the church then the £32 million could be spent on nurses and other staff - which has to be a good thing.)

A Good Question - "Why are supposed human rights activists so quick to attack Israel but never make a squeak against the anti-peace Hamas regime that persecutes women, Christians and homosexuals?"  Read the rest of Allon Lee's Of blockades and blockheads.

It's Called Lying - there is an interesting paragraph in a piece with the eye-catching headline The Dalai Lama on violence. In attempting to explain the apparently contradictory stance of the Buddhist boss Mark Vernon ties himself in knots. "The Dalai Lama quite routinely says different things to different audiences, an approach that is valued in Buddhism and is known as "skilful means". It is not a kind of duplicity. Rather, it aims to have the right word for the right time and context. The difficulty is that when his words ripple out across the internet, as they do, they are also ripped out of their original context. Skilfully interpreting the Dalai Lama then becomes very hard." What utter nonsense. The internet allows easy comparison of different speeches to different audiences thereby making dissemblance much more difficult. The Dalai Lama is doing what religionists have always done - lied to advance their aims. This is not sinful apparently if it benefits the faith. Islam even has a word for it - taqiyya, at which, say, Tariq Ramadan is such an expert. Such deception is also endorsed by one of the founders of Christianity, St Paul. The safest approach to such pious mouthings is to trust them no further than one could comfortably spit a grand piano.

Organization of the Islamic Hypocrites - "The Islamic bloc is attempting to turn an international shield for religious freedom into a sword for religious-motivated state censorship. It's part of a larger campaign to invert the real danger of Islamist extremism and terrorism around the globe into an imagined narrative of Western victimization of Islam and its adherents." Hillel Neuer, executive director of U.N. Watch speaking of the repeated efforts by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) to outlaw defamation of religion - note that by religion they actually mean Islam. This is particularly rich given the tendency for Islamic countries to persecute religious minorities as in Egypt, Pakistan, and Iraq, to name just three. (Also see Discriminatory regimes continue to push anti-discrimination agenda at UN from the Heresiarch and Pakistan "Playing With Fire" from the International Humanist and Ethical Union)

Heavenly Trumpets - the Catholic archbishop of England and Wales, Vincent Nichols, does not like vuvuzelas, the plastic trumpets that have provided the raucous theme music for the soccer World Cup. The Telegraph tells us "He is concerned that some people have got into the habit of using the plastic horns during the World Cup in South Africa and might not be able to resist using them when Pope Benedict XVI...addresses crowds in Britain." It is likely such an idea had not occurred to the many people that have no liking for Ratzinger or the use of taxpayers' money to subsidize his visit so Archbishop Nichols is owed a debt of gratitude for mentioning it. This page from Amazon has vuvuzelas of various shapes and sizes customized with the national colors of competing teams - there doesn't seem to be a papal one yet but thanks to Nichol's suggestion it is a certainty that enterprising individuals with an eye on the market will be producing some by September in order to give Ratzinger a rousing welcome to the shores of this scepter'd isle.

Set An Example - Archbishop Vincent Nichols, the head of the Roman Catholic church in England and Wales is quoted in the Telegraph calling "...on the Government to consider the "ethical factors" underlying the economic collapse." Leaving aside whether an organization that colluded in the cover-up of the mass rape of children should lecture anyone on ethics, Nichols said "A key part of the change needed is to forge a cultural consensus in the financial sector that its licence to operate depends on a clear and demonstrable commitment to service." Perhaps the archbishop would like to set a whole new tone of openness within finance by making public the church's accounts and investments. What an inspiring example this would set. (Update - "A senior Vatican cardinal is under investigation for corruption, dragging the Catholic church into a public works scandal that has sent shockwaves through the Italian government." )

June 23rd 2010

Of Crosses And Cups - a report in the Telegraph tells us that theologian Gunnar Samuelsson does not believe that Jesus died on a cross (so does 80, but for a very different reason). Samuelsson points out that the bible "...has been misinterpreted as there are no explicit references (sic) the use of nails or to crucifixion - only that Jesus bore a "staurus" towards Calvary which is not necessarily a cross but can also mean a "pole"." He quite rightly points out the dearth of information on crucifixion in ancient texts. It would appear that the Christian story of the crucifixion owes more to tradition rather than an accurate biblical description. Samuelsson says "If you are looking for texts that depict the act of nailing persons to a cross you will not find any beside the Gospels."

Of greater interest to 80 is a statement he makes concerning a historical Christ that reflects poorly on the quality of his scholarship "That a man named Jesus existed in that part of the world and in that time is well-documented. He left a rather good foot-print in the literature of the time." This is nonsense - there are no contemporary documents attesting to Jesus' existence. The gospels post date the supposed time that he lived by decades, with Mark, identified as the earliest, setting the framework for Luke and Matthew. John is even later. The closest thing to contemporary documentation are the epistles of Paul but his Jesus is more the spiritual being Christ rather than a flesh and blood person. Paul appears to know little or nothing of any recently deceased preacher. It is noteworthy that Paul when in a dispute as to whether converts should follow Jewish dietary practices does not quote the Gospel Jesus' ruling on that very subject which would have been the clincher. Paul does not know of the itinerant preacher from Galilee and never quotes his teachings. Paul's Christ is revealed to him through biblical study and revelation and owes nothing to the gospel stories. For more on the historicity of Jesus 80 recommends The Jesus Puzzle and the writings of Richard Carrier. Also see Crucifixion?

Even stranger than Samuelsson's revelations is the story of Retired Royal Navy officer EC Coleman who claims to have found the Holy Grail having spent "...years studying ancient texts". Not long enough apparently if he thinks the grail is a real physical object. His grail is a metal cup found in a bishop's tomb in Lincoln Cathedral during building works in 1889. It had been placed there probably in the 13/14th century. The history of the grail first appeared in the fiction of Chrétien de Troyes in the late 12th century and was taken up and adapted by other authors. The object at times has been a bowl, a plate and a cup, perhaps with a connection to the pagan idea of a cauldron of plenty. It is nowhere attested in the New Testament or early church writings so quite which "ancient texts" Coleman has studied is a mystery. (Luke 22:14 - 20 mentions a cup used at the Last Supper but makes nothing of it.) The Sunday Express article announcing his "find" does not tell us his sources but Coleman has written a book (there is always a book) The Grail Chronicles which is out on July 1st. Perhaps his studies will be detailed there and he can justify his extraordinary claim.

The Pope Needs A Miracle - so says Pat Condell in his latest piece to camera as he mulls the notion of Catholic priests as "gifts to the world"  to use Ratzinger's unfortunate and inaccurate expression.

Seeing Is Believing - want to keep tabs on the rest of the congregation? Or entrap a dodgy priest? Then the Cross Spy Camera is just for you. "The Cross Spy Camera is a digital spy camera and camcorder hidden inside a mini crucifix! Ingenious and fashionable, wear it on a necklace and capture people in the act or use it as a life blogging device! The possibilities are endless... "  I'll say they are...

June 27th 2010

Riddle - when is a Catholic priest not subordinate to the Vatican? Answer - when he is accused of raping children, of course. "A lawsuit against the Vatican that had been dismissed as a publicity stunt moved forward when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from the Holy See. Monday's development represents a significant advance for what many believed to be a long-shot claim that the Vatican bears legal responsibility for molester priests." If there ever was a hierarchical system it is that of the Roman Catholic church with the Pope at the summit and cardinals, bishops and priests each with their place in the system, their niche in the apostolic succession. But when the shit hits the clerical fan, as it has in an Oregon district court, backpedalling like crazy becomes the order of the day. "Jeffrey Lena, the American attorney for the Holy See, argued the Vatican is not responsible for individual priests in dioceses, saying the existence of the priest in the case "was unknown to the Holy See until after all the events in question." This seems disingenuous to say the very least but Lena goes on to say "The Holy See does not pay the salary of the priest, or benefits of the priest, or exercise day-to-day control over the priest, and any of the other factors indicating the presence of an employment relationship." The Holy See is behaving like a character in the gospel fables, Pontius Pilate, and indulging in some timely hand-washing.

Such protestations may well prove in vain - Jeff Anderson, the Minnesota attorney who represents the plaintiff had this to say "I have known for 25 years that all roads lead to Rome. This is the beginning for us of a new journey, a uniquely difficult odyssey." It is a journey which many people will be following very closely indeed. More countries need to take Belgium's approach - if someone rapes a child they should be pursued with the full might of the law - and the same goes for those who conceal such despicable acts. Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrews and Edinburgh in talking-up Pope Ratzinger's forthcoming UK trip said “A defining feature of Pope Benedict's teaching has been to remind Europe of its Christian roots and culture and to give us guidance on the great moral issues of our day and it is my hope that we all open our hearts to his words.” The one moral issue that is still not being adequately addressed is the widespread abuse of children by Catholic clergy and for all the waffle from the likes of O'Brien it is not going away. Meanwhile, as if anyone gives a damn', Ratzinger announces "... a new body with the aim of promoting a renewed evangelism," in countries that are going through "progressive secularisation of society". This deluded old man does not yet realise that any authority he has is being drained away with every instance of clerical child abuse that comes to light. This may be the only good thing to come out of this sorry and disgusting episode. (Also see Without its immunity, can the Vatican survive?)

Nurturing Vipers - this article by Edna Fernandes in the Daily Mail informs us that there are "166 Muslim schools in Britain today." and takes a closer look at one of them, Darul Uloom, a madrassa in the Kent village of Chislehurst. It is one of 26 schools of this particular type which had their beginning in Deoband, northern India. It is no coincidence that the term Deobandi is used to describe a particular hardline Sunni sect which "...holds that a Muslim's first loyalty is to his religion and only then to the country of which he is a citizen or a resident; secondly, that Muslims recognise only the religious frontiers of their Ummah and not the national frontiers; thirdly, that they have a sacred right and obligation to go to any country to wage jihad to protect the Muslims of that country." In Pakistan "The Islamic Deobandi militants share the Taliban's restrictive view of women, and regard Pakistan's minority Shiia as non-Muslim." Needless to say the Deobandis are closely linked to Saudi Arabia's austere Wahabi  strain of Islam (which possibly explains where the school obtained £2.7 million to buy the premises, ironically enough, from the Ministry of Defence). That the school's ethos is in accord with such hardliners is obvious in an interview with the school's headmaster, Mufti Mustafa.

"Our aim to is educate our students in a sharia environment..."  he says, "More important than exams is the learning of the Koran, the Hadith [ways of the Prophet] and Islamic law. It is the obligation of every Muslim to live according to sharia." It is obvious that integration with the wider society or, to use the irritating New Labour term, community cohesion, is nowhere on his agenda. The kids that pass through this school are not being educated as British citizens and the Mufti has a medieval view of the purpose of education as evidenced by this deeply worrying statement "As Muslims, we’re not interested in an education that is simply about getting a job. We’re not on Earth for this reason. We live on this Earth merely with a view to the next life."  This is the same attitude that led to 19 young men "...with a view to the next life" flying airplanes into skyscrapers. This is a cold, miserable culture in which everything is subverted to religion - or outright banned, "Music is haram (forbidden) for the children. There are things in it that can cause children to go haywire." says a school adviser. Fernandes "... asked the Mufti why many thought these schools were linked to a fundamentalism among young British Muslims. He said while Deobandi Muslims believed in the sharia way, they also understood it could not be adopted by a country that is not an Islamic state. As for extremism, he replied: ‘We’re not here for that reason. Jihad. We don’t get involved in politics." The obvious conclusion to draw from that particular example of taqiyya is that the aim is to create an Islamic state and naturally sharia will follow.

The Chislehurst madrassa is one of the less hardline ones operating in the UK. Denis MacEoin of thinktank Civitas, which conducted the first major survey of Islamic schools in Britain, found that "...younger British Muslims were more hardline than their elders, partly because such schools encouraged a separatist mentality. His research showed many of the Darul Uloom schools in Britain resisted cultural integration. Instead, sharia values on issues such as women’s rights, homosexuality, segregation of men and women, and capital punishment were being inculcated in children from a young age." MacEoin points out how a separatist culture is already here, producing children unfit for British society, "It means no child attending a Muslim school of this kind will ever visit a gallery, attend a concert of classical or non-classical music, pass an evening mesmerised by Romeo and Juliet performed by the National Ballet. No Muslim girl will become a ballerina." The best comment on the children produced by these schools is in the comments below Fernandes' piece - "It's going to take years to deprogram these broken little robots".

Miserable, Joyless, Heartless Islamist Bastards - "A UN summer camp for children in Gaza was vandalized by two dozen masked men early Monday. The vandals burned and slashed tents, toys and a plastic swimming pool." And this was not the first time, in May, "Masked gunmen from an Islamist group torched a UN-run summer camp for children and teens in Gaza on Sunday, Army Radio reported, the top UN aid official in Gaza said. John Ging says the assailants tied up the guard early Sunday, burned tents and vandalized bathrooms. UN officials say the attackers left behind three bullets and a note threatening to kill Ging and others unless the UN cancels its activities for some 250,000 Gaza children."  Hamas hates the sound of children laughing and playing - they have much better activities for them.