clockwise from left: Anthony Blunt, Alan Turing, Roy Cohn

Of the Cambridge Five, as they have come to be known, only Kim Philby wasn’t a homosexual. It is rumored that Blunt recruited those four Apostles for Stalin. It is also rumored that Blunt used others’ homosexuality to blackmail even more hapless souls into the service of Mother Russia. Being homosexual was quite a different matter back in the staid 1930s. [source: Master Soviet Spy Sir Anthony Blunt’s Memoirs Released]

In this country we find in the history books the likes of Roy Cohn — played so effectively by Al Pacino in the HBO adaptation of “Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes.”

“Unit cohesion” I hear people chant. I laugh at their pathetic stupidity.

As far as lack of imagination goes, I ask those people to imagine where a language expert recently fired from the intelligence services might find employment — especially the Arab language experts. Thankfully these young people are much too patriotic to consider working for America’s enemies — but why on earth would you treat your own citizens so terribly for serving their own country?

It’s just another bomb waiting to go off: the imbalanced, introverted genius who only needs the condemnation of family, community and government to push him over the edge. But go right ahead, keep trying to light the fuse. I’m sure someone will lend you the lucky match in time.

As obvious as it may be to some, for others the fact must be underlined: it’s the stigma and homophobia here that create the security risk, not the individual’s private life.



Intelligence² Debates

Intelligence² occupies a unique position in London’s social and intellectual landscape. It is the only institution in town - aside from Parliament - to provide a forum for debate on the crucial issues of the day; but unlike Parliament, its debates are consistently exciting, witty, provocative… and comfortable, held as they are at the Royal Geographical Society’s Ondaatje Theatre and other venues.

Intelligence² takes information and analysis as its raw material, and translates this into discussion, conversation, and sexy debate.

IQ² debate: “Pakistan: what next?”

Richard Lindley introduces this debate on the future of Pakistan.

Opening the discussion, General Sir David Richards argues that the international community has been terribly good at coming up with bright ideas, but terribly poor at implementing them.

Imran Khan is heavily critical of the ways in which General Musharraf, President Asif Ali Zardari and the US have carried out their military offensive in the tribal areas of Pakistan since 2004. He said they had failed to distinguish between al-Qaida and the Taliban, which held limited ideological beliefs.

Anatol Lieven suggests that Pakistan, not Afghanistan, is our key strategic interest in the long term, and that the Western presence is driving radicalisation. He said he had been shocked to find that many Pakistanis regard the Taliban as they did the Mujahedeen, and support the Taliban’s right to fight against foreign occupiers.

Jonathan Paris foresees that, over the next one to three years, Pakistan will neither turn into a failed state, nor grow significantly. It would, he predicted, muddle through. Pakistan, he suggests, is not attracting enough investment, and needs to break away from the IMF stranglehold.

Farzana Shaikh reassesses the claim that the US is primarily responsible for Pakistan’s problems. Instead, she proposes, the country’s malaise lies in its historic conflict with India and uncertainty over the role of religion.

Jaswant Singh Jaswant Singh discusses the Future of Pakistan. Since the start of the 20th century, the whole of the South Asian region has been at the crossroads of a collapsed empire, be it Ottoman, How is it possible, Singh asked, that 60 years after Independence, the region was once again subject to the whims of the West?

William Dalrymple points out that while the media has been only too eager to praise India as an emerging superpower, neighbouring Pakistan has been portrayed as a failed state - and the only US ally bombed regularly by Washington. This contrast, Dalrymple said, was a huge exaggeration.

I forgot to express sufficient gratitude that the esteemed Professor Cowburn has graced us with his kind “belief in evolution.” Without that, we’d be listening to him drone on endlessly about how God punishes our hubris by his Making of the Fake Fossils on the Sixth Day. The horror. 

A televised debate from November 2009 in London, followed by criticism and suggestions 

Sponsored ad

Be prepared to meet your maker with the Indulgence line of credit and instant tithe payment

 available at select mega-churches and praying malls 

The debate

The biggest problem with this debate is the question. It didn’t really go anywhere interesting, nor did it seem to sway anyone in the audience (largely Christian, as it was held in a church.) I think the sub-text to all of Cowburn’s statements is an attempt to refute Dawkins’ “God is a delusion and religion is a virus” thesis.

Viewers should disregard any claims by Professor Cowburn that he is a humble garden-variety Christian. His smirk and air of self-satisfaction betray an absolute certainty in his righteousness, but in the end, high self-esteem and expertise in nano-technology don’t by themselves prove that “God and science go together.” Cowburn experienced an independent religious conversion to Christianity at age 18, presumably away from the “normal” British secularism of his family. Unfortunately, we don’t know if Cowburn is a Papist or Evangelical Protestant or what. He does seem to want everyone to accept Jeebus as God’s proxy, being such an important “pinch point.”

New rule: don’t coin new words and phrases to make your argument. If you say “pinch point” for example, your opponent may challenge the term. Should it be missing from the dictionary, your opponent may then use it freely to mean anything he wants — but you may not.

Criticism of the arguments

• Overstating what can be expected from science makes a convenient straw-man argument to easily shoot down. I agree that science can’t answer Cowburn’s question “Does my wife love me?” but considering general infidelity rates, I think a better question with a more useful answer would be “Does my wife love me more than the milkman?”
• Cowburn shows his ignorance of applied science in military matters with his silly example “what does science say about the war in Iraq?” Intelligence gathering, threat evaluation and war “gaming” all use state-of-the art “science” as does the field of game theory. It’s only recently that a computer won against a chess grand master; perhaps Cowburn would rather everyone pray for guidance rather than attempt a rigorous answer to the Iraq war question. His obvious unstated opinion is that his faith gives him moral superiority, and hence he can answer the question better than “science.” All of which is utter nonsense, of course. Cowburn is also apparently ignorant of what the Downing Street memo proved: that the “Iraq war” wasn’t a question to be posed, but a given around which everything else was to be choreographed
• For believers, “proving” a Supreme Being exists or seeking such proof could be seen as an sign of weak faith. If you know Jeebus is your personal savior, why prove anything? Doesn’t that imply you haven’t completely given yourself over to your Messiah?
• I dislike the implication that hard science and religious dogma are the only things of use to nurture civil society. It’s important to inform your arguments with the best knowledge and information at hand, and realize that your argument must persuade regardless of faith or lack of it
• I found the claims about Jesus proving God, endorsing Abraham & subsuming all Abrahamic faiths, ridiculous. Cowburn realized his error later in the debate, and claimed “Jesus proves the existence of the Abrahamic God” which I find ridiculous still, but coherent (a well-formed theorem, but false)
• I dislike the fact that this religious argument admits no possible errors in the doctrine, and makes no attempt to separate valuable human parables from completely outdated social policies. I’d rather people didn’t ask everyone to accept their “miracles” and genesis myths as factual. Second- and third-hand accounts, accounts recorded decades after events, language muddled through multiple translations, and suppression of unpopular accounts must be dealt with honestly
• Cowburn misstates the Atheist position regarding the existence of a divine dictator. A request that extraordinary evidence accompany extraordinary claims is quite different from the notion that the existence of said dictator has been or can be disproved. This is elementary logic and rhetoric, and a cynical attempt to rebut an argument that was never made. The impossibility of proving a negative is well-known and quite tedious regarding the question “does God exist?” The more interesting issue is whether one thinks the existence of God is provable in the affirmative at all. Cowburn apparently thinks it is, and his proof is his personal conversion to Christianity via the New Testament (King James edition?) at age 18. Hallelujah, praise be, yada yada. Snore.
  

Possibly related suggestions

Try to get as far away from this anti-example as you can (stick around for the intro to evolution concepts)

Headless transcript: mumble has become mumble from mumbletypeg. Correct? A has become A from A’. Correct? You have become yourself from your parent. Correct?

I wish I could count past the one after one. I hate the idea of meeting my great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather at the zoo. Our ancestors are lurking around waiting to stab us in a dark alley, dirty clever gorillas. Or lemurs. Or benobo. Or is it monkeys?

Are we marsupials or insects? I’m confused! Man is a manimal, and so is a whale, but not shark week. Sharks are like water snakes, cold blooded! When can I get a manimarsupial pouch for my cell phone? Sign me up, forget that river crap!

• Comparative religion and the history of religion deserve more study. Was it the Franciscans and the Catholics that had the epic battle and split over whether Jeebus had a purse? Yes, more or less: Wikipedia: Apostolic Poverty (I’m pleased I remembered that factoid)
• The fracturing of at least 2 of the big 3 religions into conflicting orders and sects shows me that regardless of which lucky religion (if any) holds the magic key to the pearly gates, it isn’t a discernable fact and should never be used as an argument for or against any proposition. It is a sin of pride, false judgment and hubris to regard another as inferior because of a difference in faith. Faith is largely an accident of birth — most commonly it is inherited from your family and community. How cruel it would be if the other (roughly) two thirds of humans lost the coin toss, and will be eternally damned because their parents were Pastafarians. Is the divine dictator benevolent if he gives you at best a one-in-three chance for salvation? Are we but chips on a divine Craps table that He is gambling with cynically?
• A person who claims their faith commands them to forcibly convert all others to it risks forgetting the lessons of history and guarantees a grim future
• Dogma reformation can be and has been accomplished. Literal, fundamentalist interpretation of ancient dogma is too common. Articles of faith are not “true” but instead are possibly relevant or valuable to modern human society. Often these articles are “religious” commands requiring or forbidding garments, personal grooming, body exposure, sex, flirtation, visibility of ankles, discussions of items like these, appeals to an elder, stonings, castings out, ad lib infinitum. These are ancient relics, useful only to bind you together with a false cord. Please look harder to see what’s relevant. It might not matter that you do things a certain way.  It probably matters more that you all follow strict rules, eat the same diet and worship together. It’s even more relevant if you are thousands strong in a giant crystal cave on a mountain top, with a tall masculine leader who claims to be your new Messiah come to Earth to lead you in battle! Please call me immediately and reverse the charges should this happen. This is both valuable and relevant — and quite rare thankfully
• First leave your dogma with the cat and then please argue your position on HIV prevention, birth control, and the like and explain how it is applicable to all affected humans of all (or no) faiths
• Last I checked we are all human, regardless of genetic differences. Let us not allow our brothers and sisters and our tiny blue dot to suffer outrageous harm, acts of genocidal violence, terrorism and wholesale damage to delicate ecosystems. And let us not become ideological extremists serving some fervently misguided cause (i.e. Earth Liberation Front, P.E.T.A.)  
• Let us strive to avoid becoming “protest addicts” who would rather yell at strangers with a bullhorn than have a debate on the merits of policy

Fair warning

• The survival through 2009 of the 9/11 conspiracies in the U.S. is a sign that many people are becoming less interested in “objective reality.” By “objective reality” I mean (roughly) reasonable, coherent determination of causes, effects, motives and threats
• The “tower of Babel” is quickly being brought down by technology. In its place is being constructed a grand temple of all faiths past and present, with Beelzebub collecting the exorbitant rent, payable only in human blood, to be sure
  

Bob Rivers is still twisting holiday classics. I find the music and lyrics often hilarious, often offensive, and always well produced. I much prefer Bob Rivers to Weird Al. His radio show originates at KZOK in Seattle, Washington.

Bob Rivers Show website

There’s a “Twisted Xmas Radio” tab there which lets you make a playlist and play single items.

Highly recommended Hendrix homage: Holidaze (S’cuse Me, I’ve got Gifts to Buy)

I’d love to use the videos from his site, but some genius completely borked the embed codes, they won’t “share to Facebook” either.

Bob Rivers on YouTube

About.com: The Radio Guy Who “Twisted Christmas” Forever (You’ve Heard His Christmas Parodies: Now The Story Behind Them)

Here’s a behind-the-scenes interview with Randy Hansen, the guitarist who does the Hendrix tributes, as they prepare for the yearly Twisted Christmas extravaganza in Seattle, WA.

Seattle guitarist Randy Hansen will be was a guest Impaler at the Twisted Christmas Party at the Paramount Theater December 13th 2007. During rehearsals, he has been impressing impressed the Impalers with his self-tuning guitar and he brought in that guitar to play for us. The day after our Christmas show, Randy will play played the 4th Avenue Tavern in Olympia.

The Video Gallery may not work on certain browsers, so here’s a link that will serve as an alternate:

vodpod.com/reechard/softmachineother/tag/xmas

Intelligence Squared (US edition) hosted a debate (on December 1 2009) on the motion:

America is to blame for Mexico’s drug war

MODERATOR: John Donvan is a correspondent for ABC News Nightline. He has served as ABC White House Correspondent, along with posting in Moscow, London, Jerusalem and Amman.

FOR THE MOTION:  Andrés Martinez directs the New America Foundation’s Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program. He was the editorial page editor of the Los Angeles Times from 2004-2007, and presided over the newspaper’s op-ed page and Sunday opinion section.

FOR THE MOTION: Jeffrey A. Miron is senior lecturer and director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Economics at Harvard University. Miron holds a B.A. from Swarthmore College and a Ph.D. in economics from M.I.T.

FOR THE MOTION: Fareed Zakaria was named editor of Newsweek International in October 2000, overseeing all Newsweek’s editions abroad. The magazine has an audience of over 24 million worldwide. He also writes a regular column for Newsweek, which appears in Newsweek International and the Washington Post.

AGAINST THE MOTION:  Asa Hutchinson has been elected three times to the United States Congress and has been confirmed by the United States Senate both as administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration and as the nation’s first undersecretary for the Department of Homeland Security after the 9-11 attacks.

AGAINST THE MOTION: Chris W. Cox is the executive director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), the lobbying arm of the National Rifle Association of America. Cox oversees seven ILA divisions: Federal Affairs, State & Local Government Affairs, Public Relations, Grassroots, Finance and Administration, Research & Information, Conservation, Wildlife & Natural Resources; as well as the Office of Legislative Counsel.

AGAINST THE MOTION: Jorge Castañeda was foreign minister of Mexico from 2000 to 2003. Castañeda is a renowned public intellectual, political scientist, and prolific writer, with an interest in Mexican and Latin American politics, comparative politics and US-Mexican and U.S.-Latin American relations.

Transcript:

Meta-note on permission, access and economics of media such as posted here:

The video is publicly available and so is the transcript, hence this post. I’m a big fan of these debates, and I will likely become a paying “subscriber” — the problem is that I won’t be able to share anything I get access to as paying member. What a dilemma! This does raise the question: whether a “blog use permit” could exist for per-post use of generally unavailable media? It’s just a thought — a way to make money, but not “everything is free” and not “content for paying subscribers only.” I’d be happy to throw IQ² some cash for the priviledge of sharing content I find particularly compelling.

Impl. note: Using “access here only” video and document embeds, with a key generated by the content provider, sent after the one-shot payment has been received.

Sen. Orrin Hatch recently co-wrote and sang a Jewish holiday song, so Max Weinberg returned the favor. Includes a performance by the Mormon Tappernacle Choir.

Correspondent Christof Putzel travels to southern Italy to investigate how Europe’s growing appetite for cocaine is funding the growth of West African crime syndicates.

View Larger Map

Wikipedia: Camorra

The Camorra is a mafia-like criminal organization, or secret society, originating in the region of Campania and its capital Naples in Italy. It finances itself through drug trafficking, extortion, protection and racketeering and its activities have led to high levels of murder in the areas in which it operates. It is the oldest criminal organization in Italy.^{[citation needed]}

…

In recent years, various Camorra clans have been forming alliances with Nigerian drug gangs and the Albanian Mafia, even going so far as to intermarry. For instance, Augusto La Torre, the former La Torre clan boss who became a pentito, is married to an Albanian woman. It should also be noted that the first foreign pentito, a Tunisian, admitted to being involved with the feared Casalesi clan of Casal di Principe. The first town that the Camorra gave over to be completely governed by a foreign clan was Castel Volturno, which was given to the Rapaces, clans from Lagos and Benin City in Nigeria. This allowed them to traffic cocaine and prostitutes before sending them across the whole of Europe.^[12]

They call this the “hockey stick”

Unfortunately, I don’t have a good explanation for why this video “took off” like it did today. It’s one of many I’ve collected in which Maddow covers the ongoing political scandal around the sect “The Family” and the “church” located on “C Street” in Washington DC.

The Family Values of C Street politicians

I have a similar problem with the ongoing popularity of a post about an “out and proud” neocon I ran into “in the wild.” The traffic it generates from all over the world is not explained by any search terms or referring web sites.

Enter Neocon Stage Right - Exit Neocon Stage Right

After the White House gate crashers segment, Maddow airs audio from Nevada Sen. Ensign’s appearance on a Las Vegas radio program. Hal Turner caps the segment.

I’m quite willing to accept that some people aren’t prepared for life without god and/or religion.

That Marvin [not his real name] apparently has anti-social tendencies and hostility for large swaths of the population is much more of a concern to me than whether or not he is religious. He’s well past his teen angst years, and much too young to make a habit of statements such as “I do not care if the world ends tomorrow.”

I’m just going to have to assume that he has found no salvation in Atheism, and that Atheism has disappointed him deeply. I urge him to try to find in himself some kindness, humility and empathy for others, however he can. The argument I make is that one can be a civil, moral and ethical person without the crutch of any religion, dogma or label. A sense of humor goes a very long way, but he doesn’t betray one, more’s the pity. More things he does very well, that he didn’t mention:

• Compliment himself, without reason to;
• Denigrate others without giving sufficient reason

“Whiny, disagreeable and emotionally incompetent” describes everyone in some group except him. I don’t think he should be so hard on himself - I’m sure he could be that way if he tried hard. Wait a minute! His rant below is whiny, disagreeable and emotionally incompetent. I think he doesn’t want any group that would have him as a member. It does seem he suffers from common problems — excessive hubris, impatience, intolerance of differing opinions, and inability to negotiate and argue successfullly.

Marvin: (not his real name)

As purely an exercise in acidic hyperbole and sarcasm, let me respond to you.

What a nasty dismissive and unsupportable little comment you ended with there. At the very least, you should support your argument that “You Atheist Americans that came before me are a disgrace and have soiled the potential that atheism offers.”

On the other hand, please don’t. You’ve already managed to appall me and bore me at the same time.

Sincerely,

Richard

P.S. Heaven have mercy on your soul! I certainly have no such obligation.

Homeopaths, anti-vaccination loonies and other advocates of “alternative” and more “natural” forms of medicine, or prayer, which are not confirmed through empirical testing and systematic observation, are ultimately enemies of science, reason and evidence.

Learn more about them here, and protect yourself and your loved ones from their corrosive peddling of facile nonsense. It may seem harmless, but when it becomes a substitute for real medicine, it can turn deadly.

If you do believe in the power of homeopathic medicine and wouldn’t mind making some money, which I’m sure could come in handy in this downward spiral economy, you could always decide to enter James Randi’s Million Dollar Challenge: prove, under controlled conditions, that homeopathy (or any other kind of supernatural phenomenon) works. Horizon decided to take the challenge…

In the final part of this series, Owen Bennett-Jones examines the Islamic leader who confronted the might of the British Empire. The Mahdi was a devout man, who developed a huge following. This programme examines his rise to power and his clash with the British General, Charles Gordon.

The frontline between Christendom and the Islamic world has shifted for over a millennium, and at several key moments has erupted into war.

To the list of combatants from the past - Richard the Lionheart, Saladin and Suleiman the Magnificent, the Mahdi and Gordon of Khartoum - we now have to add George Bush and Osama bin Laden.

The Crescent and the Cross, explores several turning points in the relationship between Christianity and Islam.

In the final part of this series, Owen Bennett-Jones examines the Islamic leader who confronted the might of the British Empire.

The guided one

The siege of Khartoum was a rare moment of defeat for imperial Britain. And the conflict had a religious edge. The two sides were led by very devout men: General Charles Gordon and Mohammed Ahmed, a boat builder’s son who declared himself to be the Mahdi, or guided one.

The British government had in fact sent General Gordon to Khartoum to evacuate some Egyptian troops who were garrisoned in the city. But he did not want to leave without inflicting a defeat on the Mahdi.

The Mahdi though had recruited followers who admired his devotion to his faith. “When he felt hungry he would go the river and throw in the hook without putting a bait on it,” says his great-great-granddaughter Dr Mariam Sadiq al Mahdi. The young man thought bait was an unfair trick which cheated the fish. “If he gets a fish, that is what Allah brought to him. If not, that is his fate.” 

Listen: Mariam Sadiq al Mahdi speaks to Owen Bennett-Jones

From those pious beginnings the Mahdi built a mass movement with remarkable speed. “He was very charismatic,” said Dr Ali Saleh Karah of Sudan’s National Record Office, “and he appealed to a number of Sudanese people because he claimed to be a descendant of the prophet.”

The Record Office houses a collection of documents relating to the Mahdi. His fatwas in particular give a clear indication of the kind of Islam he believed in.

Anti imperialist father of the nation

Today many Sudanese revere the Mahdi as an anti imperialist father of the nation. But some modern historians are not convinced. “I think this is entirely historical,” says Justin Willis of Durham University. “I think the Mahdi himself had very little idea of a Sudanese nation and certainly would have had no idea that he would be seen as the father of it in years to come. I think probably it’s equally misleading to see him in some way as leader of a crusade against Christian invaders. The Mahdi was from his own point of view quite clearly interested in the revival of Islam and his struggle was against corrupt Muslim rulers.”

The Mahdi may have wanted to wage war on fellow Muslims but before doing so he had to win control of Khartoum. And with Gordon determined to hold the city, a clash became inevitable. After months of siege in which Gordon and his men were reduced to eating their horses, the Mahdi’s men broke through the city’s defences.

Gordon himself was beheaded - although historians on both sides now believe this was probably not under the Mahdi’s orders. “Both Gordon and Mahdi respected one another as human beings,” says one of Sudan’s most respected historians, Dr Yusuf Fadl Hassan. “The Mahdi thought highly of Gordon as a good Christian, compared with some of the Muslims whom he thought did not follow the teaching of Islam.”

If the Mahdi respected Gordon, the British press lionised him as a Christian hero whose devotion to duty knew no bounds. The Daily News, for example, wrote that “General Gordon will be remembered always in our history as the noblest type of warrior.”

That assessment overlooked the fact that had he obeyed orders, Gordon would never have tried to hold on to Khartoum in the first place. But he did and having been humiliated, London had to respond. The Mahdi himself died in 1885, but in 1896, an expedition was sent to avenge Gordon’s death and the Mahdi’s forces were defeated at Omdurman.

First broadcast 30 November 2009

This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons.

Wikipedia: Muhammad Ahmad

Muhammad Ahmad ibn as Sayyid Abd Allah (otherwise known as The Mahdi or Muhammad Ahmed Al Mahdi Arabic:محمد أحمد المهدي) (1844-08-12 – 1885-06-22) was a religious leader in Sudan who proclaimed himself the Mahdi (the prophesied redeemer of Islam who will appear at the end of times) in 1881, and declared a jihad against Egyptian authority in Sudan. He raised an army and led a successful religious war to topple the Egyptian occupation of Sudan.

Under his religious authority the divided clans of the Baggara and their rulers the Fur tribesmen were united into an alliance dedicated to establishing an “Islamic” state as the first step in a universal Islamic state.

In the West, due to the film Khartoum and other historical accounts, he is known for leading a siege against the city to drive the Egyptians and the British from Khartoum or to slaughter them. When Ahmad’s armies overran the city, they beheaded British general Charles George Gordon, in the fall of Khartoum. Ahmad himself died soon after.

Without his leadership his movement and state lost much of its momentum. Attempts to expand by invading neighbors were unsuccessful, and famine, disease, persecution and warfare killed off about half Sudan’s population.^[1] In 1898 an invading British army destroyed the Mahdi’s army at the battle of Omdurman.

…

Mahdi and jihad declarations

In 1881 Muhammad Ahmed declared himself Mahdi and ruler so as to prepare the way for the second coming of the Prophet Isa (Jesus),. “After consulting the ulama”, Egyptian authorities “attempted to arrest him for spreading false doctrine.” A military expedition was sent to reassert the government’s authority on Aba Island, but the government’s forces were ambushed and nearly annihilated by the Mahdi’s followers.^{[citation needed]} Muhammad Ahmed retaliated by declaring jihad.

I am the Mahdi, the Successor of the Prophet of God. Cease to pay taxes to the infidel Turks and let everyone who finds a Turk kill him, for the Turks are infidels ^[3]

Unlike other Muslim reformers, the Mahdi did not advocate the application of ijtihad but “claimed to receive direct inspiration from God”, so that his own proclamations superseded traditional jurisprudence. This, however, did not usurp the prophet Muhammad’s position as seal of the Prophets, because the Prophet was — in some way — the intermediary of his revelations.

Information came from the Apostle of God that the angel of inspiration is with me from God to direct me and He has appointed him. So from this prophetic information I learnt that that with which God inspires me by means of the angel of inspiration, the Apostle of God would do, were he present.^[4]

…

Khartoum

Main article: Mahdist War

Given their general lack of interest in the area, the British decided to abandon the Sudan in December 1883, holding only several northern towns and Red Sea ports, such as Khartoum, Kassala, Sannar, and Sawakin. The evacuation of Egyptian troops and officials and other foreigners from Sudan was assigned to General Gordon, who had been reappointed governor general with orders to return to Khartoum and organize a withdrawal of the Egyptian garrisons there.

…

Modifications of Sharia

With Sudan now in Sudanese hands, the Mahdi formed a government. The Mahdiyya (Mahdist regime) modified the Shariah, (Islamic law) which would be implemented by Islamic courts headed by various Islamic imams, in accordance with the view of an Islamic state. The courts enforced a Sharia law that the Mahdi claimed was founded on instructions conveyed to him by God in visions.

According to this doctrine loyalty to him was essential to true belief. The recitation of the shahada was modified to include and Muhammad Ahmad is the Mahdi of God and the representative of His Prophet. Among the five pillars, service in the “jihād” replaced the hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) as a duty incumbent on the faithful (though Jihad-warfare is central to orthodox Islam, it is not considered one of the five pillars of faith).

He also authorized the burning of lists of pedigrees and books of law and theology because of their association with the old regime and because he believed that they accentuated tribalism at the expense of religious unity.

…

 

Intelligence² Debate: “Atheism is the new fundamentalism”

This was the first IQ² debate broadcast live, with an associated twitter hashtag. A few questions were taken from the twitter stream. Note: many of the uses of the hashtag since yesterday are “hashtag spam.”

Intelligence² on twitter

Twitter search: #iq2atheism

The motion proposes that “atheism is the new fundamentalism”, i.e., atheism has replaced religion as the new faith of the secular age, exploring the notion that modern atheism is itself guilty of the very dogma and belief in its own infallibility which it scorns in the religious community.

Speaking for the motion are Richard Harries and Charles Moore.

Richard Harries outlines the features and the history of fundamentalism, arguing that many of the criteria required for it are in fact apparent in today’s atheists. He portrays a set of people with narrow views, arguing against a specific view of God, who forget that some of the greatest philosophy, art, poetry and music has been inspired and supported by Christianity the very belief system that is accused of restricting the creative process by its refusal to allow for the grand perhaps (Browning).

Charles Moore insists that his opponents cannot see the true complexity of the argument, and that they emphasise the physical and the scientific aspect of humanity at the cost of any spiritual understanding. He criticises Richard Dawkins for embodying this crude and narrow pursuit of literal truth above all else.

Opposing the motion are A.C. Grayling and Richard Dawkins.

Professor Grayling maintains that since 9/11, the nature of the debate on religious commitment has become far more serious. He distinguishes between atheism, secularism and humanism. He refutes Moore’s suggestion that atheists cannot fully understand the complexity of the religious experience, insisting that many atheists understand it all too well, having been brought up in a religious family or community.

Richard Dawkins defines fundamentalism as the following: blind obedience to scripture regardless of evidence, allied to extremism. He argues that far from being entrenched fundamentalists, atheists have a commitment to exploring evidence, and a readiness to embrace change, and that we should not mistake the passion of their arguments or their refusal to remain silent for fundamentalism.

The comedy is unintentional. There are lots of contradictions here, but I can’t decide where to start. Nice gunshot ending. A pity there weren’t bullets. The sirens would be the arrival of the “criminally stupid rap appropriation” police squad.

The Video Gallery may not work on certain browsers, so here’s a link that will serve as an alternate:

vodpod.com/reechard/softmachineother/tag/facepalm

Europe  N. America  S. America  Africa  SE. Asia  China & Japan and Australia.

Simply dial in the number of meters of sea level rise and the map will update to show the predicted flooding for that level.

Here are slide shows showing rising sea level flood maps for Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area.

Static images below link to the appropriate interactive map.

N.B. Site uses color “dithering” which is improper from a sampling perspective. Los Angeles maps are higher resolution, and scaled down here — showing the “digital artifacts” that are exposed when “improper” images are manipulated. A common example of this error is to use a black and white checkerboard pattern to represent a 50% gray color.

Data provided by NASA.