tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50579053498266438142024-03-13T09:16:00.206-07:00The RationalizerXXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-20295173506266545922017-05-27T03:35:00.002-07:002017-05-27T03:35:48.257-07:00This blog has moved...Any new posts will now appear on my new website <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/">http://TheRationalizer.co.uk</a>XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-79557810366539827822016-03-31T09:16:00.000-07:002016-05-09T15:56:19.970-07:00Dawah Man, the baby, and the money - UpdateIsn't it amazing? For a year I and others have been requesting information about the health of the baby Imran raised money for and there has been no response. I gathered the evidence from his Facebook pages etc and put it into a blog and within hours <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/posts/1057257937673526" target="_blank">he has posted an update</a>.<br />
<br />
The first thing I want to say is that I am very pleased to see the baby is okay, his foot operation has gone well and it seems he is now fit enough to travel for surgery. This is excellent news!<br />
<br />
I do feel, however, that I should address the facebook post Imran made when he released the new video footage. Evidently he is annoyed that I have been so persistent in requesting information for an update. I don't think there is anything wrong with asking for a status update on a baby who "is going to die" and for whom "time is running out", especially when time was running out over a year ago and money has been raised to save his life. It seems though that Dawah Man is pissed off about having to tell people what he has done with their £32,000 and made a bit of a hissy fit attack against my character, which I now intend to address.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Who is the atheist who made this accusation against me?</blockquote>
First thought, can't I just be a person? There is obviously some kind of mental link here...man do bad thing, man is atheist, atheists bad. My lack of belief in the supernatural is irrelevant, if I had been a Christian or a Muslim, and if Imran had been an atheist I would still have repeatedly asked him for updates on the dying baby.<br />
<br />
My second thought: What accusation? No, seriously, what have I accused anyone of? All my post did was to collect posts by Imran (Dawah Man) and lay them out in chronological order. You see, here is the problem, Imran seems to think that someone asking someone who raised £32,000 for charity for an update report is an accusation of theft.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The individual who made this accusation against me is an Islamaphobic person who has dedicated his life in trying to bring down Islam. His whole life has been dedicated to this cause. </blockquote>
I'm sorry for laughing, but really, that was very funny. Firstly I note I am again referred to as "the individual", I am starting to feel a bit like Lord Voldemort, he who should not be named. What's this about me Islamaphobic [sic]. A simple attempt at making me look like an unreasonable and illogical person who acts on emotion (hate probably), when that is nothing like me at all. I create videos about Islam and write the odd blog because once (when I was an agnostic theist) I looked into the subject with the hope of discovering it was true. I found there was a lot of bias & disinformation out there about Islam (from both the Muslim and Christian side) and so I thought others might find the views of a religiously neutral party interesting. I didn't even read the Quran until I was in my mid 30's, so to claim I have been trying to bring down Islam my whole life is laughable.<br />
<br />
I am anti-Islam, but only as much as a Muslim is anti-pagan or anti-atheist....in fact, from my experiences I would say to a much lesser degree than that. I care about the truth, circumstances led me to learn about Islam, it took a long time because I had to fight my way through the misinformation, and by the end I just felt that amount of time spent would be a waste if I didn't put forward my own conclusions.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Not only that, but he is known for attacking brothers in the da'wah and trying to put things on them that they are free from. A few months ago he put out an article about a brother who does da'wah saying that he was found on some website where men and women go to cheat on their spouses. Later it was found out that the brother in question was free from this accusation and had been a victim of identity fraud which looked like it was done for the purpose of trying to character assassinate him.</blockquote>
Now, this was the part that made me want to write this response. Imran here is talking about Hamza Andreas Tzortzis and the Ashley Madison incident. I did indeed discover Andreas's information in the hacked database release, but what did I do about it? Did I make a video, write a blog, accuse him of adultery? No! I emailed him my mobile phone number to tell him this information is out in the open. He phoned me and we discussed it privately.<br />
<br />
I had just started a 4 day holiday when Andreas got back in touch with me and asked me to check something for him in the DB. One thing led to another and about 2 or 3 days later we had finished going through the database to try to build up a complete picture so that Andreas could establish exactly what was and was not in there. The point is, not only did I not do any kind of character assassination on Andreas, I spent the best part of a short family holiday doing what I would consider work (I work in IT) free of charge. Andreas wrote to thank me for all the help I had given him.<br />
<br />
Andreas made a statement on Facebook letting people know his details were in the hack, and then the press picked up on it. I remained silent. At some point the "anti-Hamza" group had started to make false claims about what the data did or did not suggest. One newspaper (I don't recall which) made claims that I knew were untrue having looked at the data myself, but they refused to correct the article. So, with Andreas's blessing <a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/what-we-know-about-hamza-tzortzis-and.html" target="_blank">I wrote an article</a> myself. I told him in advance (many times in private) that I thought the evidence made a more compelling case for guilt than innocence, but he was happy for me to write the blog because I was setting the facts straight. As a consequence the on-line story with the misinformation in it was altered and the fictitious "smoking gun" was removed.<br />
<br />
I hope you, like myself, are struggling to see how these actions were some kind of malicious episode of trying to set up Andreas and sully his reputation? If not, here is a statement Andreas has just sent to me via email with permission for me to include it in this blog:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"Islam teaches us fairness. In no way can the Rationaliser be accused for anything concerning my ID fraud, he actually helped me a lot with access to the data and by interpreting it."</i></blockquote>
I hope this puts to rest Imran's attempted character assassination?<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He has now released this article about myself, when I had already been in touch with him and told him that I will put the information online as I have more updates.</blockquote>
Yes he did, as you saw in the article I posted, but nothing for months, and after 15 months I think it is reasonable for me to decide to stop nagging him for an update on the baby and instead detail the event in a blog and leave it. I didn't want to keep asking him, but I also didn't just want the question to remain unanswered. My blog was intended to give out the information simply as a list of facts so that others can ask him for updates instead, I'd had enough.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It is also worth mentioning that he got in touch with the fraud department at the Metropolitan Police, asking them to investigate this matter further. They got back to him telling him that I am in the clear, yet he is still insisting on pushing this narrative. </blockquote>
I can forgive Imran for this error as I doubt he is in possession of the full facts. I actually contacted Action Fraud, which is a national office run by the police. These people do not have any investigative powers at all, they simply look at the facts and then they decide if the issue looks suspicious enough to be passed on. I provided Action Fraud with the same information I wrote in <a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/dawah-man-dying-baby-and-32000-pounds.html" target="_blank">my blog about Imran</a>, and it was they who decided it looked suspicious and should be passed on to the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau, and so they did.<br />
<br />
Now, the NFIB have some kind of investigative powers, what they do exactly I do not know, but it is the NFIB who are responsible for deciding whether or not the police should be involved, and this is the email I received from them.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5VPljGj0cPE/Vv1HeAmw1SI/AAAAAAAAAhQ/O4rhlJKeYicyPM-reIZaNI1keEUTiaREQ/s1600/NFIB.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="243" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5VPljGj0cPE/Vv1HeAmw1SI/AAAAAAAAAhQ/O4rhlJKeYicyPM-reIZaNI1keEUTiaREQ/s320/NFIB.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
As you can see, nobody got back to me to tell me Imran was "in the clear" - but I wouldn't expect Imran to know that. Not only did I not know if Imran was "in the clear" or not, but I wasn't even told if any investigation had been done, and I still don't know if they even went out and interviewed him. For all I know he is only aware of me reporting him because <a href="https://twitter.com/TheRationaliser/status/646672345722134528" target="_blank">I told him about it on Twitter</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4s3Jc6FXI5E/Vv1JJe3-zWI/AAAAAAAAAhc/si5r6oXeIpwGyBuxDPe7CSFNnhp9AHRbw/s1600/NFIB-Twitter.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="237" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4s3Jc6FXI5E/Vv1JJe3-zWI/AAAAAAAAAhc/si5r6oXeIpwGyBuxDPe7CSFNnhp9AHRbw/s320/NFIB-Twitter.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
So, to be clear<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>I reported it to an agency that decides if it should be reported to the police's fraud department.</li>
<li>Based on the information I provided it was they who decided it should be looked at.</li>
<li>They passed it on to the FNIB.</li>
<li>FNIB told me they were not going to pass it on to the police for investigation.</li>
</ol>
<div>
Does that mean I wrote this blog knowing he had been "given the all clear"? Clearly not!</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Don't you think that if someone REALLY scammed people for £32,000… online!!! When he is a PUBLIC FIGURE like myself… don't you think this person would already have been behind bars?</blockquote>
First thought: Public figure :)<br />
<br />
Second thought: £32,000 is nothing compared to scams that religious people have pulled off in the past, and continue to pull off today. Nobody should ever be beyond suspicion. You were given the benefit of the doubt for 10 months before your constant refusal to comment on the matter made me feel like I had no choice other than to let an independent party investigate.<br />
<br />
Remember, Imran, when you collect £32,000 of people's money for charity you have a duty to keep these people updated. Saying you've recorded a video, it's in editing, and will be out next week and then neither releasing it or commenting on the situation for months is not good practice, and it certainly isn't the kind of behaviour donors expect from someone who raises money on a regular basis.<br />
<br />
It is not only myself and other atheists who have said so either. I have seen Muslims making comments such as "I am sure he hasn't stolen the money, but he really should have told us by now what is going on". I have even spoken to a Muslim who claims to have asked you about it only to be told you'd be bringing out a video ("Next week" I think he said). Another video that didn't materialise.<br />
<br />
Keep in mind that during this whole year I have not once said that I think you have stolen the money, when people have asserted that I have merely replied that I do not know what you have done with it and that I am interested in receiving an update about the dying baby. That is what I repeated in my blog of yesterday too. Please don't present yourself as some kind of victim in all of this just to try to hide the fact that you neglected your donors and/or was incompetent with handling the whole thing. The correspondence email from the US hospital that you showed in your Facebook post was received by you on September 11th, 2015, which means you went a whole <b>six months</b> before bothering to tell us.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a4RDfsLADEY/Vv5x2_HrX5I/AAAAAAAAAhs/DvAjotqnjDcm8Ab2xXMZKN7b0_ETBpapQ/s1600/1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-a4RDfsLADEY/Vv5x2_HrX5I/AAAAAAAAAhs/DvAjotqnjDcm8Ab2xXMZKN7b0_ETBpapQ/s320/1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
Obviously I won't ask you to make a video apologising for your illegitimate attempt at assassinating my character, I don't think I have the patience to wait until "next week" for it to be edited and uploaded. I would like to finish by saying that despite the US putting up the price of the operation to $500,000 due to the baby having a more serious condition than they thought, I was pleased to hear in your update video that you were able to find a hospital in Europe that was willing to do the more complicated treatment at a cost matching exactly how much you've already raised.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-51745628369190143312016-03-29T13:57:00.000-07:002016-03-29T13:58:14.272-07:00Dawah Man, the dying baby, and 32,000 pounds unaccounted forHere is a screenshot from a video by Imran Khan a.k.a. "DawahMan". It was posted on Facebook on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/videos/791433040922685/?permPage=1" target="_blank">November 17th, 2014</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-a46XNLh2360/VvrZde8e5PI/AAAAAAAAAfU/mmKwC3eU-z8YeMTvKbPP39FT6dSq4YoJA/s1600/DM1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-a46XNLh2360/VvrZde8e5PI/AAAAAAAAAfU/mmKwC3eU-z8YeMTvKbPP39FT6dSq4YoJA/s320/DM1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
In this video he thanks his viewers for the tens of thousands of pounds they have raised for him in the past to fund various things, and then goes on to ask for more money than he has ever asked for before. He said:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: left;">
Today I'm asking you guys to be generous, but with a cause that's more closer to home. From my mother's side of the family in Pakistan I have a relative whose younger child is only two years old is suffering from respiratory distress syndrome. I'm not a doctor so I don't want to go too much into the science of how it works, you can check it all out online, but basically what it means is that the oxygen isn't travelling around his body and he's...[pause]...<b>gonna die.</b></blockquote>
On <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/videos/795808553818467/?permPage=1" target="_blank">November 25th, 2014</a> he posted another video, again asking for more money.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--BKVlhVFc9I/Vvrd_CYzjvI/AAAAAAAAAfg/HcsW9WV5_KgJ9Kf5o6Q6Ye8ygRTKvHJ8g/s1600/DM2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/--BKVlhVFc9I/Vvrd_CYzjvI/AAAAAAAAAfg/HcsW9WV5_KgJ9Kf5o6Q6Ye8ygRTKvHJ8g/s320/DM2.png" width="177" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I've been fund raising for this young baby in my extended family, he's two years old and his name is Ali, and he's suffering from a lung problem...and he's actually...the doctors told him <b>he won't survive</b> unless he has a treatment done.</blockquote>
As for the money collected so far (approximately 50% - about £16,000) he said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The money that has already come through I have sent it over to them and the parents, when they collected the money...erm, forgive me, rather it's been collected on their behalf by a family member</blockquote>
On <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/videos/798984263500896/?permPage=1" target="_blank">December 1st, 2014</a> he posted another video, again asking for money<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5oiZt6rjNn8/Vvrf-QJVsFI/AAAAAAAAAfs/KCEUPZZ43YsJhxGf_ycrXaRoEDD2Vn-4Q/s1600/DM3.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5oiZt6rjNn8/Vvrf-QJVsFI/AAAAAAAAAfs/KCEUPZZ43YsJhxGf_ycrXaRoEDD2Vn-4Q/s320/DM3.png" width="208" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fa57oVdhtDs/VvrgptWmW-I/AAAAAAAAAf0/V-dbLr0-XUEub3RLunpjr90_zHxmkZcZg/s1600/DM4.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="89" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Fa57oVdhtDs/VvrgptWmW-I/AAAAAAAAAf0/V-dbLr0-XUEub3RLunpjr90_zHxmkZcZg/s320/DM4.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: left;">
Thank you guys for all the money that has been raised for baby Adian...We have reached basically practically just under £20,000. Just a little bit more to go before we can get the full money to get his treatment over in the USA. I mean, he is in <b>critical</b> condition. Without the machines he is rigged up to he would die. <b>Time is running out</b>.</blockquote>
On <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/videos/vb.285217404877587/804357439630245" target="_blank">December 12th, 2014</a> another video appeared on Facebook.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jT9e8JV5kic/VvrhzQC3bUI/AAAAAAAAAgE/U-3xJOLHJVURYXPfZX0NjVRbfNXhP6ZyQ/s1600/DM5.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-jT9e8JV5kic/VvrhzQC3bUI/AAAAAAAAAgE/U-3xJOLHJVURYXPfZX0NjVRbfNXhP6ZyQ/s320/DM5.png" width="180" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
This time it was a video created by the baby's (Ali / Adian?) mother, speaking in Urdu. The English text on the post read:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aI5GnimJqEY/VvrixT1CLGI/AAAAAAAAAgM/fYqEC1cZzv00Cb5T3EJbcY8eJtoBCk_bw/s1600/DM6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="134" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aI5GnimJqEY/VvrixT1CLGI/AAAAAAAAAgM/fYqEC1cZzv00Cb5T3EJbcY8eJtoBCk_bw/s320/DM6.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The baby in my family who we have been fund raising for, this is a video from his mother showing how bad his condition is. She's speaking in urdu but she's explaining how he is deteriorating </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
They may have to amputate his leg if we don't get the treatment started in time. Plz plz plz be generous with your donations ... WAllahi my family is truly grateful to you all for all your love, support and most importantly Du'as</blockquote>
</blockquote>
A translation of the Urdu spoken by the baby's mother is as follows:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Two of the veins in my child's brain have been damaged, he has a heart problem, he has a clot in the left [unknown] and now his chest is raising. His feet also have a [unknown] problem. Over here, in Pakistan, the doctors have given their answer, that his treatment is not possible here. I appeal that you give whatever help you can for my child's life. We'll try whatever's possible. There's also a saying in the hadith that whoever saves a life it is as though they've saved the whole of mankind.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/RazaSaab" target="_blank">Thanks to RazaSaab for the translation</a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
The last screen shot I was able to capture of the fund raiser was at £30,000 just before Imran created a video (that I now cannot find) claiming the baby had to have his foot amputated and was too ill to travel to the US for his life critical life saving treatment he needs otherwise he will die.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4ysyN6qg11k/Vvrj-aQphNI/AAAAAAAAAgU/Zvbsy9q6ZY4OFpX3Yyz9L-6pRWSXlKaGw/s1600/DM7.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4ysyN6qg11k/Vvrj-aQphNI/AAAAAAAAAgU/Zvbsy9q6ZY4OFpX3Yyz9L-6pRWSXlKaGw/s320/DM7.png" width="246" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I was later informed by Imran that the full £32,000 had been raised. Unfortunately any attempts at asking Imran for an update on the baby's health has led nowhere further than empty promises of update videos, and asking him where the money is / has been spent results only in threats of legal action for libel (even though not once have I done anything other than ask for information, I have made no accusations)</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ybW4WfrQATU/Vvrle0aTc4I/AAAAAAAAAgk/n5qO6T_W4IQPISpyItcnt4_HJit4ClRlA/s1600/DM8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="116" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ybW4WfrQATU/Vvrle0aTc4I/AAAAAAAAAgk/n5qO6T_W4IQPISpyItcnt4_HJit4ClRlA/s320/DM8.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/ImranibnMansur/status/590221900065964033" target="_blank">April 20th: Intended update</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t4enfb_FZnU/VvrmOagNkKI/AAAAAAAAAgs/K2S85k-FVNsN4T4A-YSztwL_xVe_eBefg/s1600/DM9.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="40" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t4enfb_FZnU/VvrmOagNkKI/AAAAAAAAAgs/K2S85k-FVNsN4T4A-YSztwL_xVe_eBefg/s320/DM9.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/ImranibnMansur/status/597074786976686080" target="_blank">May 9th: Update "next week"</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-O5oyu3tm0lM/Vvrm1yzSeyI/AAAAAAAAAg0/KUfiTAPFft0IMjPj5rbcXINKh1-qUcCvw/s1600/DM10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="51" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-O5oyu3tm0lM/Vvrm1yzSeyI/AAAAAAAAAg0/KUfiTAPFft0IMjPj5rbcXINKh1-qUcCvw/s320/DM10.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/ImranibnMansur/status/601849588002246658" target="_blank">May 22nd: Update just needs editing and uploading</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u-hQQuhCaO0/VvrnU4gyvxI/AAAAAAAAAg8/2A237voZ3K0-H2SOF8yfynbqIE3JxjigQ/s1600/DM11.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="232" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u-hQQuhCaO0/VvrnU4gyvxI/AAAAAAAAAg8/2A237voZ3K0-H2SOF8yfynbqIE3JxjigQ/s320/DM11.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/ImranibnMansur/status/601855659697696768" target="_blank">May 22nd: Confirmation that £32,000 was raised</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Since then <a href="https://twitter.com/ImranibnMansur" target="_blank">Dawah Man</a> has outright ignored the question. It's now the end of March 2016; 15 months after he finished raising the money, and 10 months after the promised update that was due "next week". Since then Imran has uploaded over 50 videos to his Facebook page.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Is the baby alive? Does he have the medical equipment his parents needed to buy to keep him alive? Has he been flown to the US for treatment? Are you ever going to release accounts showing where the money went?</div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-24790168482489572702016-03-28T06:02:00.001-07:002016-03-28T06:12:18.975-07:00Requesting volunteers for an experimentI'd like to do a short experiment regarding human memory. I'm looking for a handful of people who will be willing to watch a short video of some event I have yet to choose (nothing disturbing) and then answer a question or two about it whilst I record both the question and the answer. I'd then like to get back in touch about a month later to requestion you, the second interview will also be recorded.<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>You'll need to make yourself available via an Internet video chat for 5 to 10 minutes on two occasions, approximately one month apart.</li>
<li>You'll be free to change your mind at any point and no longer participate, in which case any footage of you I have will be deleted and not used.</li>
<li>You'll be shown the production before it is released and have the right to have your contribution removed.</li>
<li>To prevent a copyright claim on the final video, if you agree to your footage being used in the final video after previewing it then you waive the right to request your footage to be unused or for the final production to be removed.</li>
<li>Your face will be visible in the video.</li>
</ol>
<div>
To register your interest please email TheRationaliser at gmail.com with the subject "Experiment".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Thanks!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-53732795538597148242016-03-10T09:03:00.003-08:002017-05-27T13:41:02.547-07:00iERA still on the Scientific Miracles band wagon<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2016/03/iera-are-back-on-the-scientific-miracles-band-wagon/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
You may recall members of the online atheist community (Captain Disguise, Stop1Spamming, PZ Myers and myself) set about ridiculing the iERA's claims that the Quran contained "Scientific Miracles", accurate information that pre-dates scientific discovery by over a millennia.<br />
<br />
Finally it seems that iERA saw the error of their ways and decided to drop that narrative. Of course, the narrative wasn't dropped until they could <a href="http://www.iera.org/event/failed-hypothesis-islam-quran-science" target="_blank">think up a way of being right after all</a>; in summary the approach is "Science is good when the Quran matches its rules, otherwise it is useful but wrong".<br />
<br />
Mr Tzortzis wrote the following<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Regrettably, the scientific miracles narrative has become an <b>intellectual embarrassment</b> for Muslim apologists, including myself. A few years ago I took some activists to Ireland to engage with the audience and speakers at the World Atheist Convention. Throughout the convention we had a stall outside the venue and as a result positively engaged with hundreds of atheists, including the popular atheist academics Professor P. Z. Myers and Professor Richard Dawkins. During our impromptu conversation with Professor Myers we ended up talking about God’s existence and the Divine nature of the Qur’ān. The topic of embryology came up, and Professor Myers being an expert in the field challenged our narrative. He claimed that the Qur’ān did not predate modern scientific conclusions in the field. As a result of posting the video of the engagement on-line we faced a huge intellectual backlash. We received innumerable amounts of emails by Muslims and non-Muslims. The Muslims were confused and had doubts, and the non-Muslims were bemused with the whole approach. Consequently, I decided to compile and write an extensive piece on the Qur’ān and embryology, with the intention to respond to popular and academic contentions...When the paper was published it was placed under a microscope by atheist activists. Although they misrepresented some of the points, they raised some significant contentions. I have since removed the paper from my website. In retrospect if this never happened, I probably wouldn’t be writing this essay now. It is all a learning curve and an important part of developing intellectual integrity. [Emphasis is mine]</blockquote>
<br />
<ol>
<li>The Quran contains information that pre-dated human discovery.</li>
<li>The only entity that could have known this information also created the universe.</li>
<li>Therefore the author of the Quran is the creator of the universe.</li>
</ol>
<br />
I am pleased iERA were embarrassed by this claim, it's outright silly and clearly no effort had been put into researching the truth of premise 1, let alone having any evidence for premise 2. I had hoped they'd just go back to telling gullible members of the public that the Quran is a linguistic miracle they could see if only they could understand Arabic, and for now they should take the word of the Da'ee (who probably doesn't understand Arabic).<br />
<br />
On February 26th 2016 iERA hosted a Don't Hate Debate event "Does Islam need a reformation?" which I blogged about <a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/does-islam-need-reformation-iera-dont.html" target="_blank">here</a>. Whilst hanging around waiting for the event to start I was offered a copy of the following booklet, which I finally had a quick peek inside this morning.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5O5MK-WXIko/VuGf0rXa9sI/AAAAAAAAAeg/3UdyVkS7gnM/s1600/the_eternal-challenge-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5O5MK-WXIko/VuGf0rXa9sI/AAAAAAAAAeg/3UdyVkS7gnM/s320/the_eternal-challenge-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Well, the first thing to note is the use of the word "Miraculous" on the cover. Okay, I can let that slide even though I disagree with it, it's subjective. What did catch my eye though was pages 42-49. Here is a selection<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5gyWul7WB0Q/VuGgtWhdFDI/AAAAAAAAAes/jBhOx3iTeOc/s1600/Page%2B44%2B-%2B45-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-5gyWul7WB0Q/VuGgtWhdFDI/AAAAAAAAAes/jBhOx3iTeOc/s320/Page%2B44%2B-%2B45-1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
So, what do we see here? First the old expanding universe claim. It claims " lamusi'una also means that God is actually continuously expanding it." Of course this is rubbish, the word in question is not a verb so cannot be something ongoing nor something completed, it is a <a href="http://quranx.com/Analysis/51.47#word_5" target="_blank">noun</a>. Your mother gave birth to you, that's a past tense verb; but she will forever remain "your giver of birth" even though then act is now over with. This verse says nothing more than "Allah is the expander of the universe", without saying whether it is expanding, or expanded. The book concludes "This is surprisingly in line with modern discoveries that the universe is expanding."<br />
<br />
Okay, so they didn't use the word words "scientific miracle", but on the subject of a book that is claimed to be miraculous it is claimed the information in it is "surprisingly" in line for modern discoveries?<br />
<br />
The next page goes on to talk about embryology. Initially I was relieved to see an acknowledgement on this page that Greek and Hebrew physicians used to say the same thing before the Quran was <strike>revealed</strike> made up. The next pages contain images from "The Developing Human - With Islamic Additions", the book by Keith Moore which acknowledges none other than the billionaire Usama Bin Ladin; presumably Usama provided financial of some kind rather than providing proof-reading services.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-C8518KPcprE/VuGgv8NnCaI/AAAAAAAAAe8/mPhUbYHkHDo/s1600/Page%2B46%2B-%2B47-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-C8518KPcprE/VuGgv8NnCaI/AAAAAAAAAe8/mPhUbYHkHDo/s320/Page%2B46%2B-%2B47-1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9htagQQugDA/VuGg1sF9htI/AAAAAAAAAe8/RjpbhdLC1Pw/s1600/Page%2B48%2B-%2B49-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-9htagQQugDA/VuGg1sF9htI/AAAAAAAAAe8/RjpbhdLC1Pw/s320/Page%2B48%2B-%2B49-1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
It goes on to claim that doctors of the time would not have known that the embryo at this early stage resembles a leech because this view of the embryo could not have been discovered until after the 15th century, when microscope was invented. Yet again a veiled scientific miracle claim is made without using the words themselves. If this information could not have been known until the 15th century then how could Muhammad have known it in the 7th century? Obviously the Quran doesn't say anything about the embryo looking like a leech. Hundreds of years earlier Galen had already described the leech like properties of embryos. See my video <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMT_kNtOTIs" target="_blank">Embryology In The Quran</a>.<br />
<br />
Although iERA have stopped using the term "Scientific miracles" they have continued to beg the question of how Muhammad could have known X centuries before it was discovered by humans. Not much of a change of stance, is it? It brings the words of Mr Tzortzis back into my mind:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Regrettably, the scientific miracles narrative has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslim apologists, including myself...It is all a learning curve and an important part of developing intellectual integrity.</blockquote>
Mr T didn't write this book, but it is being peddled on Dawah stands by iERA. They are passing on to members of the public information they claim they do not believe to be miraculous, in a book about how miraculous the Quran is. How intellectually dishonest is that?<br />
<br />
Douglas Adams chose 42 to be "the answer to life, the universe, and everything", and it was page 42 of this book claiming the Quran has all of the answers to life, the universe, and everything that amused me the most.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Phpl-_UqmjM/VuGgTb5YvnI/AAAAAAAAAe4/VtIrR-xH4TQ/s1600/Pag%2B42%2B-%2B43-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Phpl-_UqmjM/VuGgTb5YvnI/AAAAAAAAAe4/VtIrR-xH4TQ/s320/Pag%2B42%2B-%2B43-1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For more than a century, the speed of light had been locked in as the universe's ultimate speed limit. No experiment had seen anything moving faster than light, which travels at 186,000 miles per second. This assumption underpinned much of modern physics. That was, until an experiment at CERN laboratory in 2011 recorded particles travelling faster than the speed of light. This recent discovery turned the world of physics on its head. It just goes to show how even the most fundamental theories about our universe can be completely overthrown in an instant.</blockquote>
<br />
Seriously? The details here are quite confused; there was no announcement of faster than light particles, the experimenters were asking for help to identify the problem with their experiment after failing to find it themselves. The speed of neutrinos was confirmed to not be faster than light only months later, and the fault at OPERA was identified, fixed, and confirmed in May 2013, and yet the copyright in this book is 2015!<br />
<br />
No wonder they are a joke amongst the atheist community, referred to as iError and laughed at as they peddle their silly and inaccurate misunderstandings of science in order to promote their delusions to the gullible.<br />
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-32171191494218607832016-03-04T13:46:00.001-08:002017-05-27T13:40:15.481-07:00Does Islam need a reformation? - iERA: Don't hate, debate!<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2016/03/does-islam-need-a-reformation-iera-dont-hate-debate/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
I recently attended a discussion in London hosted by iERA. It was entitled "Does Islam need a reformation?" I was pleased that, as I expected, the iERA crew were very friendly with me.<br />
<br />
The whole video can be watched <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kotc3xB2BR8" target="_blank">here</a>. If I recall correctly, the discussion basically went like this<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Question about Islam</li>
<li>Answer: Islam is already great, if we did more of it then everything would be brilliant. PS, look at how bad the non-Islamic world is (a.k.a. "The West").</li>
</ol>
<div>
After lots of persistent hand waving I was finally granted permission to ask a question. At 1 hour 16 minutes and 45 seconds I got to make the following statement</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
On the question of modernity and reformation, isn't it more of a case of "Does Islam need to avoid stagnation?" For example, in Surat Al Baqara, <a href="http://quranx.com/2.282" target="_blank">chapter 2 verse 282</a>, it talks about how [you should] get a man as a witness but if you can't then use two women so one may remind the other if she errs. Now, in modern times I can't really see how that's an issue because most people in society can read and write; they can recognise their own signature on a piece of paper; there's nothing for them to actually remember!"</blockquote>
Then on to my question<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The four main schools of jurisprudence, and the founders; there's Maliki, Shafi, Hanbali, Hanifi all say that if someone openly admits that they no longer are a Muslim they should be killed. In a modern caliphate would that be an acceptable position, has that position already been reformed, or does Islam need reforming?</blockquote>
The first thing to note is how quickly the chair, Lauren Booth, decided to summarise the question, even though the question itself was actually very short. She said<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I'm just going to summarise that before you come back. I think we want to keep it here in the UK. I just want these last few questions to remain about life in the UK rather than in a fantasy caliphate.</blockquote>
I didn't ask about a fantasy caliphate. The purpose of my question was to establish whether the punishment is still considered to be valid, if it has already been reformed, or if the panel thinks it should be reformed. Which of these options would a "true Islam" caliphate choose? Yet as soon as I asked a question the principles of the political / legal side of Islam my question was somewhat ridiculed as a fantasy, something that isn't in the real world.<br />
<br />
After some discussion about the comment I made before the question itself, Tom Holland brought the subject back to my question and asked if Muslims should be free to apostatise. I wish I had discussed my planned question with Tom at the start of the talk, because I deliberately avoided the word apostasy for a good reason. Having <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--GMACVMa-8" target="_blank">spoken to Abdullah Al Andalusi for a number of hours in the past</a> I was already well aware of how slippery he is when it comes to this question. I knew there were two methods he uses to avoid having to answer this question:<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Claim the word "Apostasy" is a western invention, and that Islam is actually talking about treason.</li>
<li>Claim that we are all free to think whatever we like because Muslims are not able to read our thoughts.</li>
</ol>
<div>
To prevent slippery escape #1 I used the words "no longer a Muslim", and to prevent slippery escape #2 I used the words "openly admits". The schools of jurisprudence I mentioned all say that someone who outwardly manifests behaviour of transitioning from Muslim to non-Muslim can be killed.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When Tom Holland used the word "apostasy" he left the gap in the door of opportunity slightly ajar and enabled Abdullah Al Andalusi to slither his way out of it. But, just to make sure the truth of the situation wasn't accidentally told, Lauren Booth (who probably hasn't heard Andalusi wriggle out of this before) decided to change the question for a second time.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
So I think actually, putting it in the context about the reformation of Islam...if we are living in Britain do the rules about apostasy apply and do they need changing...</blockquote>
Britain is not an Islamic country and Muslims have to abide by our British law system on the death penalty regardless of what their Islamic law is regarding Muslims leaving their religion. The purpose of this shift was clear, it was to give Muslim panellists the opportunity to answer in a way that gives the impression there is no death penalty for leaving Islam, without having to admit that it is only a version of Islam crippled by British law that makes this the case. Of course those who leave Islam should not be killed (because British law forbids it).<br />
<br />
And then in came Mr Andalusi. Would he answer the question I asked, or would he monopolise on the get-out clauses he had been awarded both deliberately and accidentally?<br />
<br />
He started "The old chestnut of apostasy is always brought up. I've always said the same thing, and I'll say it again". At that point I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt he was going to take the opportunity to dodge my carefully worded question.<br />
<br />
First he says there is no law under a caliphate or in the UK that creates an inquisition that will check everyone's beliefs and see if they have left Islam or not. That is true. As long as one continues to pray, fast, and never mention to anyone that one's faith in Islam has gone then the Islamic state will leave you alone. However, according to those four main schools of Jurisprudence if one refuses to perform obligatory religious practices such as praying, or if one openly admits they no longer believe, then they to be killed unless they go back to pretending they are still Muslim.<br />
<br />
It's at this point I shouted out in protest "That's not what I asked!" (1h 20m 30s). I wish iERA hadn't edited the video to show the audience at this point, because my memory of what happened next was Andalusi looking me straight in the eye, sheepishly, as he deceived his way through his answer. I silently mouthed "Shame! Shame!" at him, and shook my head in disappointment.<br />
<br />
Next he went on to explain how the Arabic word Irtidaad is really about treason, and not about someone who just changes their mind.....in their own head, and that's it. Even in his dodging he has to add his own clause in order to ensure he is being accurate in his answer even if not entirely truthful.<br />
<br />
Andalusi goes off on a tangent for a while, and even in bringing him back to the subject of the question Lauren Booth once again puts forward a question with the "in the UK" clause that offers him the opportunity to get off the hook while leaving non-Muslims and cultural-Muslims feeling that political Islam is all nice and fluffy and people living within a caliphate are free pass gaily through life not having to worry about what might happen to them if ever they change their mind about being a Muslim.<br />
<br />
At 1h 22m and 12s I shouted out the request for him to answer <u><b>my</b></u> question. Lauren Booth refused, saying I had already asked a question. I shouted out that he is obfuscating, and she replied "I don't think he is, I have asked him twice." - Unfortunately she asked him her own question twice, not mine.<br />
<br />
At 1h 38m and 43s onwards a Hindu guy asked a question, and refers to my question as having been "neatly dodged". At 1h 45m 20s a member of the audience says<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
There's been a lot of obscurantism on the part of, in particular, Abdullah Al Andalusi when it comes to the matter of apostasy.</blockquote>
<br />
I think the point was made very clearly. The ex-Muslim cat is out of the bag, the British public are being made aware of it, and hopefully it will encourage more Muslims to reject Hadiths if not Islam itself.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-75289024590381865042015-12-23T07:26:00.001-08:002017-05-27T13:39:10.296-07:00Christian graves desecrated by Muslims at Longsight church in Manchester<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/12/christian-graves-desecrated-by-muslims-at-longsight-church-in-manchester/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
I've been reading Enemy Of The State by Stephen Yaxley, a.k.a Tommy Robinson. On page 112 he claims that Muslims in Longsight, Manchester were desecrating the graves of Christians after buying St Johns church and converting it into a mosque.<br />
<br />
Here is a link to a video to the kind of scene that would have greeted the protesters <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_yejeSZdwU">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_yejeSZdwU</a> and is also the video Tommy Robinson directed me to as his evidence - Please watch it in full.<br />
<br />
The EDL protested against this desecration of graves, but I think Tommy Robinson was misled in order to outrage people against Muslims, and no such grave desecration took place. As this seemingly false claim is documented in his book, and therefore being spread, I am hoping to prove beyond reasonable doubt that this is an error (an honest one I think) and also hoping that Tommy will accept this and ensure the record is set straight in the form of an errata webpage for his book.<br />
<br />
The YouTube video shows a lovely photo of a Christian church complete with gravestones, and then the footage taken at later date shows a flattened ground with a headstone on the floor. The first thing to note is that these are not showing the same side of the building.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7HQ5P4-JCPg/VnqdHrECMWI/AAAAAAAAAcc/pLnIcx7HtUY/s1600/Church1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-7HQ5P4-JCPg/VnqdHrECMWI/AAAAAAAAAcc/pLnIcx7HtUY/s320/Church1.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
The picturesque church with graves.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mu-uhv7-tY8/Vnqe_aq3EqI/AAAAAAAAAck/gm_mEf5bHC0/s1600/ChurchShoddyVideo.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="206" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mu-uhv7-tY8/Vnqe_aq3EqI/AAAAAAAAAck/gm_mEf5bHC0/s320/ChurchShoddyVideo.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
The church as seen in the video footage.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-m09rzu7Qz3k/VnqgEGI6FII/AAAAAAAAAcs/-pvmwKZKEbQ/s1600/SideBySide1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="103" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-m09rzu7Qz3k/VnqgEGI6FII/AAAAAAAAAcs/-pvmwKZKEbQ/s320/SideBySide1.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
The scene of the video footage on <a href="http://using%20google%20maps%20it%20was%20easy%20to%20find%20the%20point%20of%20view%20of%20where%20the%20new%20video%20footage%20was%20taken%20in%20july%202015/" target="_blank">Google Maps</a> taken in July 2015.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
One of the great things about Google Street View is that they take photos on more than one occasion. This enables us to look at a scene and then compare it to some point in the past. In this case photos were available for July 2015, and as far back as September 2008. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VR-ThWx3RA8/VnqkIF5tDHI/AAAAAAAAAc4/8ZLA_IwLbRQ/s1600/Sept2008A.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VR-ThWx3RA8/VnqkIF5tDHI/AAAAAAAAAc4/8ZLA_IwLbRQ/s320/Sept2008A.png" width="312"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Street View: <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4566967,-2.203139,3a,75y,335.97h,84.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s74XJDFGW1Mm8Th9ol8BVRw!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656" target="_blank">July 2015</a> Vs <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4566939,-2.2031533,3a,75y,335.97h,84.67t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sCEygZ0IiGBiVFSVmCasTOQ!2e0!5s20080901T000000!7i13312!8i6656" target="_blank">Sept 2008</a>.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Whatever was happening in the video footage it was after September 2008. Judging from the 2008 photo there wasn't an area that was being used as a graveyard.. So what was happening? According to this <a href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/car-park-work-disturbs-headstones-929520" target="_blank">local news report</a> from The Manchester Evening News, dated 10th of September, 2009, the former <b>garden</b> of the church was being turned into a car park when builders discovered headstones. The report reads</div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It is understood the headstones, which have not been identified, were not part of the graveyard - which has not been used since 1966 - but had been moved at some point to form pathways through a church garden, before being covered over. </blockquote>
<br />
<br />
The discovery was of headstones previously used on graves that had been moved at some point in the past to create a path in the garden, and over time had been lost beneath the undergrowth as the garden was no longer maintained. These were not graves. The same news report reads:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The developers immediately ordered all work to stop. Council planning officers are now investigating. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Arshad Nawaz, trustee of the charity that runs the centre, stressed that no grave had been disturbed. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
He said some £50,000 had been spent to repair the church, which had become dilapidated over the years. The graves and gravestones had been `carefully preserved', he added. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"As Muslims we very strongly believe in the sanctity of mankind," he said.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Note how the language switches from headstones to gravestones in this article. This is because the preserved part of the land actually had graves on it. These graves were preserved as part of the £50,000 spent restoring this Grade II listed building. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Looking through images of the site over the years using Google Earth it would appear that this area of the church has been very overgrown and neglected for a number of years before the building was restored by Muslims and used as a mosque.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lOUJDxIhNmw/VnqxvPy63HI/AAAAAAAAAdY/SlaLb57FG84/s1600/2000-12-31.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="139" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lOUJDxIhNmw/VnqxvPy63HI/AAAAAAAAAdY/SlaLb57FG84/s320/2000-12-31.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
December 31st, 2000</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7gpXS663IAk/Vnqx725SkZI/AAAAAAAAAdg/fUBLszqiX2o/s1600/2003-08-04.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="139" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7gpXS663IAk/Vnqx725SkZI/AAAAAAAAAdg/fUBLszqiX2o/s320/2003-08-04.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
August 4th, 2003</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ELniLfJkI6M/VnqyIOZ-nOI/AAAAAAAAAdo/ZlYW2IubM6A/s1600/2005-12-31.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="139" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ELniLfJkI6M/VnqyIOZ-nOI/AAAAAAAAAdo/ZlYW2IubM6A/s320/2005-12-31.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
December 31st, 2005</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LTJi8KZr5SY/VnqyVzltjXI/AAAAAAAAAdw/WAYBu18z-5E/s1600/2009-06-02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="139" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LTJi8KZr5SY/VnqyVzltjXI/AAAAAAAAAdw/WAYBu18z-5E/s320/2009-06-02.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
June 2nd, 2009</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Planning permission to convert the area at the side of the church into a car park was granted multiple times to different people, on the following dates</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
</div>
<ol>
<li>September 1st, 1998 - Flats plus a car park - Reference <a href="http://pa.manchester.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseUprn=000077152057&previousCaseType=Property&previousKeyVal=002TJTBCLI000&activeTab=summary&previousCaseNumber=002SVMBCBU000&keyVal=ZZZZYBBCXT918" target="_blank">055108/LO/CENTL2/98</a></li>
<li>September 17th, 1998 - Flats plus a car park - Reference <a href="http://pa.manchester.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseUprn=000077152057&previousCaseType=Property&previousKeyVal=002TJTBCLI000&activeTab=summary&previousCaseNumber=002SVMBCBU000&keyVal=ZZZZYBBCXT481" target="_blank">055233/FO/CENTL2/98</a></li>
<li>December 21st, 2005 - Car park only - Reference <a href="http://pa.manchester.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?previousCaseUprn=000077152057&previousCaseType=Property&previousKeyVal=002TJTBCLI000&activeTab=summary&previousCaseNumber=002SVMBCBU000&keyVal=IRUM91BC70000" target="_blank">078040/FO/2005/N2</a></li>
</ol>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The "desecrated gravestone" image seems to have come from a news report made by the British National Party (BNP) on September 6th, 2005. The report (now deleted but <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20091002084347/http://bnp.org.uk/2009/09/genocide-how-islamic-colonisation-destroys-your-heritage" target="_blank">archived here</a>) reads</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
The bloodless genocide and ethnic cleansing of the British people and culture continues apace with the latest example being the ripping up of a century old Christian cemetery to make way for a mosque in Manchester.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
The grave desecrations, being carried out with a large Komatsu earthmover in the graveyard of the St John the Apostle and Evangelist church at the corner of Holmfirth Street and St John’s Road, is part of the re-opening of this nineteenth century church as the Dar-ul-Ulum Qadria Jilania “Islamic Centre.”</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Given the evidence it would seem the BNP used this discovery of a covered up pathway (which had been made out of unused headstones when the church had a garden) and then used it to spread hatred against Muslims by claiming they were tearing down the graves of Christians; the ultimate slap in the face of Christianity from Islam. From there the EDL were stirred up with this misinformation and came to demonstrate against this seemingly sacrilegious act. Soon afterwards local Muslim graves were targeted nearby by vandals.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
UP to 20 Muslim graves have been vandalised in a racially motivated attack at a south Manchester cemetery. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
Vandals struck at the Southern Cemetery on Barlow Moor Road sometime overnight on Thursday. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
Staff arrived at the cemetery to find up to 20 gravestones had been deliberately pushed over, and a number had broken. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="clear: both;">
The attack is being treated as racially motivated as only Muslim graves were targeted. </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: right;">
<a href="http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/muslim-graves-targeted-in-hate-attack-931374" target="_blank">Manchester Evening Standard, October 2nd, 2009</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The Manchester Evening Standard article explaining the story of the graveless headstones and the garden path was published within 4 days of the BNP's misinformation exercise but, unfortunately, it was the BNP story that got the attention of the EDL. It seems as though the former EDL leader was duped by Nick Griffin and The BNP, who's agenda was always to seed hatred for anyone not white.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
So what did happen to the stones that were on the graves at the side of the church that was being used as a cemetery? They are still there!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XLZAmQPp1VM/Vnq0ZBtmzNI/AAAAAAAAAd8/MjtXVFvCHsg/s1600/Stones-2015.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="268" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XLZAmQPp1VM/Vnq0ZBtmzNI/AAAAAAAAAd8/MjtXVFvCHsg/s320/Stones-2015.png" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Google Street View: <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4571167,-2.2025243,3a,37.5y,216.55h,86.21t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sDei5H6SXvB0UHycUWmdIvg!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656" target="_blank">Taken July 2015</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
What these people actually did was spend £50,000 to preserve an abandoned church, and respect the dead.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-72023492347787068902015-11-01T06:37:00.000-08:002015-11-01T06:54:26.221-08:00Who's racist?I've let this lie for a long time now, but today I feel like it is finally time to put it to rest. Alom Shaha once tweeted a link to <a href="https://thsppl.com/i-racist-538512462265" target="_blank">this article</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mH1ZZD7v9dM/VjYJM-nYdCI/AAAAAAAAAac/NKJrGvfKx9o/s1600/01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="90" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mH1ZZD7v9dM/VjYJM-nYdCI/AAAAAAAAAac/NKJrGvfKx9o/s320/01.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
I no longer recall the details of the article. I do remember agreeing with quite a lot of it and feeling it was important for people to read. However, I did also feel that the following comment in the article was incorrect, offensive, and certainly counter productive to the acceptance of the article by the white people it stereotyped.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bu8iQNklsFU/VjYKDGvPU7I/AAAAAAAAAak/_tqNHzg_8Ww/s1600/02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="64" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bu8iQNklsFU/VjYKDGvPU7I/AAAAAAAAAak/_tqNHzg_8Ww/s320/02.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
So this is what I tweeted to Alom regarding the link he had shared</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-t3eWwNxvC6g/VjYKh5lEI6I/AAAAAAAAAas/kGf9JBhTi4A/s1600/03.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-t3eWwNxvC6g/VjYKh5lEI6I/AAAAAAAAAas/kGf9JBhTi4A/s320/03.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I can admit that looking at this tweet it can come across rude. I was very annoyed by this blog for being accused of inhumanity based on the colour of my skin. I don't experience problems in my day to day life because of my colour, and it was in fact Alom who helped me to spot the white privilege I have and was unaware of (thanks for that), but to accuse white people of thinking black people's lives are worthless is a horrible racial slur.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Yes, I took offence, and yes I was annoyed. I do also get annoyed when people negatively stereotype Black people, Asian people, Muslims, or anyone else; but what really got me annoyed about this blog was that it was written to complain about racism and yet a small part of it was being racist in a horrible way. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1wwEJUtkCZU/VjYMNKNIUhI/AAAAAAAAAa4/EedWMqXJEug/s1600/04.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="91" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1wwEJUtkCZU/VjYMNKNIUhI/AAAAAAAAAa4/EedWMqXJEug/s320/04.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
This is not the reaction I expected. I thought Alom might disagree with me, we might discuss it, and perhaps (as we did with white privilege) be fortunate enough to have one of us change our mind. I didn't expect Alom to accuse me of being racist for disagreeing with a black man for saying that white people don't care if fellow humans with black skin die. I'd have said exactly the same thing if it had been a white supremacist claiming it, in fact I'd have been more outraged because I'd have felt a white supremacist was trying to claim they represent all white people, whereas in this case I was willing to put the offensive text down to a statement of personal perception that needed wording better, or simply being mistaken.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Just do a simple search through my Twitter timeline to see <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=black%20from%3Atherationaliser&src=typd" target="_blank">what I say about black people</a>. There are a number of Tweets where I post my outrage at how black people are disproportionately shot by white police officers in the US. In fact, primarily my Tweets are about Islam, so take a look at <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=muslims%20from%3Atherationaliser&src=typd" target="_blank">what I say about Muslims</a> while you are there. I hope you will agree that I judge people based on their individual actions, and not their skin colour or even their shared beliefs.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
This morning I saw that someone I follow (The physicist <a href="https://twitter.com/jonmbutterworth" target="_blank">Jon Butterworth</a>; worth following) had retweeted something by Alom.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cs-QuMbgdWU/VjYQCA0LNhI/AAAAAAAAAbE/_kKLZYvZ3pQ/s1600/05.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="62" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cs-QuMbgdWU/VjYQCA0LNhI/AAAAAAAAAbE/_kKLZYvZ3pQ/s320/05.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<i>*Not all Muslim patrols have ill intentions, some patrol the streets to collect litter, and others to ensure the pavements are safe for the elderly to walk on after it has snowed. This isn't actually relevant to this post, I just wanted to take the opportunity while writing this blog to point out that there are good people doing good work, even if they are Muslim patrols :)</i></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But back to the issue at hand, After all this time I am still annoyed by the memory of Alom's racism towards me, and the horrible slur of accusing me of being racist. He often points out the racism in others, so the added factor of his hypocrisy in making such a racist statement still gets under my skin and I pointed it out.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J9ysydzlUg0/VjYSANYn6rI/AAAAAAAAAbQ/P4OhQgUjlvQ/s1600/06.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="107" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J9ysydzlUg0/VjYSANYn6rI/AAAAAAAAAbQ/P4OhQgUjlvQ/s320/06.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Not only did I not expect a response at all (because I am blocked), but I certainly didn't expect to read the response given.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mN9gXiZIoLs/VjYUE0DGAZI/AAAAAAAAAbc/iJi1_VXOZII/s1600/07.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="91" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mN9gXiZIoLs/VjYUE0DGAZI/AAAAAAAAAbc/iJi1_VXOZII/s320/07.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
What on Earth does my skin colour or gender have to do with anything? If he is criticising me for how he perceives me because of my actions as an individual (the Twitter handle bit) then that's fine, but it is only white people who do this or, indeed, only white men? Why, Alom, do you push your negative statement about your perception of me personally onto all people who happen to have the same skin colour and/or gender as myself? What does your statement about my skin colour do other than prove my initial point?</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i>*For the record, my name is (and always has been) a statement of my goal and not one of my perceived status. It is what I strive for in myself and others through rational discussion, not what I claim to be.</i> </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EVgeM7eWWYQ/VjYWLz_L_SI/AAAAAAAAAbw/uyZ6U1Yzfjc/s1600/09.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="91" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-EVgeM7eWWYQ/VjYWLz_L_SI/AAAAAAAAAbw/uyZ6U1Yzfjc/s320/09.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
I don't even mind your colourful language in calling me a wanker, but must you really associate your negative perception of me with the colour of my skin? Alom, you are a trustee of The British Humanist Association for goodness's sake!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fl93wFwLV0Y/VjYVYvs5SgI/AAAAAAAAAbo/YnLx0kcqewA/s1600/08.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-fl93wFwLV0Y/VjYVYvs5SgI/AAAAAAAAAbo/YnLx0kcqewA/s320/08.png" width="251" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
While I do think he has many valid points on white privilege, discrimination against non-whites and women, I do also think he suffers from a bad case of hypocrisy. Accusing me of objecting to an article not because it paints me as an inhumane racist as I stated, but simply because the author was black!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Alom, you helped me to identify something I found difficult to see about myself due to the life experiences I had due to my skin colour. I hope you are eventually able to see the plank of wood in your own eye. Not every white person who disagrees with one of your opinions is a racist, and to claim they are is what you claim to despise so much, racism.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<i>*References to the tweets are held by the independent 3rd party, Storify <a href="https://storify.com/TheRationaliser/who-s-the-racist">https://storify.com/TheRationaliser/who-s-the-racist</a></i></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-62668154207740448012015-08-24T12:40:00.000-07:002017-05-27T13:37:21.864-07:00What we know about Hamza Tzortzis and AshleyMadison.com<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/08/what-we-know-about-hamza-tzortzis-and-ashleymadison-com/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<br />
It was the 20th of August when I downloaded the hacked Ashley Madison database. It wasn't long before I found an account that seemed to belong to Hamza Andreas Tzortzis. I contacted the email address registered against the account, sending my name + mobile number and asked the owner to call me, but received no reply.<br />
<br />
The next day (Friday) I emailed Hamza on his iERA email address and informed him of what I had found. From the very start Hamza wouldn't believe me. He insisted I was playing a joke on him, and only started to take me seriously once I had revealed the last four digits of his credit card. From the outset Hamza has denied responsibility for signing up this account, and from the beginning I have told him I do not believe him but would continue to look at the data to see what I could find out. I suggested he should make a public statement explaining what I had found before someone else finds the same information and exposes him.<br />
<br />
Over the next day or two Hamza sent me multiple requests to help him to understand the nature of the data associated with him in the database. Despite being on a long weekend holiday with my family I agreed to work on answering his questions.<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Islam teaches us fairness. In no way can the Rationaliser be accused for anything concerning my ID fraud, he actually helped me a lot with access to the data and by interpreting it.<cite>Hamza Andreas Tzortzis -
iERA</cite></blockquote>
<br/>
From there onwards a lot has been reported by the press, some of which I found a little misleading, and so I have decided to write this blog explaining what is and is not known about the whole affair. The approval of Mr Tzortzis was sought before publishing this blog.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
Credit card information</h3>
The person who opened the account used a credit card registered to Andreas Tzortzis. To achieve this they would need to know his real name (readily available), home address (readily available at Companies House), his full credit card number, card expiry date, and the 3 digit security number on the back of the card. In addition to this it is possible the card issuer would have demanded confirmation this was not fraud by requesting the user enter Hamza's online banking password; this is a pretty standard security feature when using your card in an unexpected way or from an unusual location (the transaction was executed from Australia).<br />
<br />
The first payment of £54 was issued to the site on the 22nd of October 2014. This would have been the initial membership fee. There were eight subsequent charges for £15 each taken on approximately the same date of each subsequent month, totalling £174 over 9 months.<br />
<br />
From this payment information it is possible to assertain the following additional information.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>The membership number of the account (99904794).</li>
<li>The email address used to sign up to the site (A_Tzortzis@yahoo.com).</li>
<li>The IP address from which the payment was made (119.17.35.98), which is assigned to Sydney Australia.</li>
</ol>
<br />
Again, the email address is public information. It is possible that Hamza doesn't check this email address often (or at all), it is very likely an old email address as it does not include any indication of his chosen Muslim name "Hamza". However, Hamza certainly has used this email address since becoming a Muslim, for example, a quick Google search reveals content associated with this address from around 2008...but (it seems) nothing recently.<br />
<br />
The interesting data here is the IP address. A quick IP -> Geo Location lookup shows it is in Australia. Hamza's public statement on FaceBook (now deleted) stated that £54 had been charged to his card while he was in Australia, and concluded that is where the account was opened from. The server time given for the account creation is 10:09 am, and the last time the account was modified was the same day at 11:43 am. As I don't know the time zone of the server I cannot check what time it would have been in Australia. This information could prove useful if anyone can answer.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The profile </h3>
<i>(Table name: am_am_member)</i><br />
The profile for 99904794 lists the area in which the account owner can be found for sex as London N16 7TN. The map co-ordinates are 51.5543658, -0.073289 which, according to Google Maps, is Somerford Grove, London, N16 7TN. A check on the free electoral role website reveals <a href="http://www.freeelectoralroll.co.uk/Electoral_Roll_Index.asp?fn=PETER%2C%2CGEORGES-TZORTZI&fa=N167TN" target="_blank">Hamza's parents live on that street</a>.<br />
<br />
The profile lists Hamza's correct date of birth (21st of September 1980) but again this information is readily available. The profile caption read "Compassionate male seeks friendship" and the summary "I long for a sincere friendship with the ability to connect physically and mentally. I would consider myself compassionate, and someone who thinks a lot.". The profile lists Hamza as weighing 88452 grammes (13st 13lbs or 195lb) which I cannot verify. It lists his height as 178cm (5' 10"), which again I cannot verify but seems about right.<br />
<br />
<i>(Table name: aminno_member)</i><br />
Searching by signup date, signup IP there is a single row matching the account information above. This reveals a profile number of 29425606. The alias for the website is set to AndrewT14, most likely a play on Andreas T, but I don't know for certain what the 14 represents. The date of birth is the same in this table too, as expected. At the time of the hack this profile had no public photos and no private photos associated with it, so a subsequent release of hacked photos will probably not reveal anything (unless some were uploaded then removed, and the server does not physically delete the image files).<br />
<br />
There are some dates indicating the last time certain events occurred that are empty, suggesting the account was not used to email anyone and the user didn't chat with anyone.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Mailing options & user activity</h3>
<i>(Table name: amminno_member_email - I will use Y/N instead of 1/0 as per the data)</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
email=a_tzortzis@yahoo.com, isvalid=Y, optin=Y, notify_newmail=Y, notify_newmember=Y, notify_login=Y, notify_offer=Y<br />
<br />
From the developer comments associated with each of these fields it would seem that an email would be sent if there was a special offer, if contacted by another user, or if someone in the account owner's favourites list logged into the website. I cannot say whether any special offers were emailed out to accounts already paid in full or not, or if anyone nearby matching the criteria had signed up resulting in an email being sent, but if the system was working correctly and the dates in aminno_member were being updated then the data suggests no contact was made with anyone as there are no valid date/times set against the fields bc_mail_last_time, bc_chat_last_time, or reply_mail_last_time.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Observations</h3>
For this account to have been set up by anyone other than Andreas (Hamza) the account creator would need access to some publicly available information (date of birth, address etc). They would need to put in extra work to find his parent's address. My intuition says a frauster would use the same address that had already been entered during the billing stage. To use an address 1 hour drive away from Andreas's home suggests the account creator was trying to disassociate the account from him rather than bring attention to it. A malicious person probably would be more likely to use account details easily associated with Andreas so that the profile would be discovered. The same goes for the profile name, similar enough to his real name for Andreas to remember, but dissimilar enough to not associate it with him directly. Obviously there was no way this person knew the AshleyMadison.com database would be made public, so it is reasonable to assume this is information hiding rather than exposure.<br />
<br />
This person would also require full access to information on both sides of his credit card (16 digit number, expiry date, 3 digit security code on the back) and to have been in Australia at the same time as Andreas in order to sign him up and make it look like he had done it himself.<br />
<br />
They would really have had to have done some research to get his weight and height correct, or approximately correct. This high level of detail seems to have the purpose of accurately portraying one's self to attract a partner rather than to mislead the public into identifying Andreas as the account holder.<br />
<br />
I can easily accept that Andreas's Yahoo email account is not checked any more. I can confirm that my attempt to contact Andreas via that email address was not successful, whereas an email to his iera account the next day received an immediate response. I have old email accounts I can no longer even access. I can also accept he did not notice the payments coming out of his account via his card. Personally I never check my card statements, I don't even look at my bank statements to see how much is being paid to my card account.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Clarifications</h3>
The website does not require you to click a confirm link in an email in order to get into the website. I have tried it myself, my profile name is DirtyJanet if you'd like to look me up ;-)<br />
<br />
The flag in the database "isvalid" marked against an email address is stored against the user's emailing preferences. In my experience, flags to indicate the user has confirmed their email address via an email link are typically stored against an account table with a name like "Verified", and not in an email campaign preferences table as found in this database. The presence of a 1 (yes) against this flag on this account does not suggest a link in an email was clicked to activate the account.<br />
<br />
An email address can be considered "valid" if it meets the Internet standard on structure. ThisEmailDoesNot@ExistInRealLifeBecauseIJustMadeItUp.com is a valid email address, it just doesn't exist. It isn't uncommon for email campaign scripts to assume an email address is valid and exists and then mark it as defunct when "does not exist" email responses come back.<br />
<br />
To me the idea this flag is an email-bounce flag is the most plausible. If the flag were set to zero by default and only marked 1 when the user followed a link in an email then the system would have to send emails to people with emails marked as isvalid=0 in order for them to become marked as valid. I hope you'll agree, sending emails to people with addresses marked as invalid makes the whole purpose of the flag redundant. The expert <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/08/24/exclusive-islamist-hamza-tzortziss-ashley-madison-full-account-details-revealed/" target="_blank">in this article</a> might be an expert in data analysis but that doesn't make him an expert on the writing of software. I've been employed writing business software for about 19 years now, and I disagree.<br />
<br />
This isn't an important point in so far as Andreas not seeing emails to an old account, but I think it is beyond doubt that it has been demonstrated the person signing up did not also require access to the yahoo.com email account.<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE (27 Aug 2015)</b>: I am currently looking at the schema and can confirm the default value for isvalid is in fact a 1, so my original conclusion was correct.<br />
<br />
<b>UPDATE (31 Mar 2016)</b>: After the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dawahman/posts/1057257937673526" target="_blank">libellous statements</a> made against me by Dawah Man on Facebook regarding this issue I decided to re-read this article through. Regarding the information used from Andreas's credit card: obviously this would be very difficult for someone to obtain, unless of course it was a company credit card in his name, in which case a small number of people within iERA could have had access to that information. This would mean that it is possible someone who works for iERA, accompanied Hamza to Australia, and stayed in the same hotel chain could be responsible.<br />
<br />
<h3>
The third hypothesis</h3>
I find it a little annoying that the alternative to Andreas signing up is presented as someone else doing it and then hacking the website to expose him, and nothing else is considered. It would be possible that someone would sign up an account not identifiable as Andreas in the hope that at some point in the future the monthly £15 debit would be spotted by his wife and cause suspicions that could damage his marriage. Meaning that the hack was unexpected, and the only reason we got to find out about it. I don't subscribe to this hypothesis at all, I just wanted to put forward a more balanced article and point out the stupidity of some scenarios being proposed as the only alternative.<br />
<br />
<h3>
Conclusion</h3>
I strongly suspect that while in Australia Andreas decided to have a look around on the web and found this website. He signed up using an old email address he knew wouldn't be checked, entered his credit card details, and then spent the next 94 minutes looking around the website before giving up. He probably then forgot all about it and, because he doesn't check his old email or his card statements, had no idea this website was still taking £15 per month off him for a service he wasn't using.<br />
<br />
The profile on the site is now marked as Unavailable. If there is a flag in the database indicating this state then it will be possible to determine whether it was hidden after the exposure or before. If before then it supports the above hypothesis that the account was only used for 93 minutes (assuming that hiding a profile will update the column in the DB recording when the profile was last updated). Frankly, I've had enough of looking through the DB so that can be an exercise for someone else.<br />
<br />
I expect at some point he will give up the excuse he came up with while panicking and confess that he looked but did not touch, and then never went back. I seriously doubt this will hurt his career, only Allah can judge him after all, and it's not as if it is an offence that carries a death sentence.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-454823698909492092015-08-16T12:11:00.000-07:002015-08-16T12:12:45.252-07:00Geocentricism - Can you help me to find some downloads?Here is a list of works I'd like to read, in some cases there is just an author's name. I am after links to these works, and suggestions of other works concerning geocentricism. If you can help me with any of these I'd appreciate it very much (therationaliser at gmail.com).<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abū Yahyā Zakariyyā ibnMuhammad ibn Mahmūd
al-Qazwīnī (c. 1203 – 1283 CE)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb ‛Ajāib alMakhlūqat wa Gharāib wa
al-Mawjūdāt [“Marvels of Creatures and Rarities of the World”]</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al Farabi (872-951 AD)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The gathering of the ideas of the two
philosophers</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Shihāb al-Dīn Ahmad ibn Mājid ibn Muhammad
al-Sa‛dī (15th/16th century)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb al-Fawā’id fī Ma‛rifad ‛ilm al-Bahr wa’l
-Qawā’id [“Uses and Knowledge of Sea Science and Rules”]</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al Ghazzali (1058-1111 AD)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Incoherence of the Philosophers</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ihya' Ulum al-Din or Ihya'u Ulumiddin (The
Revival of Religious Sciences)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ulug Beg (1393-1449)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Zij-i Sultani (Presumably heliocentric)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abu al-Walid Muhammad ibn Ahmad <b>ibn Rushd</b> AKA Averroes (1126-1198 AD)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->{Author H Davidson}</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Tahafut al-Tahafut</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Decisive Treatise</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family: 'Segoe UI', sans-serif; font-size: 9pt;">Muhyiddin
</span>Ibn Arabi (1165-1240 AD)<b style="text-decoration: underline;"><o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Futûhât al-makkiyya ("The Meccan
Openings")</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Walī al-Dīn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad
ibn Abī Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan Ibn
Khaldūn (1332-1406 AD)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Muqaddimah</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol; text-indent: -18pt;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Mani’s book of giants? (Cosmogony)</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->al-Farghani 9<sup>th</sup> CE (Abu'l-Abbas Ahmad
ibn Muhammad ibn Kathir al-Farghani)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb fī Jawāmiʿ ʿIlm al-Nujūm (<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">كتاب</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">في</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">جوامع</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">علم</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">النجوم</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span dir="LTR"></span> A Compendium of the Science of the Stars) or Elements of
astronomy on the celestial motions, written about 833</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Jawami ilm al-nujum wa usul al karakat
al-samawiyya</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Rhazes 9<sup>th</sup> CE (Muhammad ibn Zakariya
al-Razi)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The Small Book on Theism</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Response to Abu'al'Qasem Braw</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The Greater Book on Theism</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Modern Philosophy</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Spiritual Medicine</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The Philosophical Approach (Al Syrat al
Falsafiah)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The Metaphysics</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Vienna/Avicenna 10<sup>th</sup> CE (Ibn Sina / Abū
ʿAlī al-Ḥusayn ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Sīnā)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb al-shifā </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Resāla fī ebṭāl aḥkām al-nojūm</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Dānish nāma-i ʿalāʾī (Book of Knowledge)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->al-Khujandi 10<sup>th</sup> CE, built
observatory near Tehran in Iran (Abu-Mahmud Khojandi / Abu Mahmud Hamid ibn
Khidr Khojandi)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->{Axial tilt, potentially heliocentrist)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->On the obliquity of the ecliptic and the
latitudes of the cities</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol; text-indent: -18pt;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">al Battam (d. 929)</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Science of the stars</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn Jābir ibn Sinān
al-Raqqī al-Ḥarrānī al-Ṣābiʾ al-Battānī</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb az-Zīj ("Book of Astronomical
Tables")</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abū Ishāq Ibrāhīm al-Zarqālī (d. 1087)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al Amal bi Assahifa Az-Zijia</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Attadbir</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al Madkhal fi Ilm Annoujoum</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Rissalat fi Tarikat Istikhdam as-Safiha al-Moushtarakah
li Jamiâ al-ouroud</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Almanac Arzarchel</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Mu'ayyad al-Din al-'Urdi (d. 1266)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb al-Hayʾa, a work on theoretical astronomy</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (d. 1311)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Eḵtiārāt-e moẓaffari It is a treatise on
astronomy</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nehāyat al-edrāk. The work was dedicated to
Mozaffar-al-Din Bulaq Arsalan.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Fi ḥarakāt al-dahraja wa’l-nesba bayn al-mostawi
wa’l-monḥani a written as an appendix to Nehāyat al-edrāk</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nehāyat al-edrāk - The Limit of Accomplishment
concerning Knowledge of the Heavens (Nehāyat al-edrāk fi dirayat al-aflak)
completed in 1281</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ketāb faʿalta wa lā talom fi’l-hayʾa, an Arabic
work on astronomy, written for Aṣil-al-Din, son of Nasir al-Din Tusi</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Šarḥ Taḏkera naṣiriya on astronomy.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Tuḥfa al-šāhiya fi’l-hayʾa, an Arabic book on
astronomy, having four chapters, written for Moḥammad b. Ṣadr-al-Saʿid, known
as Tāj-al-Eslām Amiršāh</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ḥall moškelāt al-Majesṭi a book on astronomy,
titled Ḥall moškelāt al-Majesṭi</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nasir al-Din al-Tusi (d. 1274) Khawaja Muhammad
ibn Muhammad ibn Hasan Tūsī</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Tadhkirah fi'ilm al-hay'ah – A memoir on the
science of astronomy</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Sharh al-Tadhkirah (A Commentary on
al-Tadhkirah)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->sharh al-isharat (Commentary on Avicenna's
Isharat)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ibn al-Haytham (11<sup>th</sup> CE) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Shukuk ala Batlamyus (meaning "Doubts on
Ptolemy") [Still geocentric]</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->al-Kindi (9th CE) Abu Yūsuf Yaʻqūb ibn ʼIsḥāq aṣ-Ṣabbāḥ
al-Kindī</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The Book of the Judgement of the Stars</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->On the Stellar Rays</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Treatise on the Judgement of Eclipses</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->On the Revolutions of the Years</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Treatise on the Spirituality of the Planets</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ibn al-Shatir (D. 1375) Ala Al-Din Abu'l-Hasan
Ali Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Shatir</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb Nihāyat al-Suʾāl fī Taṣḥīḥ al-ʾUṣūl (<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">كتاب</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">نهاية</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">السؤال</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">في</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">تصحيح</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">الأصول</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span dir="LTR"></span> The Final Quest Concerning the Rectification of Principles)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ali Qushji (d. 1474) Ala al-Dīn Ali ibn Muhammed
[Progressive, moving Earth]</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->A Latin translation of two of Qushji's works,
the Tract on Arithmetic and Tract on Astronomy, was published by John Greaves
in 1650.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->al-Biruni</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Qānūn al-Masʿūdi (“The Masʿūdic Canon”)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Maqālīd ʿilm al-hayʾah (“Keys to Astronomy”)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Istīʿāb al-wujūh al-mumkinah fī ṣanʿat al-asṭurlāb
(“Exhaustive Book on Astrolabes”)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Tafhīm li-awāʾil ṣināʿat al-tanjīm (“Instruction
in the Elements of the art of Astrology”)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb al-Āth ār al-Bāqiyya [“Chronology of
Ancient Nations”]</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]--> al-Khwarizmi</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Zij al-Sindhind (translated:al-Fazari, Yaqub ibn
Tariq)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol; text-indent: -18pt;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Al-'Abbas ibn Sa'id (9th CE) al-'Abbas ibn Sa'id
al-Jawhari</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Wrote a treatise – commentary on Euclid’s
elements</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abu Sa'id al-Darir (9th CE) Abu Sa'id al-Darir
al-Jurajani</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<span style="font-family: Symbol; text-indent: -18pt;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><span style="text-indent: -18pt;">Ahmed Al-Nahawandi (9th CE) Ahmad ibn Muhammad
al-Nahawandi [Jundishapur]</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Habash al-Hasib (9th CE) Ahmad ibn 'Abdallah
al-Marwazi</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Sanad ibn 'Ali</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Yahya ibn abi Mansur</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Fī an laysa li‐ʾl‐arḍ ḥarakat intiqāl</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Ibrāhīm al-Fazārī (d. 777)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Yaʿqūb ibn Ṭāriq (d. 796) <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">يعقوب</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">بن</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">طارق</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span dir="LTR"></span>;</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Tarkīb al‐aflāk (<span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">تركیب</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">الأفلاك</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span dir="LTR"></span>, "Arrangement of the orbs")</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Fazārī (d. 796 or 806) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Mashallah ibn Athari (d. 815) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Abu Ma'shar al-Balkhi (d. 886) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->"Introductorium in Astronomiam", a
translation of the Arabic Kitab al-mudkhal al-kabir ila 'ilm ahkam an-nujjum,
written in Baghdad in the year 848 A.D. It was translated into Latin first by
John of Seville in 1133, and again, less literally and abridged, by Herman of
Carinthia in 1140 A.D. </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Al-Birjandi (d.1528) Abd Ali ibn Muhammad ibn
Husayn Birjandi (Persian: <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">عبدعلی</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">مممدبن</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">حسین</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">بیرجندی</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span></span>) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Nur ad-Din al-Bitruji / Abu Ishâk ibn al-Bitrogi
(d. 1204) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 72pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "Courier New"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Courier New";">o<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Kitāb al-Hayʾah (The book of theoretical
astronomy/cosmology, Arabic, <span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">كتاب</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span lang="AR-SA"><span dir="LTR"></span> </span><span dir="RTL" lang="AR-SA" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">الهيئة</span><span dir="LTR"></span><span dir="LTR"></span>) </div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 108pt; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Wingdings; mso-bidi-font-family: Wingdings; mso-fareast-font-family: Wingdings;">§<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->translated into Latin by Michael Scot in 1217 as
De motibus celorum</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->al batanni 9<sup>th</sup> – 10<sup>th</sup></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-33952073356988883412015-05-21T01:45:00.003-07:002015-05-21T01:45:22.062-07:00Experiment - Praying to water makes more aesthetically pleasing crystalsSomeone on YouTube has sent me a <a href="http://www.explorejournal.com/article/S1550-8307%2806%2900327-2/fulltext#sec2" target="_blank">link to a paper</a> that claims a double-blind experiment indicates good thoughts about a sample of water can physically influence it in such a way that it will create more visually appealing crystals when frozen.<br />
<br />
Here are what I think is the problem with that experiment.<br />
<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The author D.R. knew which bottles had the "treated" water in.</li>
<li>D.R. was the person who received the photos from Tokyo and could have shown bias in his selection of physical photograph samples for evaluation</li>
<li>The D.R author wrote the website which collected ratings and could have been biased in which photographs were presented for evaluation</li>
<li>The "treated" bottles were stored in a secure location with limited access, but the control bottles were stored in an easily accessible location, a cardboard box on a desk. So the control bottles were easily accessible and could therefore be tampered with by the very person who knew which bottles were designated for treatment and control. In fact, if you wanted to fake this test then it is the control bottles you'd want access to in order to contaminate so they do not form crystals as readily as the unaltered water.</li>
<li>If the ratings of the photos on the website (selected by D.R.) had been truly random & unbiased then we should see an equal number of observations for the treated and control samples, but what we actually see is that the control samples were only evaluated half as much as the treated samples.</li>
</ul>
<br />
This shows that the author D.R. not only had opportunity to physically influence the samples but also had knowledge of which samples would need to be influenced in order to produce specific results.<br />
<br />
The only assurance we have that this was not the case is a statement from the testers themselves stating they had no bias in the results of the experiment. This is not sufficient, the purpose of a double-blind test is to eliminate the possibility of deliberate manipulation of an experiment. This test did not meet that criteria as D.R. had too much knowledge of the selection of the samples, combined with suitable access to the samples to influence the outcome of the experiment.XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-52764348093382555192015-05-18T05:37:00.003-07:002017-05-27T13:32:51.319-07:00Al Andalus and the golden age of Islam (Convivencia)<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/05/al-andalus-and-the-golden-age-of-islam-convivencia/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
I've just read <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/17/islam-reformation-extremism-muslim-martin-luther-europe" target="_blank">this cringe worthy article</a> by Mehdi Hasan.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Then there is Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The Somali-born author, atheist and ex-Muslim has a new book called Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now. She’s been popping up in TV studios and on op-ed pages to urge Muslims, both liberal and conservative, to abandon some of their core religious beliefs while uniting behind a Muslim Luther. </blockquote>
I have not read Ayaan's book so I don't know exactly what the core religious beliefs are that she is asking Muslims to abandon, but I can suggest a few myself. However, before I do I'd like to make it clear that I don't think Muslims are a massive homogeneous group. Some of the beliefs I am about to go on to list are not held by all Muslims, therefore I am only criticising those individuals who hold them.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Non Muslims are morally inferior; who live their lives like animals, bending any rule to fulfil any desire <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4hpfqFt-0Q" target="_blank">(Mehdi Hasan)</a>.</li>
<li>Jews are apes and pigs.</li>
<li>It is okay to take women and children as spoils of war.</li>
<li>It is okay to force Islamic rule on others by way of invasion and violent oppression.</li>
<li>Sex with brides as young 9 years of age is acceptable as part of an absolutely immutable morality and should be permitted today <a href="https://vimeo.com/82192500" target="_blank">(UK charity iERA)</a>.</li>
<li>Keeping female captives of war as concubines.</li>
<li>The right of a man to physically discipline his wife <a href="https://vimeo.com/82192499" target="_blank">(UK charity iERA)</a>.</li>
<li>Women being inferior to men both in religion and intelligence.</li>
<li>Homosexuals deserve to be killed for admitting they have had sex with each other.</li>
<li>Muslims who lose their faith deserve death unless they keep quiet and pretend to practice Islam.</li>
<li>Thieves should have hands and opposing feet cut off.</li>
<li>Adulterers should be stoned to death.</li>
</ol>
<div>
It's not common to find an individual who holds all of these beliefs to be true at the same time (Anjem Choudhary), but at the same time it is not uncommon to find a Muslim who holds at least one of these beliefs to be true. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I am guessing that these are the kinds of issues Ayaan is calling for change on, and rightly so in my opinion. Rather than addressing those issues, Mehdi instead criticises the author rather than her arguments, and completely misrepresents the call for an 'Islamic Luther'.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Yet the reality is that talk of a Christian-style reformation for Islam is so much cant. Let’s consider this idea of a “Muslim Luther”. Luther did not merely nail 95 theses to the door of the Castle church in Wittenberg in 1517, denouncing clerical abuses within the Catholic church. He also demanded that German peasants revolting against their feudal overlords be “struck dead”, comparing them to “mad dogs”, and authored On the Jews and Their Lies in 1543, in which he referred to Jews as “the devil’s people” and called for the destruction of Jewish homes and synagogues.</blockquote>
<br />
Now, I may be wrong here, but my understanding is that when people call for a Luther reformist figure they are simply saying that a person is required to stand up to those who have arranged the system to give themselves power. It doesn't mean a call to strike-dead dissenters of the state, to see others as animals, or to demonize Jewish people or calling for their destruction. To some extent this is the situation we currently have in some Islamic parts of the world, and are exactly the kind of ideas that suggest reformation of some people's understanding of Islam is needed. Martin Luther is merely a name well known for challenging established power to bring about reform, using his name is merely a jargon, not a suggested strategy.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Islam isn’t Christianity. The two faiths aren’t analogous, and it is deeply ignorant, not to mention patronising, to pretend otherwise – or to try and impose a neatly linear, Eurocentric view of history on diverse Muslim-majority countries in Asia or Africa. Each religion has its own traditions and texts; each religion’s followers have been affected by geopolitics and socio-economic processes in a myriad of ways. The theologies of Islam and Christianity, in particular, are worlds apart: the former, for instance, has never had a Catholic-style clerical class answering to a divinely appointed pope. So against whom will the “Islamic reformation” be targeted? To whose door will the 95 fatwas be nailed?</blockquote>
Of course Islam and Christianity aren't entirely analogous. Claiming Islam, like Christianity of the past, needs to reform its approach to dealing with humans when in a position of power isn't saying that it is the same as Christianity, it is merely highlighting the fact that it needs to go through the same reformation of views and actions that Christianity went through in the past. Pretending to have your feelings hurt because you infer being patronised isn't going to change the fact that the world does see the kind of abuse in the name of Islam that Europe once saw in the name of Christianity. <br />
<br />
Being a Shiite you possibly do not accept the authority of Muhammad's friend and father-in-law Abu Bakr who, after Muhammad's death, went to war against numerous previously conquered communities who wanted to leave Islamic rule in what is known as the apostasy wars (Riddah wars). But that point aside, there may not be an ultimate single leader of the Muslim world, but that doesn't stop people bringing about reforms within their own communities, mosques, towns, or even countries. There is no single door to nail 95 demands to, there are many doors.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Don’t get me wrong. Reforms are of course needed across the crisis-ridden Muslim-majority world: political, socio-economic and, yes, religious too. </blockquote>
At last Mehdi gets to the admission that Islam needs reform. Of course, after first placing the blame on geopolitics, socio-economic processes, and colonialism; but he finally addresses the reforms needed within Islam with three words "yes, religious too". A brilliant piece of work there Mehdi! I can envision Muslims throughout the world reforming their "yes, religious too" in the way you have suggested....rather than blaming every possible cause other than Muslim perception of Islam itself. Of course, I am being facetious.<br />
<br />
You may not like Ayaan, but her effort to reform Islam is, I am sure, more useful than your article which seems to say Islam needs religious reformation, although being entitled '<i>Why Islam doesn't need a reformation</i>'.<br />
<br />
But here is the part of the article that annoyed me enough to sit down and vent in the form of this blog post.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Muslims need to rediscover their own heritage of pluralism, tolerance and mutual respect – embodied in, say, the Prophet’s letter to the monks of St Catherine’s monastery, or the “convivencia” (or co-existence) of medieval Muslim Spain.</blockquote>
If only Islam could be like the good old days, eh? Before all the European colonialism? Those days based on the co-existence of people living in medieval Muslim Spain? The co-existence often cited as some kind of golden age for Islamic peace rather than what it really was, forced domination of a foreign country and subjugation of its people with the aid of a group of people called The Berbers.<br />
<br />
I made notes of from the book <i>Kennedy, Hugh (2014-06-11). Muslim Spain and Portugal: A Political History of Al-Andalus Taylor and Francis </i>- now seems like a good time to share them.<br />
<br />
Despite being part of the invading party, Christian and Pagan Berbers were made to pay the Jizya (a tax imposed on non-Muslims by the Muslim state), this acted as an incentive to become a Muslim because upon doing so they would earn themselves a share of war booty from invasions (or regular booty raids), and as a Muslim could qualify to be a governor (Mawla) of a conquered area, something non-Muslims were not permitted to do.<br />
<br />
Non-Muslims were not permitted to build new places of worship, proselytise, openly wear symbols of their religious beliefs, or perform audible prayers.<br />
<br />
The Jews certainly suffered severe legal disabilities and intermittent persecution and it is clear that they preferred to remain in their cities and accept Muslim rule than to join their Christian fellow countrymen in flight, but there is no reliable evidence that they actively supported or encouraged the invaders.<br />
<br />
The conquest of Al-Andalus (714) resembled, on a smaller scale, the Muslim conquest of Iran where the main cities and lines of communication were first secured and only later were agreements reached with the inhabitants of outlying areas.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Here is a brief timeline of some of the events of medieval Spain, a.k.a. Al Andalus </h3>
<h3>
<i>711</i></h3>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Tariq sent force under Mughith al Rumi to Cordoba. Serious resistance was encountered from within one church for 3 months, until the occupants surrendered were and executed.</li>
<li>Tariq moved on to Toledo. Most people, except Jews, had fled and he spent winter 711 through to 712 there.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
712</h3>
<ul>
<li>Mūsā bin Nusayr (Tariq's superior) set out with 18,000 men to capture the fortress of Carmona.</li>
<li>Mūsā bin Nusayr then went on to take Seville, which is said to have resisted for some months before being taken by force. Then went on to subdue neighbouring towns.</li>
<li>Mūsā bin Nusayr went north to Merida. Here there was serious resistance, the garrison made a sortie, and siege engines were required to force it into submission in July 713.</li>
<li>Mūsā bin Nusayr sent son Abd al Aziz east to Orihuela, then the most important city in the Murcia (the city of Murcia itself was another later foundation ) district, he was met by the local commander, Theodemir, with whom he made a treaty whose lenient terms meant effective local autonomy and freedom of Christian worship in exchange for goodwill and a modest tribute to be paid in cash, wheat, barley, thickened grape juice, vinegar, honey and oil.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
713</h3>
<ul>
<li>After the fall of Merida, Mūsā headed for Toledo whence Ṭāriq came to meet him. Inevitably, when the two forces did join at Talavera there were tensions and reproaches, but they patched up their relationship and wintered together in Toledo.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
714</h3>
<ul>
<li>In the spring of 714 campaigning began again with expeditions which led to the nominal subjection of Galicia and the Ebro valley.</li>
<li>September - Mūsā bin Nusayr and Tariq summoned to Damascus by Caliph. Leaving Mūsā's son 'Abd al-Azīz as governor.</li>
<li>When the Muslims arrived at Orihuela the governor, Theodemir, had so few men that he had to dress up women as soldiers and put them on the ramparts.</li>
<li>On the whole the Muslims offered generous terms which certainly made surrender a more attractive option, whereas unsuccessful resistance could, as the unfortunate defenders of Cordoba found, lead to death. In Merida the inhabitants were allowed to keep their possessions (except those who fled, and the land of churches was taken) the local people were allowed to remain in possession of their lands as long as they paid a land tax and a poll-tax to the conquerors.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
721</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al-Samh b. Mālik al-Khawlānī led an expedition against Toulouse (France) on which he himself was killed.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
725</h3>
<ul>
<li>'Anbasa b. Suḥaym al-Kalbī led a lightning raid right up the Rhone valley to Burgundy where the army pillaged Autun.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
732</h3>
<ul>
<li>Governor of Al-Andalus, 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Abd Allāh al-Ghāfiqī, led an expedition through western France which was finally and disastrously defeated by Charles Martel at the battle of Poitiers.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
745</h3>
<ul>
<li>Qaysis Muslims revolted and took control</li>
</ul>
<h3>
750</h3>
<ul>
<li>Abbasid revolution. Al-Andalus was no longer part of a wider Muslim empire:</li>
</ul>
<h3>
755</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al-Ṣumayl was besieged in Zaragoza by Yemeni elements, Yūsuf was powerless to help him and he was only saved by an expedition of Qaysī volunteers from the south.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
756</h3>
<ul>
<li>Abd Al Rahman had recruited an army of about 2,000 Umayyad mawālī and Yemeni jundis and marched on Cordoba. Here his supporters fought and defeated the Qaysī army of Yūsuf and al-Ṣumayl and, in May 756, he entered the capital. The arriving members of the Umayyad family needed estates and, as the Syrian jundīs were not property owners, lands had to be confiscated from the Baladis and the Christians.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
763</h3>
<ul>
<li>Abassid caliph Abū Ja'far al-Manṣūr made a serious attempt to regain control of Al-Andalus.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
764</h3>
<ul>
<li>It was seven years before 'Abd al-Raḥmān felt strong enough to challenge their hold on Toledo. In 764 he sent two of his most trusted commanders, Badr and Tammām b. 'Alqama, against the city where Hishām b. 'Urwa al-Fihrī was holding out and he was captured and executed.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
766</h3>
<ul>
<li>One Sa'īd al-Maṭari rebelled in Niebla and took over Seville before being killed by the Amir. In the same year he had another leader from the area, Abū'l-Ṣabbāḥ Yaḥyā al-Yaḥṣubī, executed in Cordoba. The dead man's followers sought revenge and the people of Seville joined his cousins in an attempt to take Cordoba by surprise. It was not until 774 that the rebellion was finally defeated by 'Abd al-Malik b. 'Umar.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
768-770</h3>
<ul>
<li>A Berber of the tribe of Miknāsa called Shaqyā b. 'Abd al-Wāḥid led a revolt, claiming to be related to the 'Alids. His rebellion began in Santaver, in the hills around Cuenca, but for the next nine years he dominated much of the sparsely inhabited upland country between Santaver and Coria and Medellin far to the west. It was a guerrilla war, the Berbers retreating to the mountains on approach of the Amir's army and returning to the villages and plains when they had gone. The rebellion was an irritant, but the soi-disant Fatimid seems to have attracted no support amongst the Arabs or the town dwellers and 'Abd alRaḥmān was also able to make an alliance with Hilāl al-Madyūnī, described as head of the Berbers in the east of Al-Andalus. In the end, in 776-77, Shaqyā was taken by treachery and killed.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
781</h3>
<ul>
<li>Amir 'Abd al-Raḥmān led a military expedition to demand the submission of al-Ḥusayn b. Yaḥyā and to re-establish Muslim control in the Upper Ebro valley. At first al-Ḥusayn accepted the Amir's authority and was confirmed as governor of the city, but the next year he threw off this allegiance. 'Abd al-Raḥmān returned and assaulted the city with siege engines (manjanīq), and al-Ḥusayn was captured and executed and severe measures taken against the townspeople. The whole complex episode shows how the Umayyad Amir tried to establish his authority over the local magnates by a mixture of diplomacy and occasional force but that, as long as they were content to accept his overlordship, he was prepared to leave them in peace.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
785</h3>
<ul>
<li>Almost at the end of 'Abd al-Raḥmān's reign, Yūsuf al-Fihrī's son Muḥammad gathered an army in the Toledo area. Defeated by the Umayyad troops, he fled west towards Coria where he was isolated and killed. </li>
</ul>
<h3>
788</h3>
<ul>
<li>{While Abd al Rahman was dying} It only took six days for Hishām to come from Merida, and 'Abd Allāh greeted him as ruler and handed over the seal of office, but his other brother was not prepared to accept this verdict and gathered his supporters to march south. There was a short, sharp conflict near Jaen and Sulaymān's men were defeated. It took almost two months for Hishām to reduce Toledo and oblige his brother to surrender, but in 789 Sulaymān was paid 60,000 dīnārs in cash, possibly half the annual income of the amirate at this time, and was forced to leave for North Africa and promise not to return: Umayyads were defeated and disgraced but, at this time, they would not be executed like any common rebel, for that would undermine the status of the whole ruling house.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
788-789</h3>
<ul>
<li>Sa'id b. al-Ḥusayn al-Anṣārī, whose father had held Zaragoza against the Umayyads in the previous reign, took the city again, proclaiming himself Amir.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
791-792</h3>
<ul>
<li>Zaragoza was taken over by Maṭrūh, the son of Sulaymān b. Yaqẓān, and an expedition was sent from Cordoba to drive him out. The problem was solved, however, when Matrūḥ was murdered by one 'Amrūs b. Yūsuf while he was out hunting and the city was handed over to the Umayyad forces.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
791-795</h3>
<ul>
<li>Unlike the Christians they were fighting, the Muslims made no substantial territorial gains, but they launched numerous raids on Christian lands.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
796</h3>
<ul>
<li>Hishām died on 17 April 796. He was careful to leave no uncertainty about the identity of his chosen successor and his son al Hakam, now 26 years old, was duly accepted as Amir in Cordoba.</li>
<li>Al Hakam's uncle (Hisham's brother) Sulayman spent the next four years wandering the country, attempting to build up enough support, largely among the Berbers of the south, to dislodge his nephew. He was defeated in a number of encounters and was finally surrendered to al-Ḥakam by the Berber governor of Merida, Aṣbagh b. Wansūs. He was executed in 800,</li>
</ul>
<h3>
805</h3>
<ul>
<li>There was a conspiracy among certain notables of Cordoba to mount a coup d'état and put al-Ḥakam's cousin Muḥammad b. al-Qāsim on the throne. Unfortunately for the conspirators, Muḥammad did not share their enthusiasm for the project, which he revealed to the Amir.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
818</h3>
<ul>
<li>There was a widespread uprising in the populous suburb, usually referred to simply as al-Rabad (the suburb), which lay to the south of the city itself, across the Guadalquivir river.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
822</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al Hakam died. Son Abd al Rahman II named as his successor</li>
</ul>
<h3>
823</h3>
<ul>
<li>Raid on Christian land for booty</li>
</ul>
<h3>
825</h3>
<ul>
<li>Another raid on Christian land for booty</li>
</ul>
<h3>
826</h3>
<ul>
<li>Another raid on Christian land for booty.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
828</h3>
<ul>
<li>Muwallad, Ibn Marwān al-Jilliqī (the Galician), ruler of Merida in the Lower March killed by a Berber.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
830</h3>
<ul>
<li>Abd Al Rahman II sent troops and appointed an Umayyad Mawali as governor.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
836-837</h3>
<ul>
<li>Toledo was finally occupied by Umayyad troops.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
838-852</h3>
<ul>
<li>Intermittent raids for booty were resumed until the end of his reign.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
844</h3>
<ul>
<li>Zaragoza was conquered by 'Abd al-Raḥmān II in person in 844 and entrusted to his son Muḥammad</li>
</ul>
<h3>
846</h3>
<ul>
<li>There was no intention of conquering the Christian north, though attempts were made to regain lost lands like Pamplona and Barcelona . When the Leonese abandoned their city when faced by the mangonels of the Muslims in 846, the conquerors simply made breaches in the walls and then left the site abandoned; of course, it was soon reoccupied and fortified again by the Christians. Destruction and booty were the main objectives,</li>
</ul>
<h3>
848</h3>
<ul>
<li>Governor of Valencia, Ibn Maymun led an expedition which forced the submission of the Balearic Islands</li>
</ul>
<h3>
852</h3>
<ul>
<li>The government of Al-Andalus was now a palace-based bureaucracy, not a successful war-band.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
862</h3>
<ul>
<li>Upper March leader (appointed by Muhammad) killed in conflict with the Banū Sālim Berbers of Guadalajara. Muhammad sent his four sons to rule, who were able to capture the Umayyad governors of Tudela, Huesca and Zaragoza, where the occupation is said to have been followed by a massacre of the Arab population, and restore the family's power in the area.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
868</h3>
<ul>
<li>The Amir launched a surprise attack on Merida, which had been defying the authority of Cordoba under the leadership of the muwallad 'Abd al-Raḥmān b. Marwān al-Jillīqī, whose father had been governor of the city until his murder in 828. After some brisk fighting the city was taken and the leading horsemen (fursān - the word has a social significance here, somewhat like the English 'knight') were obliged to come and settle in Cordoba with their families, where it was presumably intended that these formidable warriors should form part of the Umayyad army. Muḥammad installed an Umayyad governor, Sa'īd b. al-' Abbās al-Qurashī, in the citadel his father had built , but the rest of the city is said to have been destroyed, and certainly for a later historian this event marked the end of Merida as an important urban centre: 'no vestige', he wrote, 'remained of that once opulent city'.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
871</h3>
<ul>
<li>Mūsā's four sons were able to capture the Umayyad governors of Tudela, Huesca and Zaragoza, where the Banū Qasī occupation is said to have been followed by a massacre of the Arab population, and restore the family's power in the area.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
886</h3>
<ul>
<li>Amir Muhammad died. Succeeded by his son Al-Mundhir</li>
</ul>
<h3>
887</h3>
<ul>
<li>Mūsā b. Dhī'l-Nūn led an army of 20,000 against Toledo and defeated the army of the city. In total the struggle for Toledo took 150 years of fighting</li>
</ul>
<h3>
888</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al-Mundhir died, succeeded by his brother Abd Allah</li>
</ul>
<h3>
891</h3>
<ul>
<li>He encouraged his son Al-Mutarrif to stab to death his eldest son Muhammad.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
895</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al-Mutarrif accused of conspiring with rebels in Seville. Under siege in his house for 3 days, then killed. The vindictive Amir also had two of his brothers, Hishām and al-Qāsim, killed.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
896</h3>
<ul>
<li>Annual tax collection - Aḥmad b. Abī 'Abda and sons Isa and Abbas sent with 300 soldiers; rebel fighting and tax collecting.</li>
</ul>
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Hisn Qamarat Jaysh</b><br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Ravaged agricultural lands<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Cut down trees<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Battle commenced and they won<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Former leader's father sent as a hostage to Cordoba<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Tashkar</b><br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Found deserted<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Took harvest and then burned it<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Bakhtwira</b><br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Fought battle and won<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Burned the suburb<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Former leader's son taken as hostage<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Given written agreement to continue to run the place<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Munt Shaqir<br /><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Al-Banyul<br /><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Hisn al-Liquwn</b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Quickly defeated<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Took horses + equipment + food<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Gaudix</b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Rested<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Received Ushr (tithes) from Pechina<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Received Jibaya (taxes) from Hisn Bashira<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Balsh</b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Fought locals<br />
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Destroyed houses and fruit trees<br />
<b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Murcia</b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Collected taxes (Magharim)<br />
<h3>
901</h3>
<ul>
<li>Ibn al-Qiṭṭ of Umayyad family declares himself Mahdi to lead Muslims back to "true Islam" - tried to siege Christian Zamora and was killed</li>
</ul>
<h3>
912</h3>
<ul>
<li>Grandson (via eldest son Muhammad) of Abd Allah took control - Abd al-Rahman III.</li>
<li>Abd al-Rahman III inherited and army that was more like a war-band living off the proceeds of annual pillaging</li>
</ul>
<h3>
927</h3>
<ul>
<li>Melilla was taken</li>
<li>Built permanent siege camp at Bobastro</li>
</ul>
<h3>
928</h3>
<ul>
<li>Bobastro was captured</li>
</ul>
<h3>
929</h3>
<ul>
<li>Abd al Rahman III took the title of Caliph (Commander of the faithful)</li>
<li>Beja put under siege</li>
<li>Badajoz put under siege</li>
<li>Lord of Ocsonoba surrendered but was able to keep Ocsobona on condition he paid tribute</li>
</ul>
<h3>
930</h3>
<ul>
<li>Built permanent siege camp at Toledo</li>
<li>Badajoz surrendered</li>
</ul>
<h3>
931</h3>
<ul>
<li>Ceuta taken</li>
</ul>
<h3>
932</h3>
<ul>
<li>After two years Badajoz submitted due to famine</li>
</ul>
<h3>
937</h3>
<ul>
<li>Caliph allied with Christian forces from Alava to defeat Zaragoza leader Muhammad al-Tujibi.</li>
</ul>
<h3>
951</h3>
<ul>
<li>Tangier was taken</li>
</ul>
<h3>
961</h3>
<ul>
<li>Caliph Abd al-Rahman III died leaving Al-Hakam {not related} as named successor</li>
</ul>
<h3>
976</h3>
<ul>
<li>Al-Hakam died leaving son Hisham as named successor (aged 14/15). New crops + irrigation techniques had left Andalusi rich through agriculture.</li>
<li>An attempt was made to replace Al-Hakam with his brother al-Mughira. It failed. al-Mughira was strangled in front of his family despite knowing nothing of it.</li>
</ul>
<div>
No reform needed because Islam already went through one in medieval Spain?</div>
</div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-5789987509534012972015-03-16T07:48:00.002-07:002017-05-27T13:32:01.794-07:00Abdullah Al Andalusi, BBC The Big Questions and Islamic apostasy<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/03/abdullah-al-andalusi-bbc-the-big-questions-and-islamic-apostasy/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
Abdullah Al Andalusi was a guest on BBC's The Big Questions show this Sunday (15th of March 2015, Series 8 episode 10) to discuss the subject "Do British Muslims have a problem with apostates?" He was clearly unhappy with how things went on the show and was <a href="http://abdullahalandalusi.com/2015/03/15/my-review-of-the-bbc-big-questions-topic-do-british-muslims-have-problems-with-apostates/" target="_blank">quick to write a blog post</a> <strike>criticising</strike> reviewing the experience.<br />
<br />
I thought I would <strike>criticise his criticisms</strike> review his review.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I’ve just finished the BBC ‘Big Questions’ program. It was, as expected, an anti-Islam fest, attacking Muslim families for not accepting children to leave Islam (despite lots of non-Muslim families rejecting their children for BECOMING Muslim).</i></blockquote>
<br />
I think people should be free to change their minds, and that this freedom should apply to people leaving Islam and to those joining it. I don't think a twenty minute slot is sufficient to discuss anything more than a very small picture of a complex issue, and so it obviously would not have been possible to discuss both sides of the same coin. I would like to see a show about the problems of becoming a Muslim or perhaps even better a one hour special covering the whole phenomenon of freedom to think; people changing / joining / leaving all kinds of religions, how their families and friends reacted etc. That would be very interesting indeed .<b>Take note Mentorn Media!</b><br />
<br />
The discussion was not <i>"attacking Muslim families for not accepting children to leave Islam"</i>, it was about Muslim families who do not accept their children leaving Islam, this is very different. Abdullah's wording implies the discussion is about how Muslim families act in general, rather than how some families act, or even only some members within some families. For the sake of brevity (20 minutes) this discussion was restricted to Islam and was to discuss whether or not there is a scriptural basis for these actions, whether they are mandated or not, whether they apply in Britain, and so on. Perhaps it was Abdullah's misunderstanding of exactly who was being discussed is the reason he felt it was an attack of Muslim families and "an anti-Islam fest"?<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>They gave the discussion to an Ex-Muslim ‘Amal’, whom was given the lions share of time to attack Islam and Muslims, and ample time afterwards – so much so, it almost became the ‘Amal Show’</i></blockquote>
<div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br />
From the quick review I've just done (which wasn't all the way through) Amal had the longest time to talk (2 mins 40 seconds) followed by Usama Hassan who explained how death for disbelief was a concept that was introduced after Muhammad's death.<br />
<br />
Lots of people shouted over each other, which made parts of the show very frustrating, and I would say the biggest culprits of this were Amal and Kate Smurthwaite. The person who interrupted the least was Usama Hassan followed by Muhammad Shafiq. If the best amongst us are those with the best of manners then, in that audience at that time, the Muslims were clearly the best amongst us.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Predictably when it came to me, Nicky Campbell asked the ‘yes or no question’, about whether I believed in a ‘apostasy law’. I responded robustly that I reject the translation ‘apostasy’, and they didn’t like it – not one bit. I approached the topic from outside the box that they wanted me to stay in.</i></blockquote>
<br />
After Amal claiming the phenomenon she personally experienced is founded in Islam why is it unreasonable to ask Abdullah if that claim is true? Nicky asked a very clear question, <i>"When all Shariah conditions apply in a perfect Shariah state should apostasy be a criminal offence?"</i> At this point Abdullah could easily have said something like <i>"If you mean for simply leaving Islam then no."</i><br />
<br />
Abdullah and I have discussed this and I know that he disagrees with the killing of people who decide to stop being Muslims. At one point he called the show an inquisition, said he was only there to talk about issues (not people), and then said he refused to say if he condones or condemns specific beliefs. When asked about FGM Abdullah felt confident to quickly condemn it. So why did Abdullah give up the opportunity to give his opinion on Nicky Campbell's apostasy question?<br />
<br />
The four major Sunni schools of thought on Islamic jurisprudence all agree that one may be <a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/apostasy-in-islam.html" target="_blank">executed by the state</a> for simple actions such as refusing to pray, denying the Quran, or mocking Muhammad; which is why Muhammad Shafiq's promotion in Pakistan of Maajid Nawaz being an insulter of the Prophet was so dangerous. This was seen by people as an incitement to violence against Maajid Nawaz. Why? Precisely because there <b>is</b> a problem with apostates, something Mr Shafiq would surely have known.<br />
<br />
Abdullah's views are far more palatable than those of the majority, but they are not the majority's view. Abdullah's sticking point here was something called "Ijma".<br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijma" target="_blank">Ijma</a> is a consensus, in the case of punishment for losing one's Islamic religion the consensus of the founders of the four major schools of Sunni Islam is death. Even denying a ruling that is the consensus of the scholars is an offence punishable by....death! This means that even if our unnamed fictitious country heralded in a perfect Caliphate running a perfect law system based on Shariah it would still be possible to have Muslims killed for openly professing a loss of their faith in Islam, or for making their disbelief manifest in other ways such as refusing to pray.<br />
<br />
The best Abdullah could do at this point was to rally the troops by declaring the show an attack on Muslims, and then to disagree with the definition of the word Apostate. Even when Usama Hassan repeated the question, reworded without the word Apostate, Abdullah still did not answer. His objection clearly wasn't with the definition of the word Apostate, but with the answer he didn't want to reveal.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The first point was, that the title of the ‘Big Question’ is tritely and unoriginally another attack on the Muslim community in the UK: ‘Do British Muslims have a problem with apostates?’. It serves to further fuel the demonisation of Islam and Muslims in the UK – leading to more anti-Muslim social ostracism (which they were so upset about happening to ex-muslims!).</i></blockquote>
<br />
It wasn't an attack it was criticism, and it wasn't The Muslim Community but only individuals who act in a certain way. The show was about a specific victim group, not one about all victims of any injustice one can think of on the spur of the moment. This was a poor show of <a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/whataboutery" target="_blank">WhatAboutery</a> In this second attempt to rally the troops to his aid Abdullah did exactly what he was accusing others of doing, he was making an Us vs Them scenario where the victims side of the argument is every Muslim in the UK.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The second point I made was that it was anti-Muslim and disingenuous to discuss Islamic State law and connect it to the issue of Britain. 0 ex-Muslims have been killed in the UK, that’s right 0 – so how does this relate to so-called death penalties claimed of Islamic law?</i></blockquote>
<br />
Abdullah seems to be claiming that as long as nobody is killed we shouldn't openly discuss the fact that there is a group of people who others believe should be killed. The discussion was about British Muslims' opinions about apostates, not how many apostates have been killed in the UK. Ostracisation from one's family, being spat at, beaten up, are these not problems worthy of discussion?<br />
<br />
In fact Abdullah is wrong. <a href="http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1989/Life-Term-for-Father-Who-Killed-Daughter-for-Religious-Reasons/id-5ca966fa2a28dcc00e1f54cfc4aeec0c" target="_blank">This news article</a> from 1989 tells the story of a Muslim man in Birmingham, UK, who killed his daughter for apostatising and becoming a Jehovah's Witness. It says...<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Malik had threatened several days earlier to kill his daughter unless she returned to Islam...She refused his demands to acknowledge Allah, so he deliberately killed her as he said he would</i></blockquote>
<br />
Is it okay to discuss attitudes towards Muslim apostates now, or is this somehow irrelevant because it's only one case and was over 25 years ago? Is it anti-Muslim to mention this, or should I get credit for noting that the murderer's wife and sister opposed his actions and tried to calm the situation down by getting the victim to placate her father? Which part of this event can we discuss without it being anti-Muslim? Nobody is saying Muslims are killing apostates left, right, and centre, we are asking if this denigrating attitudes towards apostates is based in Islam, and whether or not we can do something to solve it.<br />
<br />
I can't help but wonder how many murders for un-Islamic behaviour have been classified as "Honour Killings"?<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The points I made were valid, but I was accused of being ‘slippery’ and avoiding answering the question. NO</blockquote>
<br />
Abdullah, you did avoid the question! You resorted to accusing the show of victimising Muslims in general, and diverting to the subject to one of accurate translation rather than addressing the social affect. Death for apostasy is the majority view, you cannot deny this fact, and you cannot pretend you didn't know it without losing credibility as a Muslim debater. When Abdullah first wrote his review on Facebook I added two comments, one linking to my blog on the jurists' rulings for apostasy and another asking him to discuss it with me. He deleted the comment which linked to the evidence.<br />
<br />
If you really are willing to answer the question then that's great. Here it is:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MeXbNjqT4FU/VQblscBWAjI/AAAAAAAAAYM/YAcswI6r63Y/s1600/Untitled-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MeXbNjqT4FU/VQblscBWAjI/AAAAAAAAAYM/YAcswI6r63Y/s1600/Untitled-1.png" height="167" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
The factual answer is "No", it is legal for the state to kill these people. If you would like to explain why you disagree with the majority position then please blog about it, convince others, that's what many people want. To change something, you first have to admit it needs changing.<br />
<br />
UPDATE: The Big Questions posted these statistics on March 18th<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_srqd5wzIgM/VQlSAwDIgSI/AAAAAAAAAYc/ITFm5eGiU30/s1600/Untitled-1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_srqd5wzIgM/VQlSAwDIgSI/AAAAAAAAAYc/ITFm5eGiU30/s1600/Untitled-1.png" height="53" width="320"></a></div>
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-30589863928944150282015-03-07T09:35:00.001-08:002017-05-27T13:31:09.568-07:00Just for the record - Memorising the Quran<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/03/just-for-the-record-memorising-the-quran/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg45PzozDA8" target="_blank">During a discussion with a guy named Shabir</a> he proposed the Quran was a unique book because it had been learned off by heart by so many people. He argued this was because it's divine author had deliberately made it easy to learn. Although he said he didn't think this proved the divine origin of the book he argued that it begs the question.<br />
<br />
Obviously this is non-sequitur. If the book is easy to learn it doesn't prove anything other than it is easy to learn. Even the fact that the Quran has been memorised by many people doesn't prove it is easy to learn. It is claimed the Quran started as an oral tradition and that many people knew all of it before it was ever canonised (even though various hadiths contradict this claim), and it is probably because of this story that it is seen today as a feat which can promote one's social standing. This alone is enough to create a social phenomenon of learning the Quran by heart, and considering the claimed 1.5+ billion Muslims in the world the number of people achieving this feat is neither surprising or impressive to me. At the time I thought I recalled mental imagery of young children in Madrasas reciting Quran verses over and over, <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bareilly/10-year-old-unable-to-recite-Quran-made-to-do-170-pushups-lands-in-hospital/articleshow/46647257.cms" target="_blank">being punished with the strike of a slipper or stick whenever they got it wrong</a>; I felt it would be too impolite to mention this at the time. If only Allah had made the Quran easy to remember...<br />
<br />
Despite not being willing to take his argument as far as claiming it proved divine authorship Shabir was very insistent that I found an example like it, in fact, he insisted that I got together with 9 or 10 of my friends and learn a book from cover to cover. Taking into account his line of thinking is non-sequitur to the point he wasn't even willing to commit to making it an argument, and how long it would take to memorise a book of similar length, and how I wouldn't want to spend the time learning a book I declined his challenge. So instead, for some bizarre reason, I ended up accepting I would prove evidence of a book of at least similar size which has been memorised by at least 10 people....but not a phone book.<br />
<br />
Jewish people from history has a tradition called Mishna, which means to study by repetition. It was claimed that Moses received two forms of information on Mount Sinai, one in a form he wrote down and another he memorised and passed on orally. The Mishna was passed from generation to generation via oral transmission before finally being canonised for reasons of preservation, along with commentaries hundreds of years before Muhammad was even born.<br />
<br />
This is not the only historic example. Indian Hindus have an oral history dating back thousands of years. The rote techniques for learning the Vedas are quite interesting, they consist of Vedic chants of different styles. In computer science there is a simple technique called a checksum, which is used to identify possible errors in transmission (a simple example is to use the modulo of the sum of a chunk of data); similarly the Vedic Chants act as checksums. Not only do the chants having their own system of ensuring accurate recitation, there are also different ways to chant the same information which also have their own checksums, and act as a checksum for the other methods of chanting the same information. I won't go into details, if you look it up <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedic_chant" target="_blank">wikipedia</a> you will find information on these Vedic Chants.<br />
<br />
This is such common knowledge I can't even imagine why Shabir would ask me to prove it to him, it just seemed to be a way of stalling the conversation.<br />
<br />
Seeing as I have no links with a social culture of memorising books to impress my peers it is obvious I don't know any books off by heart, not even the children's books I have read many times. Shabir on the other hand does have links to such a social culture, which is why he raised the subject in the first place. Considering how easy he alleges the Quran has been made specifically to learn off by heart, does this mean Shabir himself knows the Quran by heart from cover to cover? Does it also imply he also has 9 friends who have done the same and they could gather together and go through the entire recital, perfectly corroborating each other's words?<br />
<br />
I am not claiming it is easy to learn whole books. I expect it is difficult, which is why it takes so many years to achieve. I am claiming the phenomenon is a social one, it has been done before, it still happens today, just not up my street. Shabir is the one claiming the Quran is easy to learn by rote.<br />
<br />
I'd ask him to give us a recital but I won't, because I'm not interested in hearing it and neither his success nor failure would prove anything at all.<br />
<br />
The discussion we had was "Is the Quran man made?" Considering we have opposing views as to what the answer is then it was obvious I was going to argue for it being man made and he was expected to argue for it being of divine origin. After all, the title of the discussion was not "The Quran is man made", which would have meant I was the only one coming to the discussion with a positive claim. Hearing his argument for divine origin might have been interesting, if only he had felt brave enough to actually try arguing it.<br />
<br />
I'd end with a statement declaring my interest in seeing a recital demonstration of the whole Quran from him and his 9 friends but I won't, for two reasons<br />
<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>I could never look forward to such a brain numbing experience.</li>
<li>I don't think he can live up to his own claim, so I doubt it will ever happen anyway.</li>
</ol>
<div>
<br /></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-70958279400060638652015-02-12T03:11:00.003-08:002015-02-12T09:25:41.289-08:00When was the last time you heard of someone getting shot over a parking space?This isn't a blog, just a list of a few links. People do actually shoot neighbours during long-term disputes over parking spaces. I'm documenting just a few cases because someone on Twitter begged the question "When was the last time you heard of someone getting shot over a parking space?"<br />
<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The shooting in <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/blog/bs-md-ci-troy-preston-20150115-story.html" target="_blank">this first case</a> resulted in the shot hitting a 3rd party who was not involved.</li>
<li>This <a href="http://www.wsfa.com/story/25430713/man-74-charged-with-attempted-murder-in-tuscaloosa" target="_blank">74 year old man shot his neighbour</a>, who thankfully survived the shooting. He also tried to shoot his girlfriend but his gun clip was empty.</li>
<li>This man <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/blog/bs-md-ci-homicide-arrest-20150112-story.html" target="_blank">killed two of his neighbours</a>.</li>
</ul>
<br />
If the Chapel Hill Shooting had involved victims unknown to the murderer then it would be a clear cut case, but that isn't what happened. We should wait and hear what the murderer says, if it was an anti-Muslim attack then he will undoubtedly use this international exposure as a platform to put forward his views, just as <a href="http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/05/anders-breiviks-opening-statement/" target="_blank">Anders Breivik did</a>.<br />
<br />
So rather than turning this into some massive them versus us scenario, let's wait and see. If you have any more news reports I can link to then let me know and I will add them.XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-46138684687205531802015-01-28T16:13:00.002-08:002017-05-27T13:30:22.078-07:00What's wrong with the Kalam Cosmological Argument?<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/01/whats-wrong-with-the-kalam-cosmological-argument/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
The Kalam argument is essentially that every action has a cause, and that an infinite set of cause/effect events can only stretch from an exact starting point into the future (e.g if yesterday you launched a rocket into space on an infinite journey). It proposes we cannot have an infinite number of events in the past because the current event will always be waiting for an infinite number of prior events to complete.<br />
<br />
Any amount of events could logically occur, even an infinite amount of events, if they all occurred at the same time. The important clause in the infinite regression argument is that because we are looking for a cause of the universe these must be cause/effect events, so A must always initiate (but not necessarily complete) before B is initiated, and so on. No matter how small an amount of time elapses between the initiations of A and B it will always be above zero. Therefore it will always take an infinite amount of time to perform an infinite amount of cause/effect actions, because any number above zero (time) multiplied by an infinity is also an infinity. Effectively we end up waiting for an infinite past to expire before "now" can arrive, and it would seem, at least intuitively, that this cannot happen.<br />
<br />
William Lane Craig (and thus Hamza) use this as an argument to claim there must have been an initial cause that was itself not caused. In this way we could have a finite starting point and can reach the event in question (in this case the big bang). If the initial cause was some intelligent agent that decided to create the universe then the first action occurred 13.8 billion years ago and took 13.8 billion years worth of cause/effect events to get to point when I would start to write this post. No previous cause is required because it was a decision that started the events from a fixed point and not a previous cause/effect event.<br />
<br />
These proponents use the term "infinite regression of events" because they need to hide the fact that it is actually the infinite amount time that is the problem. They convert a non-action into a first action by invoking an intelligent agent which makes the decision to act. Using "total number of events" as a unit of measurement the sequence can be initiated with a non-physical event (a decision) and thus provide a termination to avoid a historical infinity. When using time as a unit of measurement the same trick cannot be employed, because there will always be an amount of time between the decision and the action, and also an amount of time before the decision itself. Using the terminology of events is an attempt to avoid the question "So how long did this intelligent agent exist for before creating the universe?" <br />
<br />
When asked this question the answer always seems to be the claim that the agent is eternal. The use of the word "eternal" here is to avoid saying the agent existed forever, because that is an infinite amount of time and we end up with the same infinite regression problem.<br />
<br />
The use of the word "eternal" instead suggests that the agent is somehow able to "exist" in a kind of timeless dimension, and in doing removes the necessity of it having to exist for an impossibly infinite amount of time before it created the universe. So here the proponents of this argument sacrifice the existence of time itself, and have it appear as part of the creation of the universe.<br />
<br />
So now the proponents have argued that there is no infinite regression of events, just 13.8 billion years worth, and they have also argued that there is no infinite regression of time because the intelligent agent was without time. However this just leads to a different problem, did this agent have any choice but to create the universe?<br />
<br />
In order to have free will one must be at a point where there is a choice to make from numerous options. In this case the options would be to create or not create a universe (putting aside the incalculable options of what form it should take). Importantly, to have free will, the agent must then be able to make a decision based on those options.<br />
<br />
The problem is that you must have the options before making the choice, there needs to be a logical precedence in order for free will to work, it essentially boils down to cause/effect of an intelligent source where the cause is the choice and the effect is the intelligent decision that was made. That is where the problem is, to have cause/effect, even of an intelligent kind, you need time!<br />
<br />
Without time either nothing happens, or everything happens at once in a non-deterministic way. How can an intelligence non-deterministically determine how to create a universe? Did the universe not spring into existence at all because nothing happens in a timeless dimension? Obviously not!<br />
<br />
So if everything in a timeless dimension happens at once then this requires the decision to create the universe, to exist simultaneously with the choice of whether or not to create one at all, while simultaneously the universe is already in existence.<br />
<br />
If this agent created time before the initial state of the universe in order to avoid the paradox of the universe seed both existing and not existing simultaneously, it just moves the problem to time itself. Time itself would simultanously exist and not exist in this timeless dimension, and then not even as an effect of an intelligent decision to create it.<br />
<br />
Without time there can be no logical sequence of evaluating options, making a choice, and then actioning that choice. These are essential for the freedom of will and freedom to act. Without freewill and/or freedom to act this intelligent agent is impotent, its intelligence is redundant. Powerful non-intelligent events are called "nature", rendering the existence of the universe an unknown (and very perplexing) natural event.<br />
<br />
With time in this dimension there can be no way this intelligent agent can exist for an infinite duration. Without time the agent is irrelevant.<br />
<br />
One thing seems pretty certain, and that is 13.8 billion years ago the universe was very tiny. There is no evidence to suggest the universe didn't exist prior to this time, we only know it existed in a different form. We don't even know it started to expand at that point in time, we just know that at a certain point in time it was expanding at a rate we could actually measure.<br />
<br />
To even say there is evidence the universe was "created" or "began to exist" is wrong, and all of the logical fallacies built on top of this erroneous basis which require a complex reality of timeless realms are worthless on account that they are both unprovable and unfalsifiable.XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-45081366501987345192015-01-20T02:53:00.001-08:002017-05-27T13:29:37.749-07:00Scorning the Prophet is an act of violence - Tim Winters in The Telegraph<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/01/scorning-the-prophet-is-an-act-of-violence-tim-winters-in-the-telegraph/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
Tim Winters, also known as Abdal Hakim Murad, is a British Muslim theologian and broadcaster. To some he might only be known for video footage in which he explains how homosexuality is an "inherent aberration" and how homosexuals themselves are "ignorant people who don't know what their bodies are for" (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Winter#Controversy" target="_blank">See here</a>) The video footage is 15-20 years old and Timothy Winters has apologised for the offence caused by his statements and has distanced himself from them, although I've yet to find a statement from him saying that homosexuality is not an inherent aberration and that homosexuals are not ignorant of what their bodies are for.<br />
<br />
This morning I read the article "<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11351280/Scorning-the-Prophet-goes-beyond-free-speech-its-an-act-of-violence.html" target="_blank">Scorning the Prophet goes beyond free speech, it's an act of violence</a>" in The Telegraph. It starts with the words "The Paris murders aside, the law has a duty to protect us all from insult and abuse". I thought the opening line seemed to set the whole article up for a session of victim blaming, and it seems I wasn't wrong. Here are my objections to the article:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The Paris murders aside, the law has a duty to protect us all from insult and abuse</i></blockquote>
<br />
No, this is simply not something you do. You do not put aside the murder of numerous people merely for causing offence, and then go on to say they should not have offended the killers in the first place. The law does have a duty to protect people from abuse, but it does not have any duty to protect us from insult. Don't tell people to forget the disproportionate response in order to get to see how upset you were that some people drew some cartoons.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Muslims believe in every jot and tittle of the Second Commandment. We are to make no graven images of any living thing, irrespective of whether such images might or might not lure the unwary into idolatry.</i></blockquote>
<br />
Here's the thing...I am not a Muslim. I don't believe in the second commandment, My beliefs (or lack of) do not constrain me to avoid drawing pictures. If that is what you believe that's nice for you, don't do it, but don't tell the rest of the world we have to adhere to your beliefs. The more you demand the drawing of Muhammad should be forbidden, the more necessary it is for unbelievers to draw him in order to maintain the freedom of our non-Islamic laws.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Unlike some other commandments, notably those against murder, adultery and theft, the Second is treated as a somewhat marginal issue in the classical manuals of Islamic ethics and law. Making pictures of people is forbidden, certainly, but it is hardly as wicked as missing a prayer, or neglecting the welfare of parents.</i></blockquote>
<br />
It should be treated as a marginal offence, for Muslims within a state ruled by Islamic law, and not a more serious offence like (as mentioned) deliberately missing prayers which, by the way, <a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/apostasy-in-islam.html" target="_blank">warrants a death penalty</a>. Let's not forget that Muslims themselves have painted <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depictions_of_Muhammad" target="_blank">pictures of Muhammad</a> throughout the years.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The murders were the acts of criminals with troubled pasts and little religious knowledge...The difficulty lay in the evident intention to mock, deride and wound. To portray the Prophet naked, or with a bomb in his turban, was not the simple manufacturing of a graven image. It was received, and rightly so, as a deliberate insult to an already maligned and vulnerable community.</i></blockquote>
<br />
The problem with the Charlie Hebdo cartoons is that they were offensive. Something which, according to hadiths, carried a death sentence during the life of Muhammad. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/USC-MSA/Book-14/Hadith-2678/" target="_blank">In this hadith</a> (story from Muhammad's life) a singing girl used to mock Muhammad, and upon his conquest of Mecca he ordered her to be killed even if she was seeking refuge on sacred ground; and in <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/DarusSalam/Hadith-4361" target="_blank">this hadith</a> Muhammad was told about a blind man who stabbed to death his own wife, his wife who was also his slave. Muhammad was about to rule on his punishment when he was told the murdered women used to abuse and disparage him with her words, in response to these accusations Muhammad declared there should be no punishment for the murderer.<br />
<br />
Perhaps these killers were inspired by these stories from Muhammad's own actions, stories which were probably made up over a hundred years after Muhammad's death and shouldn't even be part of Islam?<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Scorn towards despised minorities is a hazardous business. During the days of Nazi terror, cartoons supplied a key weapon of anti-Jewish polemic</i></blockquote>
<br />
This is an awful misrepresentation. As you have just said yourself, the Nazi's propaganda was anti-Jewish, it was not anti-Judaism, and it certainly wasn't a mere mockery of the claims of Judaism itself. The Nazi's didn't mock stories of burning bushes, or bread falling from the sky, they produced material which portrayed <b>Jewish people</b> as sub-human, people to be despised. To compare this to a mockery of the idea that non-Muslims have to abide by blasphemy rules of a belief system they do not believe in is absurd beyond words.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>To laugh at the Prophet, the repository of all that Muslims revere and find precious, to reduce him to the level of the scabrous and comedic, is something very different from “free speech” as usually understood. It is a violent act surely conscious of its capacity to cause distress, ratchet up prejudice and damage social cohesion.</i></blockquote>
<br />
A violent act? If someone is violent towards you then it is easier to understand a violent reaction, and it is clear that this is your intention when labelling it as a violent act. Who was physically injured by this violent act? This is a very poor attempt at excusing violent reprisal! Could you please supply a list of victims, their injuries, and at which hospitals they were treated? To classify those cartoons as violent acts is as erroneous as classifying the ensuing murders as art.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>an atheist activist was convicted for distributing anti-Christian images in the prayer room at Liverpool Airport. The deeply distressed airport chaplain took him to court, and won easily.</i></blockquote>
<br />
Again, I object. The offender mentioned in this case went to a place of worship and distributed his materials, he was pushing the information onto people who did not want it. The problem with his case isn't that he was producing material insulting religious ideas, but that he was being anti-social in distributing this material without permission on private property, it was harassment, it was material that contained images of a sexual nature being distributed in a public place where there are children.<br />
<br />
My second objection is that this story has been misrepresented as a man being prosecuted for distributing "anti-Christian" images, this simply is not the case. According to <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7353643/Philosophy-tutor-in-court-for-leaving-anti-religious-cartoons-in-John-Lennon-airport.html" target="_blank">this news article</a>, which also appeared in The Telegraph, the images consisted of<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Jesus on a cross next to an advert for "No more nails."</li>
<li>Islamic suicide bombers at the gates of heaven being told "Stop, stop, we've run out of virgins"</li>
<li>Two Muslims holding a placard demanding equality for everyone except women and homosexuals.</li>
<li>A drawing of the Pope with a condom on his finger.</li>
<li>A women kneeling in front of a Catholic priest captioned with a crude pun.</li>
<li>An image where sausages were labelled as "The Koran."</li>
</ol>
<div>
<br />
Labelling pork as "The Quran" would be considered a massive offence by many Muslims. From these descriptions it seems these leaflets were more derogatory about Islam than Christianity.<br />
<br />
The crime for which this man was arrested was harassment, and rightly so. I would be equally as willing to condemn anyone for handing out Charlie Hebdo cartoons of Muhammad in a Mosque in order to cause offence, that too would be harassment!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Mr Winters was obviously aware of the details of this case, so why pretend it was a purely anti-Christian act that resulted in the successful prosecution of the perpetrator? His purpose was simply to make it look as though it is an example of double standards when it comes to mocking Islam. It is an attempt at making the Muslim community victims of injustice. Whether this injustice actually exists or not I do not know, but the cited case is a clear example of faking such injustice.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>It is for the many Muslims who now populate the Inns of Court to discover whether these legal precepts can in practice be used to protect non-Christians from abuse. A series of complex cases would trigger an overdue national and perhaps Europe-wide discussion on the right to protection from hate speech. Not all the lawsuits would succeed, but the community would have shown that it is determined to enjoy the protection of our country’s laws.</i></blockquote>
<br />
<div>
Go ahead, that is what the courts are for! If you don't like the ruling then that is what appeals are for! These laws that apply to any case on the mockery of Christianity also apply to the mockery Islam, these laws that apply to dehumanisation of Christians also apply to the dehumanisation of Muslims.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
You should perhaps be careful what you wish for. The freedom of speech laws which permit people to mock your beliefs are the exact same ones which allow Muslims to call for the establishment of an Islamic system of government in the UK, to say <a href="http://quranx.com/7.179?allTranslations=y" target="_blank">non-believers are worse than cattle</a>, and that we are <a href="http://quranx.com/29.49?allTranslations=y" target="_blank">people of no intelligence</a>. British law does not protect people from hurt feelings, nor should it. If it did then religious books such as The Quran and The Old Testament, which deride homosexuals and unbelievers would be amongst the first to be censored.</div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-25923470517316551802015-01-09T06:23:00.001-08:002017-05-27T13:28:20.506-07:00Blasphemy and the BBC<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2015/01/blasphemy-and-the-bbc/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
Recently I read <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30714702" target="_blank">this excellent article</a> on the BBC news website by the historian <a href="http://www.tom-holland.org/" target="_blank">Tom Holland</a>. Once again the BBC have not published examples of the cartoons that caused the offence. Personally I think it is important to show these kinds of images so that people can get a fuller idea of what exactly what was perceived as so offensive that it resulted in the murder of twelve people, It is important that people see these images so they can be more appropriately outraged at the horrendous reaction to such irrelevant cartoon pictures.<br />
<br />
The BBC seem to have a policy of not showing images that depict the Islamic prophet Muhammad, but why? This got me thinking, are the BBC as equally sensitive about not displaying images that upset people of other religions?<br />
<br />
The first thing that sprung to mind was the Jeremy Paxman interview with the <a href="http://www.jesusandmo.net/" target="_blank">Jesus and Mo</a> author. During this interview the author was shown drawing a typical cell from one of his cartoons. The BBC showed the footage only as far as him drawing Jesus, and then cut before he started to draw Muhammad <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JETbhvU2BYw&t=3m25s" target="_blank">(3 min 25 secs)</a>. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FUUPQSXr4NI/VK_lS2SonzI/AAAAAAAAAXE/XxXEgUz5N8A/s1600/JesusAndMo.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-FUUPQSXr4NI/VK_lS2SonzI/AAAAAAAAAXE/XxXEgUz5N8A/s1600/JesusAndMo.png"></a></div>
<br />
<br />
A quick browse through the BBC news website revealed that the level of "respect" shown for the feelings of Muslim's is higher than that of people of other beliefs. I have deliberately chosen a few examples not just of images the BBC have shown, but specifically ones where the story is about how people were offended by those images for religious reasons.<br />
<br />
<br />
<img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4b9UN1UOTEs/VK_lhfr1XdI/AAAAAAAAAXM/ibX0IE4y0Es/s1600/LastSupper.jpg" style="float: left; margin: 8px;">
The first article is about a modified depiction of Da Vinci's painting of The Last Supper. I am not sure how it was deemed offensive but this poster, advertising a clothing brand, was ruled as "a gratuitous and aggressive act of intrusion on people's innermost beliefs" by a judge in Milan and the poster was banned. The BBC wanted us to see the offensive material so we could judge for ourselves whether or not this was an overreaction. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4337031.stm" target="_blank">Article here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="clear: both; margin: 2em;">
<img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ndUIXprcWZQ/VK_mZ514NAI/AAAAAAAAAXU/Fn7-A3K3mi0/s1600/IceCream.png" style="float: right; margin: 8px;">
The second article contains not one but two prints of posters that received complaints on the grounds of religious offence. The campaign seems to have centred around the idea of selling ice cream by promoting indulgence in carnal pleasures. The first image depicts a pregnant nun, and the second depicts two priests in a homoerotic pose clearly about to passionately kiss each other. Again it seems it was important for the readers to get an idea of the content of the posters that had raised complaints. <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19048807" target="_blank">Article here</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="clear: both; margin: 1em;">
<img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KphtHc8_TQI/VK_nqQxaKdI/AAAAAAAAAXg/L_72ncOs5cg/s1600/JesusBrazil.png" style="float: left; margin: 8px;">
The third article is about how a news paper advert for a betting firm was banned by the Advertising Standards Authority who said it was "likely to cause serious or widespread offence". Even though this image was banned from appearing in newspapers (mainly for breaching advertising standard on associating gambling and sex) the BBC thought it was necessary to show an image of Jesus with a bottle in one hand and a bikini clad Brazilian woman in the other. <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28662573" target="_blank">Article here</a>.<br />
<br />
<div style="clear: both; margin: 1em;">
<br />
<br />
<img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QP5tC06KXhc/VK_oMgHt75I/AAAAAAAAAXo/TlwS-F_Y_OU/s1600/PoorJoseph.png" style="float: right; margin: 8px;"><br />
The final article is a story about how a billboard poster in New Zealand was causing offence to Christians. It depicted a downcast Joseph in bed with Mary accompanied by the caption "Poor Joseph. God was a hard act to follow". The offence here presumably is that God's impregnation of the Virgin Mary (Miriam in Islam) was an act that physically pleasured Mary, or in other words, God gave her one and it was the best ever. <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8417963.stm" target="_blank">Article here</a>.<br />
<br />
Joseph and Mary are revered in Islam. So why is it that depicting Muhammad is seen as such a taboo when the portrayal and mockery of other Islamic figures (and even God himself) is okay? Muslims consider Allah to be the god of the Torah and the Bible, so why is it okay to say "God was a hard act to follow" but not "Allah was a hard act to follow"?<br /><i>**Update: I mistakenly listed Joseph as a prophet.</i><br />
<br />
Is seems it is okay for the BBC to show material mocking "God", but wouldn't consider showing material mocking Allah. It's okay to show material mocking Jesus but not Muhammad, even when it is on the same piece of paper. Why is this? <br />
<br />
The answer lies not in the perceived insult of people (and God himself) revered by Islam, but in linking the identities of the mocked specifically to Islam. It's okay to mock Joseph/Jesus/God as long as you aren't mocking them by their Islamic specific names Yusuf/Isa/Allah. Mocking the Islamic terminology is seen as a threat to the institute of Islam, something empires simply cannot afford to tolerate in case it weakens its control over the masses. This is why Muslims wishing to install Islam as a world political system (read "Empire") try to whip up such a frenzy of offence amongst the world's Muslim population whenever Muhammad is mocked in a cartoon.<br />
<br />
The BBC should be neutral when it comes to reproducing materials, either show offending material or don't. If an image will offend people then it is quite noble of the BBC not to reproduce it, but to avoid reproducing images that are a vitally important part of the story is simply ridiculous. <br />
<br />
The sad thing is that the BBC has been reproducing offensive images of Islamic prophets for years. They are not avoiding offence, they are (possibly inadvertently) only avoiding shaking the foundations of an Islamic empire. How many other states are afforded the same privilege?</div>
</div>
</div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-88712613048221683372014-07-23T06:15:00.002-07:002014-07-23T06:17:10.006-07:00Israeli sniper killing wounded civilianI was on Twitter this morning and saw a link to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBakqLUBWP0" target="_blank">this video</a> reporting to show an Palestinian civilian being killed by an Israeli sniper as he lay injured on the floor.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I watched it through a few times, trying to understand exactly what was happening. I found some parts difficult to understand so I decided to download the video. By capturing screen shots and overlaying them in Photoshop I was satisfied that there were no continuity errors or anything like that in the scenery. I watched the video frame by frame and there is at least one continuity error, very likely caused by the editing, and what seems to be an inaccuracy in the description.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The video is running at 25 frames per second. The time format shown is A:BB:CC where A = Minutes, BB = Seconds, and CC is a frame number from 0 to 24 denoting which of the 25 frames is being displayed at the current Minute/Second. Each frame lasts 1/25th of a second, which is 40 milliseconds.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NlaRjzlokjI/U8-QjpKt2XI/AAAAAAAAATw/foBOiIsCzLI/s1600/01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NlaRjzlokjI/U8-QjpKt2XI/AAAAAAAAATw/foBOiIsCzLI/s1600/01.png" height="218" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
At 0:24:09 we see the future victim in the green t-shirt for the first time, he is helping to carry a man on a stretcher. If you look closely you can see the coloured stripes at the hem of his t-shirt's sleeves.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4D1WkWgIX_A/U8-Rb7JMQEI/AAAAAAAAAT4/0_ks-NzACNU/s1600/02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-4D1WkWgIX_A/U8-Rb7JMQEI/AAAAAAAAAT4/0_ks-NzACNU/s1600/02.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
0:27:08 The man on the stretcher appears to have a nasty injury to his lower right leg.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qiDq7fF3DG8/U8-SgamDYuI/AAAAAAAAAUA/oN1HTuVeCWg/s1600/03.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qiDq7fF3DG8/U8-SgamDYuI/AAAAAAAAAUA/oN1HTuVeCWg/s1600/03.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
0:36:20 The victim is seen ahead of the cameraman, calling out to someone he is searching for. In the foreground we see a man with a white bandanna on, the other male aid worker has a dark sleeved top on beneath his high visibility jacket.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zzCYeVeoA10/U8-TGYOSCLI/AAAAAAAAAUI/46yIr6rSj5g/s1600/04.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zzCYeVeoA10/U8-TGYOSCLI/AAAAAAAAAUI/46yIr6rSj5g/s1600/04.png" height="183" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div>
0:48:19 The victim is seen in the distance, leading the way up the street over the rubble.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
00:59:18 The sound of a shot is heard, the cameraman reacts audibly at 1:00:03, which is 10 frames and therefore 0.4 seconds. Certainly nothing unusual about that.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HsKOkWTJhd4/U8-X9H-hkNI/AAAAAAAAAUY/BIxnEmLeTxY/s1600/05.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HsKOkWTJhd4/U8-X9H-hkNI/AAAAAAAAAUY/BIxnEmLeTxY/s1600/05.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
1:49:19 The aid workers are now quite some distance away, it is possible to make out the white bandanna of one of the workers and the dark sleeved top of the other.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W78xusFYqhg/U8-aUFtjsoI/AAAAAAAAAUk/iBRICCjUs7E/s1600/06.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-W78xusFYqhg/U8-aUFtjsoI/AAAAAAAAAUk/iBRICCjUs7E/s1600/06.png" height="232" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
2:13:01 The video footage is continuous between 1:49:19 (above) and this point in time. The cameraman does not move between those two points so we know how far away the aid workers are, it also shows the victim is within an arm's reach of the cameraman.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7WhVXPe6yl4/U8-cUVQ5qjI/AAAAAAAAAUw/RKDtzPVXyv0/s1600/07.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7WhVXPe6yl4/U8-cUVQ5qjI/AAAAAAAAAUw/RKDtzPVXyv0/s1600/07.png" height="234" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
2:22:17 Two shots are heard. Still the cameraman has not moved along the road. At 2:23:07 The cameraman reacts to the shots, this time 0.6 seconds so again within reason.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NA7G7Gp5jpg/U8-dl69MhCI/AAAAAAAAAU8/-m6pwMIfNN8/s1600/08.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-NA7G7Gp5jpg/U8-dl69MhCI/AAAAAAAAAU8/-m6pwMIfNN8/s1600/08.png" height="232" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div>
2:23:19 Confusion ensues and the camera's view is covered by close contact with the victim, movement of the phone filming the sky for a split second, and eventually what looks like flesh (pictured).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
2:24:16 The image is completely white.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qt0FiNNizag/U8-gJXpynOI/AAAAAAAAAVQ/tOlQ6XZ65Cw/s1600/09.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qt0FiNNizag/U8-gJXpynOI/AAAAAAAAAVQ/tOlQ6XZ65Cw/s1600/09.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
2:24:17 The next frame is as displayed above. The green arrow is indicating the position of a shadow from the victim's leg. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HV5pfXipLgk/U8-g1b5LA2I/AAAAAAAAAVY/3ziNzm4pTBw/s1600/10.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HV5pfXipLgk/U8-g1b5LA2I/AAAAAAAAAVY/3ziNzm4pTBw/s1600/10.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
2:25:10 The victim is being asked "Can you move?" - The victim is now on the floor at least 2 metres away from the cameraman. At this point we cannot tell exactly where the victim is, so we don't know if the cameraman has run away from the victim, or if the video has been edited at 2:24:16 and the victim is in a different place.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KU8ztDFgFGU/U8-hwufkwkI/AAAAAAAAAVk/BpKtdNEpeZU/s1600/11.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KU8ztDFgFGU/U8-hwufkwkI/AAAAAAAAAVk/BpKtdNEpeZU/s1600/11.png" height="232" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
2:30:03 The victim can now be clearly seen to be much closer to the aid workers. He is lying down and appears to be sending a text on his mobile phone.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PkoxOquRdzk/U8-mK2trMtI/AAAAAAAAAVw/QHu5AulRHBI/s1600/12.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PkoxOquRdzk/U8-mK2trMtI/AAAAAAAAAVw/QHu5AulRHBI/s1600/12.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I have superimposed the frame of the victim on the ground over the image from 1:49:19. Matching up three distinctive items in the scenery I have placed a copy of the victim on the original photo to illustrate where he is.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LZXl-aMuyiA/U8-rG3sn25I/AAAAAAAAAWA/Hs2rbukt-Gk/s1600/13.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LZXl-aMuyiA/U8-rG3sn25I/AAAAAAAAAWA/Hs2rbukt-Gk/s1600/13.png" height="233" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
2:33:20 The victim is seen raising his left arm to show an injury to his hand/wrist.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<h3 style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Summary</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
In the 1:49:19 the arrangement of the people is as follows</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Aid workers -> Lady -> Camera man -> Victim</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The same arrangement appears at 2:13:01 where the victim was the furthest along the street away from the aid workers.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
At 2:22:17 The two shots are heard. The arrangement is still the same, with the victim being the furthest of the three away from the aid workers.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
0.96 seconds later, at 2:24:16, the camera cuts. The next image we see is the one at 2:24:17. At this point in time we see the arrangement is now Aid workers -> Victim -> Camera man -> Lady. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The victim is approximately 2 metres closer to the aid workers than the cameraman is. In addition to this he is lying down and approximately 10 metres closer to the aid workers than he was before. This, I think, shows conclusively that there is an edit at this point.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Question set 1</h3>
<div>
<ol>
<li>How much time is missing from the footage, and what happened during that time?</li>
<li>How did the victim move the approximate 10 metres closer to the aid workers?</li>
<li>Why is the victim lying on the floor seemingly unable to move if the gunshot injured his hand or wrist?</li>
<li>Did he run and fall during the missing footage, could he have fallen and twisted his ankle + cut his left wrist on the rocks?</li>
<li>Was he carried by the cameraman and lady and then dropped for some reason? If so, why would they carry him for an injured hand/wrist?</li>
</ol>
<h3>
Question 2</h3>
<div>
According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_equipment_of_Israel" target="_blank">this Wiki page</a> the Israeli army uses the following rifles</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Galil" target="_blank">IMI Galil assault rifle</a><br />Muzzle velocity 800 m/s</li>
<li><span id="goog_691940384"></span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Tavor_TAR-21" target="_blank">IMI Tavor assault rifle</a><br />Muzzle velocity 870 m/s</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M89SR" target="_blank">M89SR sniper rifle</a><br />Muzzle velocity 855 m/s</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezi_SM-1" target="_blank">M1 Carbine</a><br />Muzzle velocity 607 m/s</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div>
The speed of sound at sea level is 340 m/s, to travel faster than this the elevation of the scene would have to be below sea level or be very cold. This means that the rifle with the lowest muzzle velocity fires bullets at 1.79 times the speed of sound.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The first gun shot we hear after the victim is on the ground is at 2:37:11. The cameraman reacts to the sound 160 milliseconds later at 2:37:15 and the last we see the victim upright is 1 second after the gunshot at 2:37:18. A high velocity rifle shooting someone would cause a visual impact, especially with the bullet entering a body with a thin t-shirt on, yet we do not see one.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Scenario 1: The victim is closer to the cameraman than the shooter.<br />In this scenario the bullet travelling at nearly 1.8 times the speed of sound would reach the victim before the sound reached the cameraman.</li>
<li>Scenario 2: The shooter is closer to the cameraman that to the victim.<br />In this case the bullet would have less time to outright the sound of the shot. The scenario in which the bullet and sound are as close together is at the end of the gun at the point of firing. Even if the shooter was standing next to the cameraman we would expect the bullet (travelling at a minimum of 607 m/s) to have travelled the few metres from cameraman to victim in less than 0.16 seconds (assuming a 10 metre distance from cameraman to victim), so we should have seen an impact wound well within the 1 second of video footage we have of the victim from the point of the gunshot. Placing the shooter further away only gives more time for bullet impact before the sound is heard.</li>
</ul>
<div>
I can only conclude from this that the 2nd shot did not hit the victim, how is that incorrect?</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Question 3</h3>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ptwba6FZ08E/U8-yvxdwMNI/AAAAAAAAAWY/thvKLPyl8TA/s1600/14.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ptwba6FZ08E/U8-yvxdwMNI/AAAAAAAAAWY/thvKLPyl8TA/s1600/14.png" height="232" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
At 2:54:11 the third shot is heard. The shot misses the victim and hits a rock behind him, as seen in the picture by the dust rising from the shot.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The visual effects of the bullet are seen at the same time as the shot is heard, indicating the shooter is very close, corroborating the claim above that we should have seen an impact wound from the 2nd gunshot <b>if </b>the victim had been hit. Even assuming this is a different shooter the point in Question 2 still stands by its own merits.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The question that arises here is, why do the publishers of the video claim the victim was shot 3 times when the final shot clearly misses?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h3>
Conclusion</h3>
<div>
The worst case scenario I can see here is the following:</div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>A shot was fired which either hit the victim somewhere in the arm/hand or missed him.</li>
<li>There was no need to carry him, so he ran towards the aid workers.</li>
<li>Either he was shot for a 2nd time while the camera was not filming, or he tripped and fell. It is also possible that at this point he sustained the injury to his wrist, along with one to another part of his body which prevented him from getting up.</li>
<li>Another shot was fired at him in an attempt to kill him, and missed.</li>
<li>A 3rd and final shot was fired at him, which also missed.</li>
</ol>
<div>
It is clear that someone (I will assume an Israeli) was trying to kill a wounded non-combatant as he lay on the floor. This alone is disgusting, I hope it is not the case that this event has not been misrepresented (3 hits + death) as a propaganda tool. At the same time I sincerely hope the victim in his video is alive and well.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
Perhaps there are some points I am missing? In which case I would certainly like to read them so that I can understand the events more clearly. It is for this reason I would like to ask <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzFso4CAgqfYCD6giOWrnlw" target="_blank">ISM Palestine</a> to release the full unedited video so that the events occurring in the gaps can be understood properly.</div>
<div>
<br />
I am not claiming some kind of conspiracy here, I am just struggling to reach a conclusive decision of what <b>exactly </b>happened (the intentions I think were clear).</div>
</div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-85260510993345568972014-07-08T03:30:00.003-07:002017-05-27T13:27:08.272-07:00Apostasy in Islam<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/07/apostasy-in-islam/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
Here are my notes on apostasy from my <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--GMACVMa-8" target="_blank">recent discussion</a> with <a href="http://abdullahalandalusi.com/" target="_blank">Abdullah al-Andalusi</a><br />
<br />
<h2>
Quran verses</h2>
<a href="http://quranx.com/4.89" target="_blank">Q4.89</a> They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them<br />
<a href="http://quranx.com/Q4.90">Q4.90</a> Except those who seek refuge with a people between whom and you there is a covenant, or (those who) come unto you because their hearts forbid them to make war on you or make war on their own folk<br />
<br />
<a href="http://quranx.com/tafsir/maududi/4.90?hl=sanctity+of+the+blood" target="_blank">*Maududi says</a> that the protection of going to a non-war country was due to the sanctity of the treaty and not the sanctity of blood<br />
<br />
<h2>
Books on jurisprudence</h2>
========================================================<br />
<b>School: Hanbali</b><br />
<b>Title: Al Umda fi al Fiqh</b><br />
<b>Author: Imam Muwaffaq Ibn Qudama (A.H. 541-620)</b><br />
========================================================<br />
<b>Definition</b><br />
Page 309: If someone denies Allah's existence, or attributes to Him a partner, or a consort, or a son, or if he accuses Allah of telling lies, or blasphemes him, or if he calls His Messenger a liar, or insults him, or if he denies a Prophet, or denies the Book of Allah or anything from it, or denies one of the basic pillars of Islam, or if he attributes lawfulness to something declared unlawful by the consensus of legal opinion, he is guilty of apostasy - unless he is one of those who are unaware of the religious duties and prohibitions, in which case he must be informed thereof, and if he does not accept, he is guilty of unbelief.<br />
<br />
<b>Punishment</b><br />
Page 309: If someone apostatises from Islam, whether it be a man or a woman, the penalty of death must be enforced, because of the saying of Allah's Apostle<br />
"If someone changes his religion, you must kill him"<br />
The apostate should not be killed until he has been invited three times to repent. If he repents [he is spared], but if not, he is killed by the sword.<br />
<br />
<b>=================</b><br />
<b>School: Shafi</b><br />
<b>Title: Minhaj at talibin</b><br />
<b>Author: Nawawi</b><br />
<b>=================</b><br />
<b>Definition</b><br />
Page 436: the abjuration of Islam either mentally or by words, or by acts incompatible with faith. As to oral abjuration it matters little whether the words are said in joke or through a sprit of contradiction or in good faith. Before such words can be considered as a sign of apostasy they must contain a precise declaration<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>That one does not believe in the existence of the Creator, or of his Apostles; or</li>
<li>That Muhammad, or one of the other apostles, is an impostor; or</li>
<li>That one considers lawful what is strictly forbidden by the ijmaa; or</li>
<li>The one considered to be forbidden what is lawful according to the ijmaa</li>
<li>That one is not obliged to follow the precepts of the ijmaa, as well positive as negative; or</li>
<li>That one intends shortly to change one's religion; or that one has doubts upon the subject of the truth of Islam etc.</li>
</ol>
<br />
Page 436: As to acts, these are not considered to be incompatible with faith, unless they show a clear indication of a mockery or denial of religion. Throwing the Quran upon a muck heap, prostrating oneself before an idol, or worshipping the sun.<br />
<br />
Page 69: A sane adult Moslem who refuses to pray and dénies the obligation is an apostate and punishable as such ; even if he has merely neglected prayer through laziness, without denying its obligation, he is none the less punishable with death.<br />
<br />
Page 69: Capital punishment is liable to be incurred by the omission of even one single prescribed prayer, the moment its time is passed, if done designedly and without ofïering any excuse. One should begin by exhorting the culprit to repentance, and if this be unavailing strike him upon the neck. Some authorities prefer that he should be pricked with a sharp instrument until he either prays or dies.<br />
<br />
Page 241: By the fact of being born of Moslem parents, even though only one of them may bave been Moslem at the moment of the child's conception. If such a child, after attaining majority becomes an infidel, he must be regarded and punished as an apostate<br />
<br />
<b>Punishment</b><br />
Page 437: An attempt should be made to induce the apostate to return from his or her errors; though, according to one authority, this is only a commendable proceeding. The exhortation should take place immediately, or, according to one jurist, in the first three days; and if it is of no effect, the guilty man or woman should be put to death.<br />
<br />
Page 523: Where, after execution of a death penalty, either under the law of talion, or for apostasy, or even by stoning or whipping, the witnesses déclare that they hâve made a false declaration, intentionally, against the executed person, they are punishable either with death under the law of talion, or with payment of the price of blood on the higher scale<br />
<br />
================================<br />
<b>School: Shafi</b><br />
<b>Title: Reliance of the traveller</b><br />
<b>Author: Shihabuddin Abu al-'Abbas Ahmad ibn an-Naqib al-Misri (AH 702-769 / AD 1302–1367)</b><br />
================================<br />
<b>Definition</b><br />
Page 596: #08.7 to prostrate to an idol whether sarcastically, out of mere contrariness, or in actual conviction, like .that of someone who believes the Creator to be something that has originated in time. Like idols in this respect are the sun or moon, and like prostration is bowing to other than Allah, if one intends reverence towards it like the reverence due to Allah<br />
<br />
Page 597: #08.7 to speak words that imply unbelief such as "Allah is the third of three":' or "I am Allah"unless one's tongue has run away with one. or one is quoting another<br />
<br />
#08.7 to revile Allah or His messenger<br />
<br />
#08.7 to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him<br />
<br />
#08.7 to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;<br />
<br />
<b>Punishment</b><br />
Page 595: #08.1 When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.<br />
<br />
#08.2 In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representative) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.<br />
<br />
Page 596: #08.3 If he is a freeman. no one besides the caliph or his representative may kill him. If someone else kills him, the killer is disciplined for arrogating the caliph's prerogative and encroaching upon his rights, as this is one of his duties.<br />
<br />
#08.4 There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die).<br />
<br />
#08.5 If he apostatizes from Islam and returns several times, it (i.e. his return to Islam, which occurs when he states the two Testifications of Faith (def: 08.7(12))) is accepted from him. though he is disciplined (017).<br />
<br />
#08.7 to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it;<br />
<br />
#08.7 to mockingly say, "I don't know what faith is":<br />
<br />
#08.7 to reply to someone who says, "There is no power or strength save through Allah": "Your saying 'There's no power or strength, etc.' won't save you from hunger";<br />
<br />
Page 598: #08.7 to describe a Muslim or someone who wants to become a Muslim in terms of unbelief (kufr);<br />
<br />
============================================<br />
<b>School: Hanifa</b><br />
<b>Title: Shaybani's Siyar (The Islamic law of nations)</b><br />
<b>Author: Muhammad Shaybani (Imam Abu Hanifa's student)</b><br />
============================================<br />
#985 I asked: If a Muslim apostatizes (irtadda) from Islam, what do you think would be the ruling regarding him?<br />
#986 He replied: Islam would be offered to him; he has either to accept it or be killed at once, unless he asked for deferment. This would be given to him and its duration would be 3 days.<br />
#987 I asked: Has any narrative come to your knowledge about this matter?<br />
#988 He replied: Yes, it has been related to us from the Prophet to this effect, as well as [narratives] from [The caliph] Abi b. Abi Taalib, AbdAllah b. Mas'ud, and Mu'adh b. Jabal. Thus this ruling is based on the Sunna.<br />
<br />
#1033 I asked: Would you think that the apostate's slaughtered animal would be lawful to eat<br />
#1034 He replied: No<br />
#1035 I asked: Even if he had become a Christian?<br />
#1036 He replied: Even if he had [apostatized to Christianity], because he would not enjoy the status of a Jew or a Christian. Do you think that he would be permitted to remain in the religion [he had adpoted]? He would have to become a Muslim or else be executed.<br />
<br />
#1053 I asked: If a man has apostatized from Islam and another [man] cut off his hand or destroyed, intentionally or unintentionally, his eye or committed against him any other tort, intentionally or unintentially, would this [other] man be held liable for anything?<br />
#1054 He replied: No<br />
#1055 I asked: Why?<br />
#1056 He replied: Since his blood is lawful to shed nobody would be liable for any tort against him, whether cutting off his hand or foot or committing a tort or injury against him.<br />
#1057 I asked: Would [the ruling] be the same if he accepts Islam and then dies of the wound?<br />
#1058 He replied: The person who has committed [the said tort] would not be liable for anything.<br />
<br />
#1069 I asked: If a woman apostatized from Islam, what would be the ruling regarding her?<br />
#1070 He replied: Abu Hanifa held that she would not be executed, but imprisoned indefinitely until she returns to Islam.<br />
#1130 + However, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad [b. al-Hasan] held that the apostate woman would be liable to execution unless she returns to Islam. But Abu Hanifa held that she would be in the same category as a very old man.<br />
<br />
#1159 I asked: If a tort was committed against [the slave woman] in apostasy, would the offender be held liable for anything?<br />
#1160 He replied: No<br />
#1161 I asekd: Why, if you do not approve of the execution of women?<br />
#1162 He replied: Since some of the jurists hold that apostate women should be executed, I hold that a tort committed against them would not render [the offender] liable [for paying compensation]<br />
<br />
#1330 I asked: If a group [of Muslims] apostatized from Islam and were attacked by [other] Muslims without [first] having been invited to adopt Islam, do you think that those [who attacked] would be liable for anything?<br />
#1331 He replied: No<br />
#1332 I asked: Why? According to Sunna they should be invited [to accept Islam] before being fought.<br />
#1333 He replied: Even so, they would not be liable for anything.<br />
#1334 I asked: Would the same be true if a single man apostatized from Islam and was killed by another before was invited [to return] to Islam?<br />
#1335 He replied: Yes<br />
#1341 + Men [who apostatize] would be liable to be executed, regardless whether they were slaves or free.<br />
<br />
#1344 I asked: If a lad apostatized from Islam before he reached puberty, do you think that he would be executed?<br />
#1345 He replied: No<br />
#1346 I asked: Would the same hold true if he had come of age while still an unbeliever?<br />
#1347 He replied: I would order his imprisonment rather than execution, because he had never professed Islam after he had come of age.<br />
<br />
===============================<br />
<b>School: Hanafi</b><br />
<b>Title: Kitab al-athar of Imam Abu Hanifah</b><br />
<b>Author: Hanifah Abu Imam</b><br />
===============================<br />
#591 Women are not to be killed when they renege on Islam but they are compelled to return to it.<br />
+We detail her in prison until she returns in tawbah or dies.<br />
<br />
======================================<br />
<b>School: Maliki</b><br />
<b>Title: The Risala of 'Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani</b><br />
<b>Author: 'Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd</b><br />
======================================<br />
1.8d No Muslim who commits a wrong action becomes an unbeliever as long as he believes. The same applies to someone who commits acts of disobedience while he nevertheless believes that the Shari'a forbids them. If someone does something such shows that he lacks belief, like throwing a copy of the Qur'an into the rubbish, then he is an apostate<br />
<br />
37.19 An apostate is also killed unless he repents. He is allowed three days grace; if he fails to utilise the chance to repent, the execution takes place. This same also applies to women apostates.<br />
+If a Muslim should abandon the performance of prayer because he disputes its being obligatory, then such a person shall be treated as an apostate - he should be given three days within which to repent. If the three days lapse without his repenting, he is then executed<br />
<br />
40.18 God, Glorified be He, has prohibited the shedding of the blood of Muslims; so also has he prohibited assault on their property except for a lawful cause. It is not lawful to shed the blood of a Muslim except when he commits apostasy, or when he commits adultery, or when he kills a person and this is not in retaliation, or when he becomes an outlaw, or when he renounces the faith.<br />
<br />
<br />
==============================================<br />
<b>Title: The punishment of the apostate according to Islamic law</b><br />
<b>Author: Maududi</b><br />
==============================================<br />
To everyone acquainted with Islamic law it is no secret that according to Islam the punishment for a Muslim who turns to kufr (infidelity, blasphemy) is execution. Doubt about this matter first arose among Muslims during the final portion of the nineteenth century as a result of speculation. Otherwise, for the full twelve centuries prior to that time the total Muslim community remained unanimous about it. The whole of our religious literature clearly testifies that ambiguity about the matter of the apostate's execution never existed among Muslims. The expositions of the Prophet, the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (Khulafa'-i Rashidun), the great Companions (Sahaba) of the Prophet, their Followers (Tabi'un), the leaders among the mujtahids and, following them, the doctors of the shari'ah of every century are available on record. All these collectively will assure you that from the time of the Prophet to the present day one injunction only has been continuously and uninterruptedly operative and that no room whatever remains to suggest that perhaps the punishment of the apostate is not execution.<br />
<br />
<br />
<h2>
Hadiths</h2>
<i>* Kill apostates with death, but not death by fire.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Some people apostatized after accepting Islam, and 'Ali burned them with fire. Ibn 'Abbas said: 'If it had been me, I would not have burned them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'No one should be punished with the punishment of Allah.' If it had been me, I would have killed them; the Messenger of Allah [SAW] said: 'Whoever changes his religion, kill him.'" <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-95/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-95</a></blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
<br />
<i>* An apostate can be offered the chance to change their mind first.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A man who turned back from Islam was brought to Abu Musa. He invited him to repent for twenty days or about so. Muadh then came and invited him (to embrace Islam) but he refused. So he was beheaded. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/Book-40/Hadith-6/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/Book-40/Hadith-6</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* A man converted to Islam and then became a Jew.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mu’adh bin Jabal (RAA) narrated - concerning a man who embraced Islam and then turned to Judaism (i.e. apostated), ‘I shall not sit down until he is killed. That is the Command of Allah and His Messenger, and he gave an order that he must be killed and so he was.’ Agreed upon. In a version by Abu Dawud, ‘He was given a chance to repent and retrun to Islam but he refused.’ <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/Book-9/Hadith-1213/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/In-Book/Book-9/Hadith-1213</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* Apostasy is one of the three reasons one is permitted to kill a Muslim.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/Book-87/Hadith-17/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-87/Hadith-17</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* Caliph Uthman confirms the three "crimes" that warrant killing a Muslim.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We were with 'Uthman when he was under siege and we could hear what was said from Al-Balat. 'Uthman came in one day, then he came out, and said: 'They are threatening to kill me.' We said: 'Allah will suffice you against them.' He said: 'Why would they kill me? I heard the Messenger of Allah [SAW] say: It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim except in one of three cases: A man who reverts to Kufr after becoming Muslim, or commits adultery after being married, or one who kills a soul unlawfully. By Allah, I did not commit adultery during Jahiliyyah or in Islam, I never wished to follow any other religion since Allah guided me, and I have never killed anyone, so why do they want to kill me?'" <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-54/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/In-Book/Book-37/Hadith-54</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* The three "crimes" again.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The blood of a Muslim who testifies that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed lawfully, except in three cases: a married person who committed adultery, in Qisas (retaliation) for murder (life for life) and the apostate from Islam who abandons the Muslim Jama’ah (community). <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/Book-9/Hadith-1169/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/In-Book/Book-9/Hadith-1169</a></blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
<i>* The three "crimes" again.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
'It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim except in three cases: A man who commits adultery after having married; or one who kills intentionally, in which case he deserves retaliation; or one who apostatizes after having become Muslim, in which case he deserves to be killed.' <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-92/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-92</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* The Jewish man killed for apostasy was told to return to Islam before being killed.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mu’adh bin Jabal (RAA) narrated - concerning a man who embraced Islam and then turned to Judaism (i.e. apostated), ‘I shall not sit down until he is killed. That is the Command of Allah and His Messenger, and he gave an order that he must be killed and so he was.’ Agreed upon. In a version by Abu Dawud, ‘He was given a chance to repent and retrun to Islam but he refused.’ <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/Book-9/Hadith-1213/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Maram/In-Book/Book-9/Hadith-1213</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* The three "crimes" again.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The blood of a Muslim man is not lawful, except for one of three (cases):Illegitimate sexual relations after Ihsan (having been married), or apostasy after Islam, or taking a life without right, for which he is killed. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Tirmidhi/In-Book/Book-33/Hadith-1/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Tirmidhi/In-Book/Book-33/Hadith-1</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* A Jewish man chained up for apostatising, while awaiting his own murder.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Once Mu`adh paid a visit to Abu Musa and saw a chained man. Mu`adh asked, "What is this?" Abu Musa said, "(He was) a Jew who embraced Islam and has now turned apostate." Mu`adh said, "I will surely chop off his neck!" <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/Book-64/Hadith-372/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-64/Hadith-372</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* A Muslim refuses to sit until an apostate is killed, as Muhammad had ruled.</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu`adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu`adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu`adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/Book-93/Hadith-21/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-93/Hadith-21</a></blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<b>Only apostates who have fought against Allah and His Apostle?</b><br />
<br />
<i>* Suggests apostates <b>MUST HAVE FOUGHT</b> in war</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
By Allah, Allah's Messenger never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate. <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/Book-87/Hadith-38/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Bukhari/In-Book/Book-87/Hadith-38</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* Questions "must have fought" because the camel theives were described as "fought against Allah and His Apostle" for murder and theft</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(People who killed the herdsman) - Abu Qilabah said: They were people who had stolen, killed, apostatized after their faith *and fought against Allah and his Apostle* <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/DarusSalam/Hadith-4364">http://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/DarusSalam/Hadith-4364</a></blockquote>
<br />
<i>* The camel thieves were killed for kufr, not sin</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Then they killed their herdsmen and drove off the camels. The Prophet of Allah sent (men) after them and they were brought back, then he had their hands and feet cut off, and their eyes were branded." The Commander of the Believers, 'Abdul-Malik, said to Anas, when he was narrating this Hadith: "Was that (punishment) for Kufr or for sin?" He said: "For Kufr." <a href="http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/Book-37/Hadith-70/">http://quranx.com/Hadith/Nasai/In-Book/Book-37/Hadith-70</a></blockquote>
<br />
<br />
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-80390597132513839792014-06-26T14:36:00.001-07:002017-05-27T13:26:22.704-07:00Mormon visits: Episode 8 - The end<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-8/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<div class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-7.html">Read 7th visit</a></div>
<br />
Text messages since our last meeting<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Nice chatting with you yesterday!<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: I have just sent a copy of one of your images to an Egyptologist named Joann Fletcher, who works in the archaeology department at the university of York. Do you remember you said you would be willing to consider the possibility that the Book of Mormon was invented by Joseph Smith? What do you think the implications might be if his translations turn out to be wrong?<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Are you getting these messages? I think we need to talk. Can you come around tomorrow?<br />
<div>
<br />
<b>Them</b>: We can come tonight.<br />
<br />
They turned up looking very dejected. I greeted them and invited them in, they declined, saying that they don't really have very long. "This isn't a five minute thing," I told them, "do you think you can come back another day?"<br />
<br />
They looked at each other awkwardly, then French guy said "That's the thing. You see, we've been talking about this and we think we shouldn't come to visit you any more." I was quite taken back by this, not because I wasn't expecting it but because I wasn't expecting it to be the first thing they said. I don't really recall what happened next. I do remember that I told them I had received a reply from the Egyptologist I had written to, and went to get it.<br />
<br />
I handed them a copy each. It was the image that Smith drew and then the email contents. I had asked Joann to select A/B answers to indicate which of the two descriptions (if any) were most accurate. One would be the Smith explanation, and the other was the scholarly explanation. I even randomly shuffled them between A and B. French guy held his and just moved his hand to his side as if he wasn't even holding it, USA guy folded it in half, and then made the crease very precise using his nails, in a way that showed me he was folding it with deliberation. "We are not going to read this" the French guy said.<br />
<br />
"Why not?" I asked.<br />
"We already know what it says," USA guy said, "and we know it's not good in favour of Mormonism."<br />"I don't understand," I told them, "what do you mean?"<br />USA guy said "People say that it's wrong."<br />"So why won't you look at it?" I asked.<br />"Because we don't go by evidence" USA guy said. "Evidence is not important to us, we go by our testimony"<br />"But to do that you are willing to ignore evidence?" I asked.<br />"Have you done this research yourself?" USA guy asked.<br />"Yes," I said, "I looked up what Egyptologists say the meanings are, then I printed out the picture and sent it to an Egypologist and asked if she would indicate which was correct in each case, and the answers are on that piece of paper."<br />"I'll bet you money she has seen this before," USA guy said, "she knows what this is, she'll have heard of it."<br /><br />I told him that it is obvious she will have seen it before because it is quite a common piece of evidence found in archaeology, "but that doesn't mean she'll know anything at all about it's links with Mormonism."<br />
<br />
USA guy then asked me something about how I know she knew, or something along those lines. I told him "She can read hieroglyphs, she read it."<br />"Do you know that?" he asked?<br />"Yes," I told him. "I know because the black guy at the end, who Smith says is a slave, was identified by her as Anubis. She wrote that although the picture doesn't have the typical Jackal head she, was able to tell who it was because she read it in the text written above him. So are you going to look at it?"<br />
"No" they said.<br />"Why not?" I asked.<br />
<br />
French guy gave me the same old stuff about how he has testimony from the Holy Spirit. I was really frustrated. USA tried to say something and I started to talk over him. I realised I was getting wound up so I said "I just started to talk over you, my brain was racing away and I shouldn't have done that. I'm sorry, please tell me what you was going to say" and I sat down on the floor.<br />
<br />
USA guy started to tell me about how my approach was wrong. Because of my past experiences I wasn't willing to listen to the Holy Spirit and wanted to find proof. I told him I had found proof, but unfortunately it was proof against his position. He asked what I meant<br />
<br />
"Evidence is something you collect," I told him, "at some point you might find you have enough evidence to feel that it proves something, that is when you have proof. In my opinion, what you are holding in your hands is not just evidence, it's proof!"<br />
<br />
"Proof of what?" USA guy asked.<br />
I told him "It is proof that Joseph Smith could not translate Egyptian hieroglyphs."<br />"But this is the evidence of men" USA guy said.<br />"No it's not," I said, "it's the evidence of A man. That man is Joseph Smith, the man you think is a prophet of God. It is a picture drawn with his own hands, and translation of the words on that picture that he also wrote with his own hands. This isn't someone later recalling what they think he said years earlier, this is physical evidence of something that we know has not changed. This is the first time we have the before and after evidence to compare."<br />
<br />
"But any mistakes are the mistakes of men" said the USA guy.<br />"Sure, "I said. "We have already agreed that the original account was made by humans and so we can expect errors there. We have also agreed that the corrections made later were made by humans without divine instruction and that is why the same mistake elsewhere in the book was missed. The only thing we have left now tying The Book of Mormon to a divine entity is the claim that Smith could translate Egyptian hieroglyphs into English, and there in your hand you have physical evidence that he couldn't."<br />"No, we also have testimony" the French guy said.<br />
I said to him "Are you really telling me that you are going to ignore evidence in favour how nice it feels when you close your eyes and think about something you like?"<br />"Yes" he said.<br />
<br />
I asked if they knew that the document Smith said was written with Abraham's own hand had been carbon dated and was about 1500 years too young."<br />"What was dated? Where did it come from?" USA guy asked. I explained how the documents had been split into three scrolls and three sets of fragments of those scrolls. The scrolls burned in a museum fire, but the fragments were discovered elsewhere and dated.<br />"They won't be the actual scrolls," USA guy said, "the ones he translated from we don't have."<br />
<br />
I told him that we do have fragments of the one Smith translated from, and we know this because of what Smith drew and what the Book of Abraham says about the contents of the scrolls. "I have spent some time collecting evidence, will you at least look at it?"<br />
<br />
"No" they both said, shaking their heads with a mixture of what seemed to be a mixture of defiance, and pride in that defiance. I was honestly completely gob smacked.<br />"You actually won't even look at evidence?"<br />"No" they said.<br />"Why not?"<br />USA guy smiled and said. "I am here on my Mormon Mission, do you think I am just going to pack up now and go home or something?"<br />"I don't expect anything," I told him. "I have no idea what you will make of the evidence. You might read it and just outright disagree with it. I don't know what you will think. I am not interested in making you think things, I am only concerned that you won't look at evidence just so that you can keep thinking them."<br />
<br />
French guy explained that the problem with proof is that it takes away our ability to have faith. "I think you are wrong." I told him. "Take evolution as an example. There is more evidence for evolution than there is for just about anything else we know of. There is an abundance of it, and it spans across all areas of science; yet there are still people who reject it despite the proof. In addition to this, even knowing that there is a God I still have the option to choose to do right or wrong. I know that killing babies is wrong, I don't need to believe or disbelieve in a God to know that."<br />
<br />
USA guy went on to explain that with proof I would have no option other than to believe it is true. "Then you don't have the option of mercy," he told me. "If you do something wrong and then die, God can show you mercy because you didn't know about the mercy of Jesus. The only way to receive mercy when you believe is through the salvation of Jesus."<br />"I don't understand" I told him. "So if I don't believe in the salvation of Jesus and do something wrong then God will forgive me for my ignorance, but if I do believe in the salvation of Jesus and I do something wrong then God will forgive me for believing in Jesus?"<br />
"Erm, not exactly" USA guy said. "If you sin when you know it is true and you sin then you get cut off, no mercy, the end. Even if you make the littlest sin like a thought then you can be cut off if you don't repent."<br />
"I don't think anyone should ever be punished for a thought," I told him.<br />
<br />
French guy said "We are not going to come around any more, and we are not going to discuss religion with you any more. If you text us anything then we will not reply."<br />
"That's a shame," I told him, "because I like you guys, you are fun to talk to. I am okay with not discussing religion with you any more, but it would be nice if you could sometimes just say hello and we could ask each other how we are doing."<br />
"Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We like you too, that would be nice" USA guy said.<br />"We would like to thank you for the time you have given us" French guy said.<br />
<br />
"So," I asked, "are you willing to take these documents with you?"<br />"No" they said.<br />"How about this then?" I continued, "You don't know what the Holy Spirit is or is not going to tell you to do. So how about you take them with you. Don't read them, but just don't throw them away. If one day the Holy Spirit says to look at them then they are there for you."<br />"In that case I can just look on the Internet" USA guy said.<br />"No, I don't think that's a good idea," I told him. "There are a lot of emotional people on the Internet making arguments from their emotions. Not only is this not a good way to decide what is true you will find that there are people out there who will be outright offensive. I don't want you to be put off by it, and I wouldn't want you to get upset either. So why not take it, and if the Holy Spirit tells you to, then read it."<br />"I'll tell you what," USA guy said. "I will take your email address, and then if the Holy Spirit tells me to read it I will write to you and ask for it." I knew this was the best I was going to get, so I agreed.<br />
<br />
USA guy said "Please continue to read The Book of Mormon, and please keep praying. But we will not answer any questions you have, you will have to find the answers yourself. We won't answer any of your text messages....well, unless you text us to tell us you have received your testimony."<br />
<br />
"Okay," I said. "From this point onwards we shall not discuss religion, but will you do me a favour?" I asked.<br />"What is it?" asked USA guy.<br />"You believe you have this additional tool for discovering truth that for some reason I cannot access. So could you please keep praying for something for me?"<br />"What do you want me to pray for?" USA guy asked.<br />"You believe that Smith translated Egyptian hieroglyphs into English despite the original evidence of the plates not being available, and yet at the same time can see that he couldn't translate Egyptian into English based on the physical evidence you have in your hand. To me that's logically inconsistent, you have to believe two opposite things at the same time."<br />"Hmm," USA guy said, "I really don't understand why that is, but I know the Book of Mormon is true and Joseph Smith is a prophet of God.<br />"When we met I told you I was interested in your brains, and this is exactly the kind of thing I am interested in" I told them. "Holding two opposing facts as true at the same time is really interesting. So, no matter how long it takes would you keep praying for an answer to me? Could you pray for an answer which explains why Smith got the translation wrong for the facsimile he drew? Please keep thinking about it, and if in a year's time or something you get an answer that makes sense to you then please email me and tell me what it is. I won't use it as an opportunity to discuss religion with you, I just want you to keep thinking about it."<br />
<br />
Then they left, and I threw lots of printed paper in the recycle bin.<br /><br />PS: TV programme has started on Channel 4 called "Meet the Mormons". The narrator said that during their mission work they are not allowed to use their first names, that'll explain why I always found it so difficult to get them to respond using their "real" names.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-33410781271023139082014-06-25T15:14:00.001-07:002017-05-27T13:25:27.765-07:00Mormon visits: Episode 7<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-7/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-6.html">Read 6th visit</a><br />
<br />
Text messages since last visit:<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Hi guys. Are you going to drop in this Egyptian stuff for me? Just thought, I can meet you and photograph it, that would take no time/effort at all. (June 24th)<br />
<br />
(No reply)<br />
<br />
My Mormon friends didn't turn up last Monday, it seems our weekly meetings may have come to an end. However, they turned up out of the blue tonight (June 25th). They apologised for turning up without arranging it with me first and reminded me that I said they could just turn up, I told them that I meant it and they are welcome to pop around any time they like.<br />
<br />
USA guy took out a book and said he had something for me. I got excited and asked if it was the Egyptian stuff that Smith had translated. He told me that I shouldn't be too excited and that it probably isn't what I am expecting it to be. He showed me that he had a book called Doctrine And Covenants. I have no idea why he was showing me this, but he explained that it was a book of revelations on how to run the LDS church in the end days. I said I thought it was odd that it says "in the end days" rather than "until the last day" or something similar. I asked if that meant we are living in the end days, they said it did. I asked how long the end days will last, 5 years, 50 years, 5000 years? They said they didn't know, but what they do know is that when scripture is revealed to Moses etc it marks the start of what is called a "period of dispensation", and that we are now living in the last period of dispensation before Jesus returns.<br />
<br />
I told them how I had read Islamic texts explaining how the first thing Jesus will do is to kill all the pigs. French guy was very surprised to hear that Muslims believe in the return of Jesus. I told him how they are essentially just another Judaism->Christian->Something Else variant of monotheism....just like Mormonism, except there are more of them. We had a little chuckle about how the anti-Christ was going to come a wreak havoc in wars etc, heralding the return of Jesus, but the first thing on his to-do list is to kill all the pigs.<br />
<br />
We talked about how the scriptures of Abraham and Moses had come to Smith. USA guy said that he thinks the books of Abraham and Moses were divinely revealed. I told him that I had read something about finding some papyrus as part of a collection, along with some mummies. "Ah yes," he said, "that's right!" I forgot to say anything about how fragile this process of preserving revelation was, but in hindsight I don't think it would have carried much weight anyway and probably would have made me sound like a nay-sayer.<br />
<br />
USA guy told me that it was the commandments (covenants) that had been divinely revealed, mostly during Smith's life-time but a few had come afterwards too. He said that it explains things like multiple marriages. I was surprised he brought it up to be honest. I had given up that subject as a lost cause, but he seemed to want some kind of approval or closure on the subject. I asked "What does it say about it? Do as I say and not as I do?" - I wonder if they feel bad later for laughing at the expense of their own prophet? I asked if they had talked to anyone about this subject, and they said they hadn't. USA guy said that he had heard something about people in the Old Testament marrying women if their husbands weren't worthy of them.<br />
<br />
I said "I can't remember what her husband's name was. I remember her name was Zina, as I said, because it means something in Arabic. I think he was called Henry or something. Well, from what I read he was sent all over world or something doing missionary work."<br />
"Was he actually doing missionary work?" USA guy asked.<br />
"Yes," I told him, "he was representing the church."<br />
"That doesn't make any sense" USA guy said.<br />
"Well I suppose it does if you want to marry his wife and get rid of him" I joked. They laughed along.<br />
USA guy said "None of that stuff makes any sense at all to be to be honest."<br />
<br />
Next I brought up the subject of changes to the book. I told them that part of my job requires multiple people to work on the same text document and then to have to compare changes and deal with any conflicts, this means that text comparison software is really quite good these days. "What I have done is to take the text from the 1830's version and compare it to the 2005 version" I told them. "And it had loads of changes?" asked the USA guy. "Well," I told him, "it's not so much that there are changes in the way words are written etc, but that there are entirely new sentences." I looked up one of these, it was the <a href="http://mormonchanges.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/first-book-of-nephi-chapter-20.html">1st book of Nephi, chapter 20</a>.<br />
<br />
I said that the clause in the book in question had originally only included people who came out of the waters of Judah, but had later been changed to include anyone else who had been baptised. He explained to me that when they are baptised, Mormons consider themselves to have become part of the family of Israel. I said "That's fine. If it was originally written by humans as their understanding of things, and then later humans made their own decisions on what to change then it all makes sense. Do you still agree that is what happened?" They both confirmed that this is their position, I was surprised to hear this, and relieved that I didn't have to suffer the frustration of them back-peddling on their previous change of opinions.<br />
<br />
I then said to them "Do you remember that you said none of the meaning of the book had changed?"<br />
"Yes," they said.<br />
So I told them "I found something in Nephi book 1, chapter 19. In the original book it says the Jews did not mock, but in the new edition it says the Jews did mock. Dropping the word 'not' makes it mean the exact opposite"<br />
USA guy suggested "Maybe it means the same and that's just how they used to say things back then?"<br />
"No," I said quite firmly, "did, and did not, are complete opposites. Either they mocked or they did not."<br />
<br />
"I expect someone has already done all of this" USA guy said.<br />
"Yeah," I told him, "but this is me. I don't like to accept other people's conclusions, I like to look at what led them to their conclusions to see if they lead me to the same place."<br />
<br />
I brought up the issue of "doubt your doubts before your faith". I told him that doubting your doubts is a great thing to do because it makes you check them. It's suppressing your doubts that is the problem. There is nothing wrong with doubts, doubts help you to reach the truth. I then asked about the hieroglyphics.<br />
<br />
USA guy said he doesn't think there are any. French guy said "Yes there are, it's the pictures". "Oh, is it those things?" USA guy asked. Then the USA guy opened his book to a specific page<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CD8zZkMI_HY/U6szHv4zwhI/AAAAAAAAASs/BBevBxhGwSY/s1600/Abraham.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-CD8zZkMI_HY/U6szHv4zwhI/AAAAAAAAASs/BBevBxhGwSY/s1600/Abraham.jpg" height="320" width="180"></a></div>
<br />
I said it was really exciting that we know what the original image looked like, because obviously they didn't have photocopiers back then so we are fortunate a manual copy was made. I then non-judgementally read out what each part was supposed to be according to Smith. "Do you have something with hieroglyphs too?" I asked. USA guy showed me this.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3sWPLpN5BAE/U6sz7mxE5SI/AAAAAAAAAS0/gCrPOsqXcYA/s1600/Abraham2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3sWPLpN5BAE/U6sz7mxE5SI/AAAAAAAAAS0/gCrPOsqXcYA/s1600/Abraham2.jpg" height="320" width="180"></a></div>
<br />
I told him I had no idea whether or not those were valid Egyptian hieroglyphs but it would be interesting to find out. I said though that this isn't as exciting as I had hoped because in the first photo we have Smith's writings but no hieroglyphs, and in this photo we have hieroglyphs but no direct translation. French guy then showed me this<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kDYMS2Z_WE4/U6s38WGRSrI/AAAAAAAAATI/Vo9u_a--fCk/s1600/Abraham3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-kDYMS2Z_WE4/U6s38WGRSrI/AAAAAAAAATI/Vo9u_a--fCk/s1600/Abraham3.jpg" height="320" width="180"></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
I must confess that I nearly did a little wee wee because of the excitement. I pointed out that this has Smith's explanation of what it is, and some hieroglyphs that might give us a clue as to whether or not he was correct. I read through each one, getting the Mormon guys to point to which part of the picture the note was referring to; just to make sure they were mentally involved in the process rather than just being told stuff by me.<br />
<br />
As I read number two I had a genuinely massive grin on my face. "It says 'Whose name is given in the characters above his head'. This is exactly what I've been looking for!" Then I read on. "Number four and number five both also explicitly state what the hieroglyphs say".<br />
<br />
"I don't understand" French guy said.<br />
"Well," I told them. "I told you last time that hieroglyphs were cracked back in about 1822. By 1830 hardly anyone in the world knew how to read them, and none of those people would have known how to read them completely. There was literally nobody on the planet who could successfully translate the Egyptian hieroglyphs into English." They were in agreement, so I continued. "I always wondered why these brass plates were supposed to have been written in Egyptian hieroglyphs, it made no sense to me. They didn't write in Egyptian, they would have used an Aramaic alphabet or something."<br />
<br />
French guy said "I heard Egyptian was probably used because it takes less space".<br />
"That's incorrect," I told him, "Aramaic is far more compact than hieroglyphs. It's just little lines with circles and dots and stuff. Nowhere near as complex as a picture of a man or an eagle or something. Aramaic would not only take up less space, it would be much quicker to write and would have been what they were already familiar with."<br />
<br />
They looked at me a bit confused, one of them said "Not sure why it would be in Egyptian hieroglyphs then".<br />
"When it comes to God and prophets do you think everything happens for a reason?" I asked.<br />
"Yes" they confirmed.<br />
"Well perhaps the reason for it being in Egyptian hieroglyphs was precisely because nobody on the planet could translate them at the time? What if they were written with hieroglyphs because God knew that in the future we would be able to translate them, which we can, and then it would be obvious that Joseph Smith must have received divine help." They were nodding in agreement. Then I added "Of course, the other thing that occurred to me is that if you were making all this stuff up then using an alphabet nobody understood would be a good trick, because then nobody could read it and tell you that you are wrong" - we all giggled, but I could see they knew it was true.<br />
<br />
French guy said "But whether or not this is right is not as important as if you pray and receive testimony". I was dismissive of this, telling him that it simply doesn't work. They might feel like it works for them, but people from all other religions also believe it works for them too. He told me "God knows how to convince you, if you pray then he will answer".<br />
<br />
So I put this to him. "That is exactly what this is. I said I believe God would know how to convince me even if I don't know myself, and now I know what that is! This isn't just some picture that Cowdery or someone else drew from memory years later. This is a picture drawn by a prophet of God himself, copied directly from the papyrus he translated. Not only does the picture contain hieroglyphs but it we have an explicit statement from Smith himself telling us what those hieroglyphic words mean."<br />
"But they are not translated word for word" French guy said cautiously.<br />
"They don't have to be," I told him. "The hieroglyphs only need to say the names that Smith claims they say. Number two should be the name of the Pharaoh, number four should be the name of the prince, and number five should be the name Shulem. If this is what they say then we have a deal clincher."<br />
<br />
"You would become a Mormon?" French guy asked.<br />
"Yes," I told him.<br />
"Even without testimony?" he asked.<br />
"Yes," I said. "The problem with testimony is that it tells so many people so many different things. Regardless of how real the testimony I previously had felt to me, I cannot accept it was real because of my subsequent investigations. I have no way of knowing what to listen to and what is to ignore because it is simply happening in my mind. Hindus are told they are right, Sikhs are told they are right, Muslims are told they are right."<br />
<br />
USA guy was nodding in agreement, listening quite deeply, but French guy was still insistent that personal testimony through prayer is the only way to go and should come first. I said to them "We are in agreement that the book was written by humans, and later edited by humans based on what they thought should change without divine instructions, right?"<br />
"Yes" they both said.<br />
"Well in that case the ONLY point at which divine intervention can occur is the translation from hieroglyphics into English. If these translations are correct then I have objective proof that Smith correctly translated them when nobody in the world should have been able to. I have previously been in touch with an Egyptologist who makes TV documentaries, I can write to her and ask her what they say."<br />
<br />
I could see by this point they both felt uncomfortable with this. "You might find some stuff that says it is right and some stuff that says it is wrong" USA guy said. "But that doesn't matter," I told him, "we have the original hieroglyphs and Smith's translations. We can know for certain if he was right or wrong. If Smith was a messenger of God then God has allowed this to happen. A picture drawn by the hands of one of his prophets has been allowed to survive until we can test if it is right or wrong. If it is right then it would be absolutely remarkable, practically on the miracle scale. In this case it's better than those other miracles, instead of us having to rely on historical accounts, which can morph into myths over time, we actually have physical evidence of something we can check."<br />
<br />
They were still unsure, they both said how they have never really been that interested in looking for evidence. So I put this to them. "If you guys weren't Mormons and I was, and we had just discovered this together, would you be curious?"<br />
"Hmm" they said.<br />
"You would wouldn't you? You'd at least want to know if it was correct or not, not to check would simply be denial wouldn't it?" They both agreed.<br />
<br />
Again French guy tried the personal testimony approach. I asked if they thought God would require anything more from people than to desire the truth and to genuinely ask to receive it. They both said they thought that was all that was needed according to their religion. I asked if praying in the wrong way or anything like that might annul the request for guidance, USA guy told me that God doesn't punish people for what they don't know, so if they were praying in the wrong way or something it wouldn't matter as long as they were genuinely asking him for guidance.<br />
<br />
"Do you know what happens on Saturday?" I asked.<br />
"No" they said.<br />
"Saturday is the first day of the Islamic holy day of Ramadan." I told them. "Millions, if not over a Billion, Muslims will be fasting from sun rise to sun set as a sign of their devotion to God, the same god that you believe in, the god of Abraham, Moses, and all the others. They will be giving extra money to charity. Despite fasting some of them will still cook food in kitchens and then take it out to feed homeless people out on the streets. At the least they will be praying five times a day, some of them will pray for a majority of the day. They pray to give thanks and to request guidance. Do you think that is a valid way to ask God for guidance, even if they happen to be facing Mecca or something?"<br />
<br />
"Yes" they said.<br />
"So being born into a society that tells you to pray in a certain direction won't matter?" I asked.<br />
"No" they said.<br />
"So," I smiled, "how many of those Muslims do you think God will tell to look into the story of Joseph Smith?"<br />
They both thought for a while. "How many of them will ask?" French guy challenged.<br />
So I told them "There are possibly millions of Muslims in this world who have never even heard the name Joseph Smith. They can't be expected to ask about a specific person they have never heard of. I thought that all God required was for us to desire guidance and to sincerely pray for it?"<br />
"That's right" they said.<br />
"So," I repeated, "out of over one billion Muslims, how many do you think will be told to read about Joseph Smith?"<br />
<br />
They thought for a while and then USA guy said "That's why we are here, to tell people about our prophet". I pointed out that God doesn't need humans to tell the story of Joseph Smith before he is able to give them some kind of experience with the Holy Spirit. They said that unless they know of Joseph Smith they won't know what the testimony is that the Holy Spirit is giving them. I pointed out that this is exactly the problem, this testimony from the Holy Spirit means whatever the person receiving it believes it to mean based on their social upbringing and life experiences.<br />
<br />
I could see a lot of watch checking had now started so I shook their hands and told them it had been a pleasure talking to them as usual. "It will be really interesting to see what those hieroglyphs say" USA guy said with a smile. "Won't it just be fantastic if the translations are right?" I asked. "Yes" he said, grinning even more.<br />
<br />
It was time to go. It occurred to be that again we had talked without an opening prayer. French guy asked if he could lead one to close the meeting. It consisted of the usual thanks for being born and for being able to spend time with me. I don't think he asked for guidance or anything, it was quite a quick prayer and I think I may have missed some of it.<br />
<br />
Tomorrow I will dig out the contact details for that Egyptologist. I won't rely on what web pages tell me, I like to check things properly.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-8-end.html">Read 8th visit</a>XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-72573365098782115232014-06-19T14:55:00.000-07:002017-05-27T13:24:21.384-07:00Mormon visits: Episode 6<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-6/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-5.html">Read 5th visit</a><br />
<br />
Text messages since our last visit.<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Hi guys. I've been preparing for a debate on Islam/tolerance so not had time to read more of your book since we last met. Are we meeting tonight? I'm sorry I hurt your feelings last week.<br />
<br />
<b>Them</b>: Hi Peter. We have a landlord inspection later tonight and our rooms are less than tidy. If we do get time then it won't be for as long as usual.<br />
<br />
(They didn't turn up)<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Had an idea. Your story about Smith translating hieroglyphs. Hieroglyphs were cracked in 1822 and investigation was still ongoing in the 1830's and 1840's so nobody at the time was an expert. I'll look for examples of Smith's translations, if he got them right that would be incredible! What do you think?<br />
<br />
(They didn't reply)<br />
<br />
Just as England started to play against Uruguay my wife told me she had just seen them pulling up on their bikes outside. I went and greeted them at the door. "You really don't have a TV do you?" I said. "The England world cup match has just started!" They smiled, we said it was nice to see each other. This time it was me who said that we can't chat for long because I wanted to watch the match, they said they just wanted to share with me what their (mission manager?) had told them about the changing of the name Benjamin to Mosiah. We sat down on the door step, it is a nice evening :)<br />
<br />
They opened the the Book of Mormon to some page at the front somewhere. It said something along the lines of "if you find any errors they are the errors of men, so don't judge the book by them". I said that we had already agreed last time that they were errors of men. The men who left King Benjamin took years to reach their destination so might not have known about Benjamin's death and in error may have given the dead king's name rather than the name of his successor. However, this still doesn't explain the correction. Why correct it later? Why correct one instance 7 years later and then the other instance another 7 years later? Also, considering Smith was dead 3 years before the 2nd change, who made the change?<br />
<br />
They agreed that it shouldn't even take humans 7 and 14 years respectively to proof read a 600 page book and correct the errors. Then the American guy said "Maybe it wasn't fixed by divine revelation? What if it was simply errors made by humans, which humans saw later and then fixed, and we have always just assumed it was divine revelation?"<br />
<br />
"That's fine," I said, "I can accept that because it makes perfect sense to me. Humans wrote it in the first place and got it wrong. Then later humans spotted errors at different points in time and fixed them. If you don't have divine revelation in the equation then it all makes perfect sense". They were happy with our agreement, I was pleased that they had taken a step towards accepting their book was not divinely micro-managed.<br />
<br />
They asked what I thought about the existence of God. I told them that I neither know such a thing exists or doesn't exist. If it wants me to know it exists then I will know, but if it doesn't want me to know or it doesn't exist then I will spend the rest of my life continuing to not know for certain. I told them that all I know is that if such a thing exists then I definitely want in! I asked "If we were contacted by aliens would that be exciting?" They both agreed that apart from the fear of being killed/eaten they would be very excited and would definitely want to know about it. I said I too would be excited, but that would be like seeing an ant on the floor compared to being contacted by the most perfect entity there is (God).<br />
<br />
They went back to suggesting the process of praying to receive testimony. I pointed out again that my past experience gave a contrary answer to theirs, and more intense. They had hoped I might receive a different feeling about their religion. I asked how I could possibly know that this other feeling would be genuine? If I could be convinced by my last experience, then by using the same approach I could easily be convinced by a different feeling about anything. I told them I've been talking to a Sikh, what if I have this feeling about Sikhism, or perhaps Hinduism? They had no answer for me, but suggested that they had once been told they should doubt their doubts before they doubt their faith.<br />
<br />
I then asked "What if I tried this same approach and experienced these feelings again but they were telling me that Islam was true? Should I just go with it because the testimony should take priority over my doubts? Should I pay attention to the doubts that led me to the evidence that convinced me Islam was man made, or should I trust in this emotional feeling I am experiencing and just put any doubts out of my mind?" They said "No".<br />
<br />
They told me how they had seen people getting lots of happiness from Mormonism. I said "That doesn't make it true though does it? There are millions or perhaps billions of people in the world who are made happy by their religions, and that doesn't make them all true does it?" - They agreed it doesn't.<br />
<br />
I told them that it is easy for me to recall my emotional feelings from my past experience. I am able to bring out those happy feelings I had as if recalling a beautiful memory. I told them that this doesn't mean that the claims of Islam are true, it simply means that I can associate certain memories of the time with positive feelings; such as how united Muslims seem to be when they pray together, and how hospitable they seemed to be to me and to each other. These are nothing more than emotional reactions to memories; not some kind of divine spirit guiding me to the truth.<br />
<br />
They asked how someone uneducated person could find out which is the true religion, wouldn't prayer be the only method that have available to them? I first pointed out that the question should be "is there a true religion?" and they agreed. They then also agreed that if there was an all-powerful all-knowing entity that had a religion it wanted us to follow then there would be no doubt amongst the people of the world. We wouldn't all be depending on the same low levels of physical evidence, compensated with experiences of how we feel when we think about it. People of all religions have those experiences about what they believe, God should be able to do better than mistaken humans.<br />
<br />
I went back to how I decided the Quran was man made. How I read things that seemed to look like common erroneous beliefs of the time. I'd read an apologist's explanation and at first be satisfied, but the more I saw this happening the more I needed in order to be convinced. Apologists' explanations alone were no longer enough for me, I had to investigate the history of what kinds of beliefs were common at the time. If the book reflected those beliefs, which we now know to be incorrect, then I must concede the book is man made. "Of course" they said.<br />
<br />
Then I told them to take the tower of Babel as an example. I told them that in the past people believed the Earth was stationary and the stars/Sun/Moon orbited around it. I pointed out how human intuition fails because we don't sense the movement of the Earth; there is no wind in our faces from the movement, when we drop objects they fall straight down and not sideways etc. Amazingly they had never thought of these things and agreed that they could see why people thought the Earth was stationary before we found proof that it isn't.<br />
<br />
So then I went back to Babel. "Do you remember I once asked you what the Firmament was that was mentioned in the Book of Mormon? When people believed the stars etc went around the Earth they believed it was covered by a kind of dome called a Firmament. So why do you think God would punish people for trying to build a tower to heaven?"<br />
<br />
USA guy said "I think it was about arrogance. They thought they were so good that they could get into heaven with no need for God". "Exactly," I said, "they thought they could literally build a tower high enough to reach the firmament of heaven, and then smash through it and climb into heaven."<br />
<br />
Big lit up faces from both of them as they suddenly realised something they had never noticed hadn't made sense to them. They now knew why the people of Babel built a tower to reach heaven. Then I asked "But why would God punish them for that? They are doing no harm other than being arrogant. If I could talk to ants and I saw them standing one on top of each others' backs to try to reach the Moon I'd just laugh and tell them they are being silly. I'd tell them that they cannot possibly reach high enough, and after a certain number of miles they will run out of oxygen and die anyway. If they still didn't listen I'd just leave them to it and wait, eventually they would realise how futile their efforts were and give up with a certain level of humility". They were both nodding with understanding, so I asked them "What would you do? Wait for them to harmlessly discover the errors of their ways, or walk over and stamp on them?"<br />
<br />
"Leave them to it" they both agreed. So then I said "What kind of a God would punish them? The one that makes the most sense is one created by humans who erroneously believed it was actually possible to reach the firmament of heaven. Meaning that there would be a valid reason for their God to intervene and stop it." They agreed, perhaps the same story is not in the Book of Mormon? I don't know.<br />
<br />
I told them that doubts aren't a bad thing. If we had ignored doubts then we'd still believe the whole universe orbited a stationary planet Earth. Having those doubts made us realise we were wrong. However, if we really had lived in a geocentric universe then those doubts wouldn't have been a problem for us at all, we'd have had our doubts, investigated, and all we'd have found would have been evidence proving a geocentric universe. Reality cannot be altered by doubts, doubts are necessary for finding the truth.<br />
<br />
So I said to them that if we look at the historical beliefs of the time we should be able to work out what people of the time might have written if their religion was actually deliberately/indeliberately man made. I told them that I had read an account of how people in America in the 1800's believed that the diversity of people around the world was a result of the events at the tower of Babel, and so the native Americans must have ultimately come from the middle east. They asked how we could know that this is what they believed. I told them there was a book called something like "The view of the Jews" which was published about 3 years before the Book of Mormon; it was written by the priest of the town that Cowdery grew up in, and was all about how the native Americans were people that had travelled by boat from the middle east. I told them that we now know for a fact that this is not the case because DNA analysis shows the native inhabitants of America were migrants from some part of Asia and not the middle east at all.<br />
<br />
I pointed out that with the benefit of modern science and knowledge we now know that to be wrong, but nobody at the time could have known for a fact that it was wrong and so seeing such a claim in a religion would indicate it was made with errors by people. They told me they didn't know what to say. They have heard something about that book but can't remember what it was, but someone had told them that it doesn't disprove their religion. The French guy wanted to leave, he kept looking at his watch and saying how they had run out of time, but the American guy just wasn't budging, he seemed to want to stay.<br />
<br />
The French guy asked if they could end with a prayer. It was at this point I realised that they hadn't insisted on an opening prayer. The American guy asked if it was okay for him to lead the prayer, I agreed, and he thanked God for the nice weather and good friends.<br />
<br />
"Oh, about the Egyptian hieroglyphics," I said after the prayer. "There were four Egyptian mummies...." The American guy was nodding eagerly "Yes, yes" he was saying, to indicate he was familiar with the story. "I think there were three scrolls with the mummies which Smith was supposed to have translated." They were still nodding and saying this was true. I said I was going to try to find a facsimile or something on the LDS website, the USA guy was grinning from ear to ear "I have a copy in my bag!" he said. "I would leave it with you but it is in a pile of other scriptures that I will need, but I can have it copied for you".<br />
<br />
"That's great," I told him, "I am really looking forward to seeing that! Imagine if he has left behind either the original scrolls or a drawing of what he translated. Back then only a handful of people would have known anything about hieroglyphics and even then their knowledge would probably have been much more basic than we have today. If there are any hieroglyphics on there that we can compare his translation to then this is a real deal clincher. The whole claim of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon is based on Smith's ability to translate Egyptian hieroglyphs into English. Now we can't check the gold plates because they are gone, but if we do have a copy of some hieroglyphs he has translated, and also the text he translated from them, then we can check if his translation was right or wrong. Do you agree that he should have got it right?" I asked.<br />
<br />
"Yes" they both said. So I said "Obviously if we look at the translation and it is completely wrong then it will prove that he couldn't translate hieroglyphs into English and it would be strong evidence that the Book of Mormon is not genuine". I could see they both knew this is exactly what it would mean. I could also see that they both agreed with me but were concerned that they might discover the translation was incorrect...for reasons that only God can understand, I'd expect.<br />
<br />
"But imagine if we looked at the hieroglyphs and the translated text and it matched perfectly. That would be absolutely stunning, wouldn't it?" Wide eyed with awe both of them were smiling and saying "Yes!"<br />
<br />
"Well," I said, "I'd like to go and watch the rest of the match now and (French guy) is much more keen to leave than you (USA guy) are. If you are going past my house at some point with little spare time, feel free to just post the copies through my door and I will see what I can find out about them. I have been in touch with an Egyptologist in the past who has made TV documentaries, so it won't be difficult to find out what the original text is actually saying."<br />
<br />
We all smiled at each other, shook hands, and then I went inside to watch England lose to Uruguay, shitty football team! I am looking forward to seeing how they deal with Smith's massively erroneous interpretations of the ancient papyrus he illustrated and translated.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-7.html">Read 7th visit</a>XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-64111996743186205662014-06-09T15:55:00.000-07:002017-05-27T13:23:31.409-07:00Mormon visits: Episode 5<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-5/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-4.html">Read 4th visit</a><br />
<br />
A log of exchanges between our 4th and 5th meetings.<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: Hi guys. Was nice to see you both again! I had a thought about something you said. It was that your church is monogamous but there were reasons for ancient prophets for having multiple wives. Does this include Joseph Smith or was he monogamous?<br />
<br />
<b>Them</b>: There was a time in modern church history where polygamy was practiced. Starting while Joseph Smith was alive and finishing in 1890 ish only specific members participated including the Prophet Joseph, and a couple other presidents of the church.<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: I'm surprised by that and a bit confused. Why did Joseph Smith have multiple wives when on Monday we read in the book it was forbidden? How many wives did he have? How long before it was outlawed, and who could have outlawed it?<br />
<br />
<b>Them</b>: Hey Peter! Sorry we didn't get back to you last night. Plural marriage, I honestly do not fully understand it. I know that it was a commandment from God. He didn't just decide that he should have more than one wife. Throughout history God has given commandments, and sometimes he gives permission to do things that are contrary to what has previously been said. For example, He commanded the Israelites to take control of the land of Canan when he had previously given the commandment thou shalt not kill. When this happens there is always a reason. When Nephi killed Laban, the Lord gave the reason, it is better that one man die, than a nation dwindle in unbelief. Though I do not fully understand the reason for plural marriage, I know that God knows what he is doing and there was a reason for it. Thank you for asking questions, keep reading and pray about the questions you have.<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: I have to ask because the leader of a group having special dispensation to have more women than others is very common in cults / man made religions, and I don't understand what benefit can come out of it that was worth risking it all look man made. How many others claimed god told them to do this, and were any of the women already married? Claiming god told you to have sex with someone else's wife is one of the biggest man-made-cult alarm bells there is. Nobody claimed to have permission to do that too did they?<br />
<br />
<b>Me</b>: I am now 1/3 of my way through. Funny coincidence. When you told me about the name change of Benjamin he appeared in the story earlier this week. I looked in the new edition and it gave the same name. Just finished reading due to tiredness, as soon as I had put the book down it occurred to me that I was still reading about Benjamin. I looked in the new version and that is where it had changed! I will re-read the chapter again tomorrow to see if I can see any hints as to why it changed. PS: who is supposed to have written this part of the book (Mosiah 21:28) can you find out for tomorrow?<br />
<br />
<h2>
The meeting</h2>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Well it went both more brilliantly than I could have hoped for, and then quickly worse that I had expected. To the best of my recollection this is what happened.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I welcomed them in using a mixture of French and accidental Spanish. We sat down and exchanged pleasantries. I asked if they had read my phone texts and they confirmed. It was unusual that they hadn't replied to my one message for a number of days so I wondered if they had been put off. As we sat down my mind was put at rest, I mentioned that I had been reading the BoM about Benjamin in the 1830's edition and then compared it to the 2005 edition and both had used the same name, and then when I finished reading it was coincidentally something about King Benjamin (it actually happened). After closing the book I realised what I had just been reading so I compared it with the 2005 edition and indeed that is where it had changed.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Opening prayer: Happy again to hear it had changed from "please guide Pete" to "please guide us to the truth"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
My BoM with notes is currently downstairs so my page numbers here won't be accurate. I told them I had re-read the chapter the next day to make sure I understood what was happening. I told them that on page 167 Mosiah had been made king and that on page 168 Benjamin had died 3 years later. Then page 200 describes about how King Benjamin has a device for translating. I joked that if it had been a script for a film (movie) it would have been a continuity error, a main character dies and then pops up later in the film with a line; only then to realise his mistake and say "erm, it's not me, I'm someone else....called Mosiah" while shuffling off scene. They had a giggle while I went to get my book. I'm surprised at how readily these guys would laugh at jokes about their religion.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I returned with my book and showed them the page numbers. I then told them that I had been to the LDS website to read about it, and they were very pleased with me for doing that. I told them that I had discovered that the error had been corrected in the 2nd edition of BoM released in 1837 while Joseph Smith was alive.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
We agreed that the original name was obviously an error, and I told them that we shouldn't spend time worrying about how the error got there but instead just concentrate on how the error was dealt with. I put it to them that if God had decided to correct the error during translation then nobody would ever have known. "Yes," they said, "because we don't have the plates to compare it to". We agreed that we personally would have done that, but they said that for some reason God had decided it was better to leave the error in and then correct it, perhaps to teach Joseph Smith how to pray and receive answers.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I said to them that I had to put this bit of evidence on the side of "arguments against Mormonism" simply because I found it the most plausible of the two following scenarios.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>Mormonism is true. God allowed an error. This lightening-fast thinker then allowed 7 years to pass before the error was corrected, after one or more humans had realised it made the story inconsistent. God then told humans to correct the error that God had deliberately let through, so effectively God had changed his mind. God did all of this knowing that people would look at the book and think that the change made it look like human error and would cause people doubts, with no apparent benefit.</li>
<li>Mormonism is false: A human wrote it. It's a large script. Humans make errors. Humans fixed the error.</li>
</ol>
<div>
I told them that I had read an apologist explanation for this. The person saying that Benjamin had the translation devices could have left Benjamin while he was still a living monarch, but because they were lost for a long time (as it says in the book) they hadn't heard of Benjamin's death, so the plates were an accurate record of what was spoken by a human in error.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They were happy with this, their concern subsided and they started to look very happy. "However," I told them, "there's just something about that I don't understand". I told them that if God had decided the accurate error should go in then it still means God changed his mind and gave someone inspiration/permission to change it later. The error being there wasn't the problem, it was the way the error was dealt with. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Thought as I write: The correct name Mosiah is given in another account of this story (the apologist account claims) elsewhere in the book so that would be evidence in favour of different humans writing different accounts at different times. It would show that some people knew things that other people did not know.</i></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I then told them that as I read the explanation on the LDS website they explained how the book was changed again for the 1847 edition, again changing the name Benjamin to Mosiah in another part of the book. I put it to them that if leaving the error and then correcting it was the right thing to do then it should follow that God would have known about the exact same error elsewhere in the book and inspired Joseph Smith to fix that one too. So now I painted two scenarios to them.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ol>
<li>God allows an error. Then after enough time for humans to spot the error God decides it is time to inspire someone to fix the error, but keeps quiet about the other occurrence of the same error elsewhere. Then in the 1847 edition the same error in another part of the book is fixed through some kind of inspiration.</li>
<li>The book is man made, nobody spotted the same error had been made until after the 1837 print.</li>
</ol>
<div>
The questions is raises are</div>
</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>If having the correct name was the best thing to do, why include the wrong name to start with?</li>
<li>If having the wrong name was the best thing to do, why change it later?</li>
<li>If having the wrong name included and then corrected at a later date was the correct thing to do, how can it be the best thing to do for the first occurrence of the error yet at the same not be the best thing to do, considering it was permitted to exist elsewhere?</li>
</ul>
<div>
They were very perplexed, and really very much in agreement. Especially when I reiterated what we had agreed earlier, if only the correction had been done during translation then nobody would have known anything about it and it wouldn't cause anyone any problems.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I said that I found it very peculiar that a perfect all-knowing God would make it look like he didn't know about the same mistake later in the book; also it seemed odd that the first one would be corrected after 7 years and the 2nd occurrence be corrected after 17 years, 3 years after Joseph Smith had died.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They told me that they don't know why this is, but they do know that Mormonism is true and Joseph Smith was a prophet. I asked them "How do you know?" So they started to go back to how the Holy Spirit gives them witness. I pointed out that previously I had explained my own experiences with what they call the Holy Spirit and that it had told me something completely incompatible with what their experiences had told them. They then asked exactly what my experience was like, possibly so that they could check if it really was the Holy Spirit. The short version of what I told them was that I had been praying for 3 to 4 hours a day for 2 to 3 months. </div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>They asked how the exchange took place. I told them that I would ask questions and then wait, my thoughts would become more and more clear and then when the clearest answer came through I'd get an indescribable sensation. </li>
<li>They asked if I had asked clear questions like "Is this book true?" - I told them I had asked the question exactly as clearly as that. Is the book I am going to read true? Yes! Was Muhammad your messenger? Yes! Is the book altered in any way? No! Is it a human's understanding of your words? No! Is it your writing word for word? Yes!</li>
<li>So then it was time to explain the Holy Ghost. This is kind of what I told them.</li>
</ul>
<div>
"I would feel as though something invisible was passing through my body, from above my head moving downwards. It wasn't actually making contact with me as we would understand the idea of touching, but more like where it overlapped with my body it would in some way alter the atoms of my body. They felt like they had been transformed from a dark night into a pure sunshine, as if every individual atom was a tiny sun receiving infinite love, happiness, and every other good feeling, and that each atom was then radiating these feelings out out for everyone else to feel. It continued to spread down my body, it was so wonderful that it was all I could think of and I had no other thoughts at the time, as if my mind had been cleansed. As it passed to my heart I suddenly felt it shoot through my arteries and veins, flowing through my whole vascular system but not into the surrounding flesh. As it continued to move down it transformed the atoms in the flesh surrounding my veins. It then continued down my back, like a tantalising shiver. Then as soon as it hit the base of my spine I felt an intensification shoot up my spine into my brain, as I enjoyed the ecstasy of this second hit I was aware of it spreading through my legs and feet. I then realised I felt weightless as if I could float up from the floor. At that point I felt as though every individual atom in the entire universe loved me. I wanted to give this feeling to everyone. I knew that if everyone in the world had this feeling then there would be love and peace everywhere, but I was also frustrated because I knew I couldn't just take a bundle of it and give it to other people, I could only teach them how to find it for themselves."</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I gave them about 30 seconds, maybe a minute as they sat there with wide eyes and open mouths. I asked "How was that? Does it sound anything like the confirmation you receive when you pray for guidance and the Holy Spirit confirms you are right?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The French guy refused to answer. He just said "I don't like to go into details about my experience because I consider it personal, but I know that when it happens I know it is real". So I turned to the American guy and said "(French guy) doesn't want to tell me his experience so I have nothing to compare with, was mine anything like yours?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
He replied "Yes, mine is exactly the same except it is nowhere near as powerful as yours". I asked what they made of it. The French guy said "Well how does this work? If we are all having the same feelings we can't all be right". I agreed and said to him that when Buddhists meditate they probably get something similar, maybe even stronger because they spend so much time practicing meditation. When people of other religions pray they too receive some kind of spiritual confirmation that the path they have chosen is correct. I told them that this month will see the start of the Islamic month of Ramadan, the month where the gates of hell are closed and the gates of heaven are opened wide. Many Muslims will spend hours reciting the Quran again and again, do you think they don't feel some kind of spiritual confirmation that what they are doing is good, right, and true?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"But what can cause it?" the French guy asked. I told him that it happens in your head. Muslims see the Quran as perfect because over the past 1400 years it has shaped the language and culture of its followers' societies; things they think are bad are bad in the Quran, things they think are good and pious are also good and pious in the Quran, so it just feels true to them. When they think about Allah, Muhammad, and the Quran they are contemplating everything they love about their lives and everything they hold dearly. It is bound to give them some kind of beautiful rewarding feeling.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Then I reminded them that my experience had included a revelation of some kind in the form of some Arabic that I didn't know. In my Arabic classes I was learning "Ana (I am) Min (from) Britaaniah (Britain). Ana (I am) Britaanee (British)" but during one of my meditation/prayers I heard the words (in my own voice/thoughts) "Mufrad. Ana Min Mufrad, Ana Mufradee". It wasn't a word I was familiar with so I ran to my living room to grab my Arabic/English dictionary to look it up. I was excited and at the same time paradoxically scared it would be right and also scared it would be wrong. I found the word Mufrad, it meant "Singular".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Throughout my months of prayer for answers I had come to the understanding that the universe had existed as a tiny point of unimaginably dense material, a tiny perfect ball, and that Allah had triggered an imperfection to the shape of this object by removing some his spiritual perfection from it, the imperfection caused the expansion we now call the big bang. I am from the singularity, I am singular. This was especially relevant because Islam refutes the idea of a trinity and claims that God is uniquely singular. From this point onward I prayed even more, receiving even more clear answers to the same questions I had asked, and I knew at that point when I started to read the Quran I would know it was God's words so I started to read.<br />
<br />
The more I read the more disappointed I was, I kept reading things that looked suspiciously like erroneous historical human beliefs. At first I would ignore them, but as I read more and more I couldn't put them out of my mind so I decided to look up scholars' explanations of those verses. At first I accepted the answers, not because they were particularly convincing but more because I felt that I already knew what was true and I wanted the answer to be sufficient. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I said to them "If you believe there is this perfect God out there that created the universe and then you think you have found a way to be close to this God, you really hold high hopes that the way you suspect is true means that all your searching is finally over". They agreed completely. I told them how the more I read the more I had to be honest with myself, this all-knowing God would know that these verses look like erroneous human beliefs that were common at the time; it would know that they would cause people problems, and if it actually cared about people believing those words were true then it would either use the correct wording or simply not mention anything that looked like an erroneous belief. Again they agreed, but wanted to know how I could explain the Arabic.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It was in one of my later Arabic classes that I realised what had happened. My class consisted of myself and lots of Pakistani Muslims. To an extent they all had a level of exposure to Arabic through social experiences and through learning specific phrases etc in the Quran. So at the start of each new exercise in our books the teacher would ask "Can anyone work out what the teacher's instructions say at the top of the page?" Now I had decided right from the start that I would ignore this part of the class. I didn't want to try to run before I could even crawl so learning the words intended for the fluent Arabic teacher were something I wanted to avoid. I also wanted to avoid accidentally learning an incorrect guess, in my previous Arabic classes one woman kept saying "Ahhh, in my language that's ......." (In case you are wondering, the Urdu word for potato is Alu).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So it was the beginning of the class and they were trying to work out what the instructions for the exercise were. It was labourious but they eventually worked out it meant "Draw a line from each word to a single picture".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Hang on, " I said, "could you repeat that in Arabic?". "Yes," the teacher replied, "blah blah blah Mufrad blah blah blah". I looked for the word Mufrad on the top of the page and there it was. I turned back to last week's lesson, Mufrad! I looked back at the previous week's lesson, Mufrad! It was all over the place! Despite deliberately blocking out that part of the class each week the subconscious part of my brain had heard it and learned it. How good are brains at convincing us that something else happened?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It occurred to me by this point that we had been talking for ages and not once had either of them even given me sight of a Book of Mormon, let alone opened one or starting to discuss the writings within it. They asked me "If there was a time when there was no religion why might people make them up?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
First I taught them about false positives. If you go for a wee in the Indian jungle in the night and you see something that looks like a tiger's face you run back to the safety of the camp fire. In cases where there is no tiger it was a false-positive, but that's okay because it didn't cost much in time/effort etc and certainly didn't prevent you from reproducing; these people tend to have brains physically wired to see visual patterns of things that aren't there (shapes in clouds etc). In the case where the tiger is there these false-positive prone people are more likely to see the pattern, run away, and live to have children. The person who erroneously misses the pattern of the tiger's face (a false-negative) ais far more likely to get killed. Being dead does impact on your ability to reproduce, so people with hard-wired false-positive pattern matching wiring in their brains are statistically more likely to have children and thus that is what humans are generally like. We see patterns, but we also see patterns that aren't there. We hear a noise and instead of thinking "how did that happen naturally?" we think "who or what made that noise?" We tend to attribute a hidden agency to things.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Again the personal testimony, and again I reminded them I had one too. By now they were both frowning a lot at their own arguments. "Ahh yeah (sucking teeth) that didn't work for you did it?". They then told me that they know Mormonism to be true not only through the influence of the Holy Spirit but also because of their life experiences of things that have reassured them that Mormonism must be true. I asked if either of them had heard of confirmation bias, and both replied that they had not.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I told them of an experiment I heard read about where there were two lights, each with a small lever beneath it. One of lights would come on, if the rat pressed the related lever it would be rewarded with food. It didn't take long for the rats to learn to always push the level beneath the illuminated bulb. Another experiment I read about (which I only remember vaguely) was something similar but done with chickens. French guy asked what a chicken was, I proudly said "Poulet" :) Anyway, in the chicken experiment the levers and lights had no relation to each other at all. A random light would light up, and at the same time a random lever would connect to the food-reward mechanism. The chickens would obviously get the correct lever randomly, but it was observed that they made false-positive pattern matches. If light X came on then a specific chicken was far more likely to activate a specific lever, and so on. The unexpected discovery was that the pattern matching didn't only stop at the lights. If one of the chickens had just turned around or done something else before seeing the light and then activated the correct lever it would then incorporate the that unrelated action as part of the procedure to get its reward. Whenever it didn't work the chicken would ignore the failure, and every time it did work it would reinforce the link between a specific light, action, and a specific lever. Eventually there were some chickens who would do quite an elaborate routine whenever specific lights came on, say two turns clockwise followed by one turn anti-clockwise and then press lever 3. (This was explained in New Scientist if you want to try to find it).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I laughed and said "So you see, ignoring and forgetting the failures and only concentrating on the successes made them erroneously think they had some kind of truth, like a superstition. Not only had they come up with some kind of superstitious belief but they had also invented some kind of superstitious ritual to go with it". They both laughed at the silly chickens, and said that they found their lesson on confirmation bias interesting.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Up until now everything was just going brilliantly, and then I think I spoiled it. I reminded them that I had sent them a text message asking about Joseph Smith and his polygamy. I asked them if he had ever married someone who was already married to another man. They knew with 100% certainty that Joseph Smith hadn't done this because it was such an unquestionably wrong thing to do. They smiled confidently, there was just no way he would ever have done such a thing.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I showed them a 2 minute clip from a documentary "The end of the world cult" about Wayne Bent and his followers in Strong City, New Mexico. The part of the documentary shows Michael (Jesus's spirit in Bent's body) explaining how one day he got out of his chair and was forced to the ground by God and told that his consummation with was imminent with someone called Christiana. I pointed out that obviously this had been discussed among them before hand and this was some kind of culmination. It then cut to the woman he had named and she said that she had told her husband that she was going over to Michael's house, and if he invited her in then she would consummate with him because she believed God had been telling her in her prayers that she must. The camera then panned to her husband. His emotional pain was obvious, he leaned his forehead against the wall in despair in the next room as he listened. Her husband was Wayne Bent's son.<br />
<br />
I pointed out that I had only asked about sex because people who start man-made religions/cults often have a God that is very concerned about who they have sex with. I said that in this case the guy had not only conned a community into thinking he was Jesus, but also his own son who would have known him better than anyone, who was an adult when his father made his claim to be the Messiah, and at the time of his father's claim was working for the police force so would have probably seen his fair share of people making untrue claims. They were astounded that anyone could convince their own son of something so incredible. The French guy said "Well we know our church is nothing like this because Joseph Smith would never do something like that".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I asked if they knew about the website FamilySearch.org - they confirmed that they did and that it was run by the LDS. I told them that when I was looking at the information about Joseph Smiths wives I discovered that one of them was already married to another man named Henry Jacobs. They looked a bit doubtful, so I opened <a href="http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/">The Wives Of Joseph Smith</a> webpage and showed them the column on the right. I told them "This column contains the name of the each wife's husband. Who she was married to at the time Joseph Smith married her, and was still married to because they hadn't had a divorce."</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Shit hit the fan.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I think that this was too personal for them. The American guy just became this calm emotionless person and said something I can't quite remember, but it didn't sound like words he would have formulated himself, it sounded very official. It was something like "At this point I think there is no benefit in continuing this process". I recall thinking it was odd that he had called their visits a process.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I asked him "Where have you heard those words before?" and then just sat and looked at him for ages. He looked quite horrified, like he had just become his dad or something. Then he looked confused "What do you mean?" he asked. "That didn't sound like the kind of sentence you would make up, it sounds like you've heard the phrase before, at church maybe?" He laughed and said that this was not the case.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They looked at their watches and said that they had to leave, indicating that our journey had gone as far as it possibly could because I had obviously made my mind up already and there wasn't much point in them coming back. I told them to remember that I had previously told them that even if up to the last page I thought the Book of Mormon was man made I'd continue to read it because I wouldn't make a final decision until I had read every word, because there might be something on the last page that completely changes my mind. They said that they remembered.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I told them that if they don't come back it will be a shame because I like them. I told them that if ever they are passing and want a drink they can come and say hello and if I need to I will promise to not discuss religion with them then I would honour that promise. I reassured them that I am only collecting evidence to help me to make up my mind, and I have only found evidence that the LDS website has led me to.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Exactly!" they said. I took this to mean "If it was anything untoward about this then the LDS wouldn't tell you about it". I suggested this and they confirmed. I said "but that still doesn't mean it makes sense to me". The American guy was really frustrated "This is really frustrating for me. I just know it's true" he said. I told him "Yes, you feel it is true in a very special way but you are frustrated because you can't just take it out of your body and give it to me?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Yes!" he said. "How can I convince you it's true if everything I have ever believed in....you've blown out of the water?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They wanted to leave so we finished with a prayer that I led. I deliberately placed myself between them so that they would see me in the position of importance/authority (centre of the group) and prayed asking if there is a God to please let us all know what the truth is, to guide us to the truth and to not let our emotions get in the way; and if there is no truth you (God) are trying to give us then give us the wisdom to realise that we are only hearing our own thoughts and desires just like followers of every other religion do.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
They started to make their way to the door. I repeated that I would love to see them again as friends if they have decided not to come back. Outside my house the French guy kept saying they had to go, but the American guy kept asking me questions. I will see what I can remember....</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><i>If there is no God then how could there even be evolution?</i></li>
<li>You are confusing "your god" with "some god". If your religion is wrong that doesn't mean that there is no God at all to create the universe and then start self-reproducing life.</li>
<li><i>You ask too many questions, I can't help you because we spend too much time finding answers.</i></li>
<li>We discussed how he feels he is on a mission from God. We kind of agreed that a mission from God would only involve finding THE truth, not being intent on convincing others that you are already right. He agreed, except he knew he was already right.</li>
<li><i>Why do you reject every answer I give?</i></li>
<li>I don't. When you told me the plates preserved the language only for the people of the past I realised I hadn't thought of that. I considered it and found it plausible so it was no longer an issue for me. When you told me that the discrepancies in Smith's accounts of his age during his first spiritual encounter were added later by a scribe I was really happy that not only did you find an answer but that you then went onto the Internet and checked the evidence before making up your mind. I don't reject everything you say at all.</li>
<li><i>So if there was a good reason for Joseph Smith to marry those women who were already married then that would be okay?</i></li>
<li>I don't find it good or bad. I just find it the same as man made religious cults. Who knows, maybe God wants men to have sex with other people's wives, and cults are only successful because they copy what God wants?</li>
<li><i>Maybe he was told to marry them because they were adulterous or something?</i></li>
<li>I hadn't thought of that. Although that wouldn't explain why they didn't get divorced first, it is at least something I hadn't thought of that could be investigated. I read that she refused a proposal from Smith, got married, and then when Smith claimed prophethood he told her that he was ordered to marry her at sword point by an angel. I only remembered it because her name was "Zina", which ironically is the Arabic word for illegal sex. (Amazingly at this point we all laughed)</li>
</ul>
<div>
I implored them to never stop looking at the evidence. I told them that if God didn't want them to see some specific evidence then that evidence would not exist. It's not about finding proof for your belief, but instead making sure that you are being honest with yourself and knowing that you believe what you because you are convinced it is true rather than because you have refused to think about certain things.</div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
He said that there are prophecies in the covenants that show Joseph Smith was a prophet. I said I didn't know that and would be very happy to read them once I had finished reading the Book of Mormon. I said to him "You can't just decide to stop looking at the evidence. That book in there (BoM) is evidence. If I stopped looking at the evidence it would mean I'd have to stop reading the book".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Oh yeah," he said, "I hadn't thought of that."</div>
<div>
So I continued, "But I can't be biased in what evidence I look at. I either have to look at as much as I can find or look at none of it and not make a decision either way."</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I told him that I am sure he felt insulted at my questions about Smith and he said he was. I explained "your religion is like an embodiment of everything you believe to be good and love. When someone says something negative about your religion you take it as a personal insult, it is as if I am insulting everything you think to be good about yourself, as if I don't like you". He agreed. I said "Well, if there is one thing you guys should know before you leave it is that I definitely do not dislike you. I really like both of you and it will be a real shame if I don't see you again."</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
As they left I asked them to think about what we had said today, and if possible research the answers to those questions even if it just means asking someone else at their church a question. The American guy stopped and said "What exactly do you want that question to be, about the changes to the book?"</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I said "If it was best to change Benjamin to Mosiah, why was it best to fix one error after 7 years and the other 17 years later after, Joseph Smith had already been dead for 3 years?" He said "Okay" so perhaps he will still make an effort, I then said to him "Just imagine, if God has just used the word Mosiah in the first place instead of Benjamin then none of the conversation we had today would have happened, we'd have just read the next chapter of the book".</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
"Hmm, yeah" he said, then waved and walked away. My daughter said that as I shut the door he was walking away shaking his head. I will probably never see them again. I will give it a few days to give them time to think and have their doubts, then I will send them a text message saying that I apologise if I caused them offence.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Possibly the end....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://therationaliser.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/mormon-visits-episode-6.html">Read 6th visit</a></div>
XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5057905349826643814.post-33531263548600247572014-06-06T07:46:00.002-07:002017-05-27T13:22:42.547-07:00The curious case of iERA and homosexuality<hr />
<h1>
This blog post has moved <a href="http://therationalizer.co.uk/2014/06/the-curious-case-of-iera-and-homosexuality/">here</a></h1>
<hr />
<br/>
<br/>
<img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pms86OBagAM/U5HF3Tq-_EI/AAAAAAAAAQo/cJ1P5kC3dKw/s1600/Intro.jpg" height="160" style="float: left; padding: 1em;" width="117">The Council Of Ex Muslims recently <a href="http://ex-muslim.org.uk/2014/05/new-report-evangelising-hate-islamic-education-and-research-academy-iera/">wrote a report</a> on the various statements of staff of the <a href="http://www.iera.org/">iERA</a>, the report claims they are a far-right extremist hate group. This report coincided with an announcement from the <a href="http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/news/investigation-launched-into-educational-charity/">UK Charity Commision</a> that they are investigating the iERA for its policies on invited speakers and payments to the charity's trustees.<br />
<br />
The iERA have on numerous occasions had to distance themselves from comments made in the past by employees and even its own directors and founders. Some have accused them of trying to appease the public whilst still holding the views that were originally seen as being so offensive. <br />
<br />
Sometimes getting a straight answer to a direct question can be very difficult. In a recent Twitter exchange Mr Adnan Rashid claimed the Council Of Ex Muslims were like Nazis for misrepresenting the views of the iERA. I asked him to confirm his views on punishments for consenting adults having same gender sex in the privacy of their own home by asking a specific, carefully worded question.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cqAGheBpeuo/U5HKssZJh0I/AAAAAAAAAQ0/1_D29VjVKXY/s1600/Twitter-01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-cqAGheBpeuo/U5HKssZJh0I/AAAAAAAAAQ0/1_D29VjVKXY/s1600/Twitter-01.jpg" height="153" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
Getting an answer was going to be a tough job.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-o1Pl_ZeRrsc/U5HLDFh4sPI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/Mq7lNJNTUFI/s1600/Twitter-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-o1Pl_ZeRrsc/U5HLDFh4sPI/AAAAAAAAAQ8/Mq7lNJNTUFI/s1600/Twitter-02.jpg" height="253" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
Indeed there were posts where Mr Rashid said that what he believes is clear, but is clearly refusing to state exactly what his clear opinion is.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8gTH0qE1dkg/U5HRr0xkTKI/AAAAAAAAARM/4nqVAzOmaVc/s1600/Twitter-03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8gTH0qE1dkg/U5HRr0xkTKI/AAAAAAAAARM/4nqVAzOmaVc/s1600/Twitter-03.jpg" height="226" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
And again...<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y4Qmob_PHrw/U5HR0GRspWI/AAAAAAAAARU/FtqadN64bFk/s1600/Twitter-05.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Y4Qmob_PHrw/U5HR0GRspWI/AAAAAAAAARU/FtqadN64bFk/s1600/Twitter-05.jpg" height="43" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
And again...</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ju5YYCt4rqo/U5HR4Pc4qXI/AAAAAAAAARc/OBSb8P7BuGs/s1600/Twitter-04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ju5YYCt4rqo/U5HR4Pc4qXI/AAAAAAAAARc/OBSb8P7BuGs/s1600/Twitter-04.jpg" height="45" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Each time deflecting the questions with comparisons to secular society.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ntVUTCD6knU/U5HSniz-LgI/AAAAAAAAARk/C4N2Egt11lw/s1600/Twitter-MoralCorruption.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ntVUTCD6knU/U5HSniz-LgI/AAAAAAAAARk/C4N2Egt11lw/s1600/Twitter-MoralCorruption.jpg" height="44" width="320"></a></div>
<br />
And now many self indulgent morally corrupt nights later I find my question still has not been answered. Well, not directly, but if I look at the Islamic books of law that Mr Rashid says he agrees with wholeheartedly I get a "clear" picture of his idea the perfect law he desires.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vBBhpeQXDEQ/U5HTbVNBKBI/AAAAAAAAARs/83EiCadnokI/s1600/20140606_115208.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vBBhpeQXDEQ/U5HTbVNBKBI/AAAAAAAAARs/83EiCadnokI/s1600/20140606_115208.png" height="320" width="240"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_PkhPQyx9P4/U5HTuayr7kI/AAAAAAAAAR0/BkOg41oF-cE/s1600/20140606_131344.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_PkhPQyx9P4/U5HTuayr7kI/AAAAAAAAAR0/BkOg41oF-cE/s1600/20140606_131344.png" height="320" width="240"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
A <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU">recent appearance at an Islamic conference</a> by Yusuf (Timothy) Chambers, secretary of iERA, has raised questions about the stance of iERA representatives on matters such as homosexuality. Mr Chambers is clearly seen sitting at the front of the room next to the main speakers when one of the event organisers takes to the microphone and conducts a survey of the audience, asking how many believe in stoning for homosexuality and other Islamic crimes. The results of the ad-hoc survey are quite alarming, but more alarming still is the complete lack of protest from iERA company secretary Mr Chambers.<br />
<br />
So here is the question, just in case iERA would like to give a straight answer.<br />
<br />
"Under the laws you desire what would be the punishment if two family men (married with children) decided to get divorced and live together, and were happy to openly and repeatedly admit that they are having anal sex with each other in the privacy of their own home?"<br />
<br />
I shall leave the last word to Mr Adnan Rashid.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Bm7VR5UowTc/U5H8htW7rvI/AAAAAAAAASE/I7Ud3atl06I/s1600/Twitter-fascists.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Bm7VR5UowTc/U5H8htW7rvI/AAAAAAAAASE/I7Ud3atl06I/s1600/Twitter-fascists.jpg" height="44" width="320"></a></div>
<br />XXXhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06526186296114594091noreply@blogger.com3