Shurley some mistake...

As they say in Private Eye

Speaking at the modern King Hussein bin Talal Mosque in Amman, he (the Pope) struck a note of harmony and shared purpose between the world's two largest faith groups, urging Christians and Muslims to jointly defend religion from political manipulation.

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL852380020090509

I prefer to turn that phrase around.

It seems to me we need to defend politics from religious manipulation. Political manipulation is the Catholic church's no. 1 job.

As for Islam ... how can anyone, especially the Pope keep a straight face while saying Islam needs to be defended from politcal manipulation?

Obama shits in Jesus' manger

Do what?
In Catalonia (Spain) it is traditional to make little nativity scenes with figurines.

And you can buy the figurines of shepherds, sheep, Mary, Joseph et al at Christmas markets there.

And to add to these, little figurines of famous people having a crap.

At this link there is a slide show of the kind of stuff they do, including Obama, Merkel, Sarkozy and Brown all with their pants down

Muslim Atheists

This story doesn't seem to have hit the mainstream media yet.

From Der Speigel in September

A number of Islamic associations have put a quick end to their collaboration with a professor -- and trainer of people who are supposed to teach Islam in German high schools -- who has expressed his doubt that Muhammad ever lived.

But now the shit is really starting to hit the fan. You know the moslem punishment for apostacy?

The university he is at is likely to cave in to the demands of the faithful.

My friend and co-conspitator germanmike has made things a bit clearer with this post at The Raytractors

The blogosphere to be policed - UK

From the Telegraph

Under the proposals, the new internet watchdog would operate in a similar way to other industry bodies such as the Press Complaints Commission, which enforces a code of practice for the UK newspaper and magazine industry, covering accuracy, discrimination and intrusion.
The watchdog would not have any statutory powers to impose fines but would investigate complaints and most likely publish its decisions in instances when its guidelines have been breached.
It is understood that it would also be able to order bloggers and social networking sites such as Bebo and MySpace to take down offensive messages or photographs.

Oh my aching nerves.

It's quite simple. If you find a blog offensive, don't read it, and don't visit it again. What if there were proposals to police offensive books? If someone writes a crap book, it doesn't sell.

A source who has seen the report said that the committee wanted to give the public "a form of redress" "At the moment consumers don't know where to go if they want to complaint about something they have seen on the internet," the source said. "The absence of any industry body is leading to a great deal of confusion and to widely differing practices.

To use the book analogy again, if a book is published and it contains information that is libelous, incorrect or offensive, there are a few options. Revisionist history for example, critics and other historians publish books that debunk the errors. Authors get taken to court for libel or hate crime. And guess what? Similar laws already exist as a "form of redress" because the article goes on to state:

A British businessman was last week awarded £22,000 libel damages from a school friend who made false accusations against him on a fake Facebook profile.
Mathew Firscht launched the High Court action after inaccurate claims about his sexuality and political viewers were posted on the site.

So it seems there are adequate forms redress already.

As the Devil said in his Kitchen:

Blogs are governed by the same libel laws that newspapers are: that is a form of regulation. As for the idea that "internet users will be protected from abusive bloggers" it's a great pile of shit: internet users get protected from abusive bloggers by not reading the fucking blog. You don't like abuse? Fine, fuck off.
And if you find this blog offensive... well... that's free speech for you. You do not have the right not to be offended, OK?

and

Make no mistake, this is about sparing the blushes of our government; not only that, it's about blogs doing the media's job and actually finding out facts and throwing them back in the government's face. It is about stifling dissent.

The 21st Century will be religious

Will France lose its secularism? Will its secularism change?
Yes it will, according to our President, Nicolas Sarkozy. In a speech to foreign diplomats in Paris today, he outlined his plans on climate change, diplomacy, defence, the Middle East, Iran, yaddah yaddah yaddah. And religion.
Taking a quote from the French writer, activist & politician André Malraux, Sarkozy said "the 21st Century will be religious or it won't be".
"One of the challenges is that of the conditions for the return of religion in most of our societies," he said. "It's an inescapable reality. Only the sectarians cannot see it."
The difficulty, he said, was ensuring that a religious revival did not come in the form of fundamentalist, closed and exclusive faiths.
"In my speech at Saint John Lateran, I explained my idea of a secularism which the place of religion would be defined in more positive terms. In front of the Consultative Council of Saudi Arabia, in Riyadh this week, I echoed the words of the wise King Abdullah, and advocated the idea of an open tolerance of religion"
Sarkozy triggered a political furore in France this week when he suggested on a visit to Saudi Arabia that religion should hold a bigger place in the social and political life of his own, officially secular country.
In a speech in Riyadh, he mentioned God 21 times, and on a visit to the Vatican last month he celebrated France’s “essentially Christian” roots. Mr Sarkozy’s declaration prompted his political opponents to accuse the president of failing to respect the constitution, which prohibits public displays of religious affiliation.
Mr Sarkozy, an occasionally practising Catholic, later insisted he was not proselytising, discriminating against France’s 5m Muslims or attacking its secular tradition, but advocating a more tolerant “positive” secularism at home.
Promoting tolerance abroad would also become a priority of his foreign policy, he said. “Perhaps more than the struggle for democracy, it is the struggle for diversity, for openness and tolerance, for the acceptance of difference, which seems to me fundamental,” he said.
Mr Sarkozy said his drive for mutual religious tolerance was one of four new approaches shaping his foreign policy.
Sources:
Financial Times
le Figaro
Le Monde

Bush calls Islam "Great"

From Reuters


"Turkey sets a fantastic example for nations around the world to see where it's possible to have a democracy that co-exists with a great religion like Islam," Bush said at a White House meeting with Turkish President Abdullah Gul.


What a pile of shite. Firstly, under what context can Islam be described as "great" other than in the sense that it is big, ie: has many followers.
Secondly, Turkey is not a fantastic example of a democracy. see Human Rights Watch. Turkey is the ONLY democratic Muslim country. Why? Because since the founding of its republic in 1923 it has maintained secularism. A separation of religion and state. A democracy cannot co-exist with Islam, it has to keep it apart. Islam certainly has no desire to co-exist with democracy.


And we all thought GW was a fundie christian? He's not, he's just a politician who'll say whatever his speechwriters tell him to.