Right Reason: The Prophet (PBUH) and Violence
The link above has lots of interesting reading about Mohammed and violence.
But, in comments someone also quotes from a 2002 article in the New York Times (which is extracted at some length.) This is the good bit:
Scholars like Mr. Luxenberg and Gerd-R. Puin, who teaches at Saarland University in Germany, have returned to the earliest known copies of the Koran in order to grasp what it says about the document's origins and composition. Mr. Luxenberg explains these copies are written without vowels and diacritical dots that modern Arabic uses to make it clear what letter is intended. In the eighth and ninth centuries, more than a century after the death of Muhammad, Islamic commentators added diacritical marks to clear up the ambiguities of the text, giving precise meanings to passages based on what they considered to be their proper context. Mr. Luxenberg's radical theory is that many of the text's difficulties can be clarified when it is seen as closely related to Aramaic, the language group of most Middle Eastern Jews and Christians at the time.
For example, the famous passage about the virgins is based on the word hur, which is an adjective in the feminine plural meaning simply "white." Islamic tradition insists the term hur stands for "houri," which means virgin, but Mr. Luxenberg insists that this is a forced misreading of the text. In both ancient Aramaic and in at least one respected dictionary of early Arabic, hur means "white raisin." Mr. Luxenberg has traced the passages dealing with paradise to a Christian text called Hymns of Paradise by a fourth-century author. Mr. Luxenberg said the word paradise was derived from the Aramaic word for garden and all the descriptions of paradise described it as a garden of flowing waters, abundant fruits and white raisins, a prized delicacy in the ancient Near East. In this context, white raisins, mentioned often as hur, Mr. Luxenberg said, makes more sense than a reward of sexual favors.
Talk about major disappointment in the afterlife....
Update: sorry, in the first version of this post I referred to the NYT article as being "recent". It would appear it is from 2002. Also, the story reminded a little of "The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross" by biblical scholar John Allegro, who claimed in his 1970 book of that name that Jesus was a complete fabrication dreamt up by some fertility cult types who were really into tripping out on magic mushrooms. Much of his argument was based on philology too (meaning some New Testament words have a hidden derivation from other words - about mushrooms mainly.) This theory was, to put it mildly, not widely accepted, and appears to have been a 1970's flash in the pan which I assume most readers have never heard of. I like this comment about the theory found here:
"Mr. Allegro's reputation as a man of judgment and learning, already widely questioned, is likely to be shattered by this curious publication. His new book reads like a Semitic philologist's erotic nightmare after consuming a highly indigestible meal of hallucinogenic fungi." Dr. Chadwick referred to Mr. Allegro's "bizarre hypothesis", to "rich indulgence in the wildest flights of uncontrolled fantasy", to "uncanny decipherment" and to a "luxuriant farrago of nonsense"
Anyway, the theory outlined in the New York Times article above does not appear to be anywhere near as dubious as Allegro's. I am just mentioning the latter to be fair.
One other point: Christianity has been under this sort of attack for a long time indeed. The New York Times article points out that Mr Luxenburg is a pseudonym, and he had a lot of trouble finding a publisher. One wonders how he would go with finding a publisher today.
Backdate: OK, seeing the article was from 2002, this was hardly breaking news, and I see that Tim Blair, amongst others, mentioned it back then. Sorry if you've heard this one before, but it had escaped my attention (either that or I had simply forgotten it.)
But, while Googling the topic, I found this article from The Guardian in 2002 that addresses the Islamic idea of paradise, including the "white raisin" possible misinterpretation, in great detail. I think I may have read it before, but before I blogged. It is worth repeated not just because it is salaciously funny, but because on some TV show recently I did hear a Muslim man or woman saying that the suicide bombers know that that marriage and life in Paradise are so much better than that on earth, of course they don't mind suicide. (In other words, this is a serious motivation for young men):
Modern apologists of Islam try to downplay the evident materialism and sexual implications of such descriptions, but, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam says, even orthodox Muslim theologians such as al Ghazali (died 1111 CE) and Al-Ash'ari (died 935 CE) have "admitted sensual pleasures into paradise". The sensual pleasures are graphically elaborated by Al-Suyuti (died 1505 ), Koranic commentator and polymath. He wrote: "Each time we sleep with a houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [ie Muslim] will marry seventy [sic] houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetising vaginas."
!
Monday, February 20, 2006
Andrew Bolt on "greenhouse mafia"
Herald Sun: Sneaky green mafia [17feb06]
I did not see all of last week's Four Corners program, but enough to make me a bit suspicious.
Andrew Bolt notes in the article above that the main informant on one aspect of this has questionable objectivity on the issue. Go read his article if you have not already.
One of the matters mentioned in the report that raised my suspicion was about sea level rises and "environmental refugees". See this part of the transcript:
DR BARRIE PITTOCK, CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT: I was asked to talk about the science of climate change, the impacts and the possible adaptations. But I was expressly told not to talk about mitigation, not to talk about how you might reduce greenhouse gases.
JANINE COHEN: One of the subjects was the impact of rising sea levels. Dr Pittock says he wanted to write about how this could lead to the displacement of millions of people in the Pacific Islands and parts of Asia who might be forced to seek refuge in Australia.
DR BARRIE PITTOCK, CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT: They don't want that highlighted because it brings in another contentious issue into what is already a contentious issue. But it is an issue. It's one of the possible consequences of global warming. And I think it should be part of the background to deciding what to do about it.
And further into the show:
KEVIN HENNESSY, CSIRO IMPACT GROUP: Certainly, environmental refugees does impact on government policy. The sort of thing that I could say as a scientist, is that with sea level rise there may be people inundated in places like Tuvalu in the Pacific. And that would be an issue that needs to be considered by government policy. But I certainly can't go beyond that as a scientist.
As I noted in a previous post here in January, the latest research indicates a rise of perhaps 30 mm in a decade, but even then the rate of sea level rise has gone up and down over the last century. Indeed, actual measurements in Tuvalu reported in 2000 (see my other post on this topic) indicated a much smaller rate over the previous 25 years of less than a mm per year, no acceleration of the rate, and that levels can also drop dramatically if there is an El Nino weather pattern.
To me, it sounds as if CSIRO scientists may have taken quite a sensationalist approach to this issue if they are talking about millions being displaced, or even Tuvalu having to be evacuated, at least over the next few decades. There should be lots of caveats added to any discussion of sea level rises and global warming.
I did not see all of last week's Four Corners program, but enough to make me a bit suspicious.
Andrew Bolt notes in the article above that the main informant on one aspect of this has questionable objectivity on the issue. Go read his article if you have not already.
One of the matters mentioned in the report that raised my suspicion was about sea level rises and "environmental refugees". See this part of the transcript:
DR BARRIE PITTOCK, CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT: I was asked to talk about the science of climate change, the impacts and the possible adaptations. But I was expressly told not to talk about mitigation, not to talk about how you might reduce greenhouse gases.
JANINE COHEN: One of the subjects was the impact of rising sea levels. Dr Pittock says he wanted to write about how this could lead to the displacement of millions of people in the Pacific Islands and parts of Asia who might be forced to seek refuge in Australia.
DR BARRIE PITTOCK, CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT: They don't want that highlighted because it brings in another contentious issue into what is already a contentious issue. But it is an issue. It's one of the possible consequences of global warming. And I think it should be part of the background to deciding what to do about it.
And further into the show:
KEVIN HENNESSY, CSIRO IMPACT GROUP: Certainly, environmental refugees does impact on government policy. The sort of thing that I could say as a scientist, is that with sea level rise there may be people inundated in places like Tuvalu in the Pacific. And that would be an issue that needs to be considered by government policy. But I certainly can't go beyond that as a scientist.
As I noted in a previous post here in January, the latest research indicates a rise of perhaps 30 mm in a decade, but even then the rate of sea level rise has gone up and down over the last century. Indeed, actual measurements in Tuvalu reported in 2000 (see my other post on this topic) indicated a much smaller rate over the previous 25 years of less than a mm per year, no acceleration of the rate, and that levels can also drop dramatically if there is an El Nino weather pattern.
To me, it sounds as if CSIRO scientists may have taken quite a sensationalist approach to this issue if they are talking about millions being displaced, or even Tuvalu having to be evacuated, at least over the next few decades. There should be lots of caveats added to any discussion of sea level rises and global warming.
Cute robot doing minor task
Honda Worldwide | New ASIMO Video
See the link of a flash video of Honda's robot doing a vital robot task - moving coffee 5 m down a corridor.
(Actually, I'm only pretending to be cynical. It really is impressive.)
There's another video of it running, which is perhaps even more "human" looking.
See the link of a flash video of Honda's robot doing a vital robot task - moving coffee 5 m down a corridor.
(Actually, I'm only pretending to be cynical. It really is impressive.)
There's another video of it running, which is perhaps even more "human" looking.
Conflicts on global warming again?
LiveScience.com - Greenland Dumps Ice into Sea at Faster Pace
So the above article notes that the Greenland glaciers are falling into the sea at a much faster rate. But it ends with this observation:
The only way to stem the loss of ice would be for Greenland to receive increased amounts of snowfall, according to Julian Dowdeswell of the University of Cambridge, who wrote an accompanying article.
It doesn't mention what the other article said.
But over at Tech Central Station, they have a story that points out this:
Another paper on this subject was published by Science just last year. Ola Johannessen did not consider direct ice lost by glaciers into the ocean but instead only focused on elevations changes. Johannssen showed that increasing snowfall in Greenland was leading to greater ice accumulations than had previously been measured and this was acting to slow Greenland's contribution to sea level rise. It was conspicuously ignored in this new report...
Why would Science publish this paper with no reference to Johannessen's earlier paper showing that Greenland is accumulating ice at a rate of about 5.4±0.2cm/year? Johannessen even used data from some of the same satellites. What's more, Johannessen used real data and Hanna et al., cited by Rignot, used a model of surface melt.
Consider what would have happened had the latest study included the ice and snow gains observed by Johannessen (and ignored the losses modeled by Hanna et. al.). Johannnessen's increase of 5.4cm/year averaged over Greenland converts to about 75km3/year. Rignot and Kanagaratnam could have subtracted Johannessen's gains. If they had done so, the total volume of ice loss from Greenland would only have become positive during the last 5 years, totaling 17km3 in 2000 and 92km3 in 2005. This translates to a sea level rise contribution of 0.04mm in 2000 and 0.23mm in 2005 -- values much less dramatic than those they published.
All very interesting. Don't expect most of the media to go into such subtleties though.
So the above article notes that the Greenland glaciers are falling into the sea at a much faster rate. But it ends with this observation:
The only way to stem the loss of ice would be for Greenland to receive increased amounts of snowfall, according to Julian Dowdeswell of the University of Cambridge, who wrote an accompanying article.
It doesn't mention what the other article said.
But over at Tech Central Station, they have a story that points out this:
Another paper on this subject was published by Science just last year. Ola Johannessen did not consider direct ice lost by glaciers into the ocean but instead only focused on elevations changes. Johannssen showed that increasing snowfall in Greenland was leading to greater ice accumulations than had previously been measured and this was acting to slow Greenland's contribution to sea level rise. It was conspicuously ignored in this new report...
Why would Science publish this paper with no reference to Johannessen's earlier paper showing that Greenland is accumulating ice at a rate of about 5.4±0.2cm/year? Johannessen even used data from some of the same satellites. What's more, Johannessen used real data and Hanna et al., cited by Rignot, used a model of surface melt.
Consider what would have happened had the latest study included the ice and snow gains observed by Johannessen (and ignored the losses modeled by Hanna et. al.). Johannnessen's increase of 5.4cm/year averaged over Greenland converts to about 75km3/year. Rignot and Kanagaratnam could have subtracted Johannessen's gains. If they had done so, the total volume of ice loss from Greenland would only have become positive during the last 5 years, totaling 17km3 in 2000 and 92km3 in 2005. This translates to a sea level rise contribution of 0.04mm in 2000 and 0.23mm in 2005 -- values much less dramatic than those they published.
All very interesting. Don't expect most of the media to go into such subtleties though.
Birthday time in North Korea
Japundit - We'’re going to a party party!
As with everything about Kim Jong Il, above is a funny/scary story on his birthday last week.
As with everything about Kim Jong Il, above is a funny/scary story on his birthday last week.
Cartoon riots of a different kind..
Economist.com - Cities Guide
From the above article:
In January the park switched to a system in which entry tickets are valid for six months, as opposed to a specific date. But this move meant that on several occasions during the national holiday many people with valid tickets were left standing at the gates, when the park reached its 30,000-person capacity. Tourists who were turned away then tried to storm the park.
Not exactly on topic, but I also wonder, what are fun or theme parks in the Middle East like? Do any exist at all? Are there Muslim cartoon characters on TV in, say, Iran or Saudi Arabia? Comedic ones I mean, not serious ones encouraging matyrdom or some such.
Some googling about this could be fun, but needs to wait for another time.
From the above article:
In January the park switched to a system in which entry tickets are valid for six months, as opposed to a specific date. But this move meant that on several occasions during the national holiday many people with valid tickets were left standing at the gates, when the park reached its 30,000-person capacity. Tourists who were turned away then tried to storm the park.
Not exactly on topic, but I also wonder, what are fun or theme parks in the Middle East like? Do any exist at all? Are there Muslim cartoon characters on TV in, say, Iran or Saudi Arabia? Comedic ones I mean, not serious ones encouraging matyrdom or some such.
Some googling about this could be fun, but needs to wait for another time.
Some interesting observations on Arab culture
FrontPage magazine.com :: Brought Up To Hate by Nonie Darwish
I don't get around to checking Frontpage all that often, but the above article is interesting, if adding nothing particularly new.
Have a look at the article writer's website Arabs for Israel too. I suspect that it would not get much of its traffic from Iran or Saudi Arabia. Still, nice to know that such sites exist.
I don't get around to checking Frontpage all that often, but the above article is interesting, if adding nothing particularly new.
Have a look at the article writer's website Arabs for Israel too. I suspect that it would not get much of its traffic from Iran or Saudi Arabia. Still, nice to know that such sites exist.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
The Sydney Morning Herald revives the Koran in the toilet?
The Saturday Sydney Morning Herald print edition ran an article on Guantanamo Bay attributed to Con Coughlin from the Telegraph in London.
This line from the Sydney Morning Herald (sorry, no link seems available) caught my attention:
It is during incidents such as this that the guards have responded in controversial ways, such as the infamous incident of a Koran being flushed down a prison lavatory. But the guards are under instructions not to retaliate.
Strange, I thought, wasn't it well established that this was, at most, an allegation that the Pentagon strongly denied? Indeed, I was correct. In fact, when I searched the Telegraph to find the original article, I first found this one from last year, which notes that :
Southern Command said the inquiry had found five cases of "mishandling" of a Koran by US personnel, but no evidence it had ever been flushed down a toilet....
In the statement, Brig Gen Jay Hood, commander of the Guantanamo prison, said the inquiry found "no credible evidence" that a member of the military joint task force at Guantanamo ever flushed a Koran down a toilet. "The matter is considered closed," he stated.
Well, that Con Coughlin guy must be very slack, I thought, forgetting that his own paper reported how this was only ever an allegation hotly denied by the Pentagon. Furthermore, in this current climate of, shall we say, high excitability by Muslims, this is one allegation you don't lightly revive. (The Telegraph article I just quoted also noted that "at least 16" people had died in Afghanistan during rioting related to this story.)
But then I found the original Con Coughlin article which the SMH reprinted. Here is what the Telegraph web version actually says:
It is during incidents such as this that the guards have responded in controversial ways, such as abusing the Koran (the famous incident of a Koran being flushed down a prison lavatory is alleged to occurred during one such confrontation.) But fearful of a repetition of the prisoner abuse that occurred at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, the guards are under instructions not to retaliate.
"We have investigated 15 allegations of abuse against the camp guards," said a Guantanamo official. "Only five of them have been upheld, and the appropriate action has been taken against the guards."
For your convenience, the parts in bold are those left out by the SMH. What a difference an editor can make, deleting all reference to the words "alleged" and "investigation".
Of course, it is possible that the SMH lifted an earlier version of the article which appears now on the Telegraph website. I am not aware of any quick and easy way of checking.
But if that is not the explanation, this would be a pretty appalling example of editing designed to re-establish a hotly disputed and inflammatory allegation into fact.
UPDATE: In last night's version of this, the quote from the print version of the SMH was given as referring to "the famous incident"; but on re-reading the post this morning, I am pretty sure (without having the print paper with me at the moment) that it was actually "infamous incident". I have therefore amended the post, but will double check later today. Doesn't make any real difference to the issue.
This line from the Sydney Morning Herald (sorry, no link seems available) caught my attention:
It is during incidents such as this that the guards have responded in controversial ways, such as the infamous incident of a Koran being flushed down a prison lavatory. But the guards are under instructions not to retaliate.
Strange, I thought, wasn't it well established that this was, at most, an allegation that the Pentagon strongly denied? Indeed, I was correct. In fact, when I searched the Telegraph to find the original article, I first found this one from last year, which notes that :
Southern Command said the inquiry had found five cases of "mishandling" of a Koran by US personnel, but no evidence it had ever been flushed down a toilet....
In the statement, Brig Gen Jay Hood, commander of the Guantanamo prison, said the inquiry found "no credible evidence" that a member of the military joint task force at Guantanamo ever flushed a Koran down a toilet. "The matter is considered closed," he stated.
Well, that Con Coughlin guy must be very slack, I thought, forgetting that his own paper reported how this was only ever an allegation hotly denied by the Pentagon. Furthermore, in this current climate of, shall we say, high excitability by Muslims, this is one allegation you don't lightly revive. (The Telegraph article I just quoted also noted that "at least 16" people had died in Afghanistan during rioting related to this story.)
But then I found the original Con Coughlin article which the SMH reprinted. Here is what the Telegraph web version actually says:
It is during incidents such as this that the guards have responded in controversial ways, such as abusing the Koran (the famous incident of a Koran being flushed down a prison lavatory is alleged to occurred during one such confrontation.) But fearful of a repetition of the prisoner abuse that occurred at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, the guards are under instructions not to retaliate.
"We have investigated 15 allegations of abuse against the camp guards," said a Guantanamo official. "Only five of them have been upheld, and the appropriate action has been taken against the guards."
For your convenience, the parts in bold are those left out by the SMH. What a difference an editor can make, deleting all reference to the words "alleged" and "investigation".
Of course, it is possible that the SMH lifted an earlier version of the article which appears now on the Telegraph website. I am not aware of any quick and easy way of checking.
But if that is not the explanation, this would be a pretty appalling example of editing designed to re-establish a hotly disputed and inflammatory allegation into fact.
UPDATE: In last night's version of this, the quote from the print version of the SMH was given as referring to "the famous incident"; but on re-reading the post this morning, I am pretty sure (without having the print paper with me at the moment) that it was actually "infamous incident". I have therefore amended the post, but will double check later today. Doesn't make any real difference to the issue.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Some housekeeping
I have fixed up some bad links I added recently over at the side.
Careful readers may note the addition of a very subtle "donate" button at bottom of the side bar. My fantasy as to how I become rich from this is that a millionaire who loves cats and has a schizophrenic son will read here about a possible treatment based on treating him for toxoplasma infection. The son is accepted for research project, and cured, and grateful millionaire gives blog writer a great deal of money in thanks for bringing this obscure bit of news to his attention.
Hey, we all have our fantasies...
Of course, even non millionaires are invited to compensate me for not doing my work bills while I blog during the day.
I also want to point out that a post which I consider important, the lengthy one about scientists possibly causing the earth's disappearance through the creation of thousands of mini black holes at the CERN particle accelerator, has now slipped off this front page. If you have not done so before, please read it, especially if you know any physicist type who is prepared to look into the arguments and not instantly dismiss them.
I really enjoy blogging, and because of this it has become very distracting at work. I must reduce the time I spend at work looking for stuff that I think is worth adding here. In particular, I do need to do some serious catching up on sending out bills.
I therefore intend no posts to here, if I can avoid it, for the rest of this week. I hope the world does nothing too interesting in that time.
Careful readers may note the addition of a very subtle "donate" button at bottom of the side bar. My fantasy as to how I become rich from this is that a millionaire who loves cats and has a schizophrenic son will read here about a possible treatment based on treating him for toxoplasma infection. The son is accepted for research project, and cured, and grateful millionaire gives blog writer a great deal of money in thanks for bringing this obscure bit of news to his attention.
Hey, we all have our fantasies...
Of course, even non millionaires are invited to compensate me for not doing my work bills while I blog during the day.
I also want to point out that a post which I consider important, the lengthy one about scientists possibly causing the earth's disappearance through the creation of thousands of mini black holes at the CERN particle accelerator, has now slipped off this front page. If you have not done so before, please read it, especially if you know any physicist type who is prepared to look into the arguments and not instantly dismiss them.
I really enjoy blogging, and because of this it has become very distracting at work. I must reduce the time I spend at work looking for stuff that I think is worth adding here. In particular, I do need to do some serious catching up on sending out bills.
I therefore intend no posts to here, if I can avoid it, for the rest of this week. I hope the world does nothing too interesting in that time.
Would a simple "yes" or "no" be too much to ask for?
AskPhilosophers.org
I found the above site via Philosophy Now, the only philosophy magazine I see at any newsagent.
The idea is that you can submit any question and one or more of a team of philosophers may try to answer it.
Of course, being male, one of the first sections I went to was on sex. The first question was about sex with animals. Guess what - the philosophical jury is still out on that one. Typical.
I found the above site via Philosophy Now, the only philosophy magazine I see at any newsagent.
The idea is that you can submit any question and one or more of a team of philosophers may try to answer it.
Of course, being male, one of the first sections I went to was on sex. The first question was about sex with animals. Guess what - the philosophical jury is still out on that one. Typical.
Update on Cats and Schizophrenia
Imperial College London - Scientists find stronger evidence for link between cat faeces and schizophrenia
I missed this update last month on the research that is indicating that at least some cases of schizophrenia are caused by cats. (Or at least toxoplasma gondii, which cats carry.) I have posted previously on this - my lengthiest post is here.
Dr Joanne Webster added: "By showing that drugs used to treat schizophrenia affect the parasite T. gondii, this does provide further evidence for its role in the development of some cases schizophrenia. It may be that anti-psychotic drugs work partly by parasite inhibition, and this could lead to new medicine and treatment combinations."
The researchers have already begun human clinical trials using anti-T. gondii treatments as adjunct therapies for schizophrenia with researchers at Johns Hopkins University.
A new (and previously unexpected) type of therapy that even helps a relatively small percent of sufferers would be a big advance.
I missed this update last month on the research that is indicating that at least some cases of schizophrenia are caused by cats. (Or at least toxoplasma gondii, which cats carry.) I have posted previously on this - my lengthiest post is here.
Dr Joanne Webster added: "By showing that drugs used to treat schizophrenia affect the parasite T. gondii, this does provide further evidence for its role in the development of some cases schizophrenia. It may be that anti-psychotic drugs work partly by parasite inhibition, and this could lead to new medicine and treatment combinations."
The researchers have already begun human clinical trials using anti-T. gondii treatments as adjunct therapies for schizophrenia with researchers at Johns Hopkins University.
A new (and previously unexpected) type of therapy that even helps a relatively small percent of sufferers would be a big advance.
Yay for Firefox
Security Fixes Come Faster With Mozilla
I must get around to putting one of their buttons on here one day.
Incidentally, I have put a link on this site to Sourceforge, which is a great site to go looking for open source software in all sorts of categories. While I guess no "hard core" gamer would likely bother with open source copies, I don't fall into that category, and free stuff for kids doesn't have to be perfect.
For myself, I have have found some open source astronomy and space simulation programs very good indeed.
I must get around to putting one of their buttons on here one day.
Incidentally, I have put a link on this site to Sourceforge, which is a great site to go looking for open source software in all sorts of categories. While I guess no "hard core" gamer would likely bother with open source copies, I don't fall into that category, and free stuff for kids doesn't have to be perfect.
For myself, I have have found some open source astronomy and space simulation programs very good indeed.
Ritalin dangers
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | Ritalin heart attacks warning urged after 51 deaths in US
From the above story:
Ritalin, extensively prescribed to calm hyperactive children in the UK, should carry the highest-level warning that it may increase the risk of death from heart attacks, US experts recommended yesterday.
There have been 51 deaths among children and adults taking drugs for ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) in the US since 1999. Yesterday the UK licensing authority, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), said nine children had died in this country among a smaller population on medication. They declined to reveal the children's ages because of the possibility of identification.
This will soon be a big story in the Australian media too, given our fondness for the drug.
From the above story:
Ritalin, extensively prescribed to calm hyperactive children in the UK, should carry the highest-level warning that it may increase the risk of death from heart attacks, US experts recommended yesterday.
There have been 51 deaths among children and adults taking drugs for ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) in the US since 1999. Yesterday the UK licensing authority, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), said nine children had died in this country among a smaller population on medication. They declined to reveal the children's ages because of the possibility of identification.
This will soon be a big story in the Australian media too, given our fondness for the drug.
A post to Huffington Post I can agree with
The Blog | Gabriel Rotello: Huntington: 1 - Reformers: 0 | The Huffington Post
It's on the Cartoon Wars, and I don't think I disagree with anything it says. Maybe the first time ever that has happened.
It's on the Cartoon Wars, and I don't think I disagree with anything it says. Maybe the first time ever that has happened.
Unhappy Lefty Enclaves
Welcome to the angst-ridden inner west - National - smh.com.au
The above article from the Sydney Morning Herald looks at why inner West Sydney, which is a very safe Labor area, comes up as the unhappiest place in Australia.
Anthony Albanese thinks it is because they all care too much:
The MP, Anthony Albanese, said the malaise of his constituents could be explained partly by their sense of compassion: "Most of them don't know anyone who voted for John Howard - or so they think - and they're frustrated," he said. "They can't believe there are people in Australia who don't support asylum seekers. Combine that with high mortgages, two working parents, a lack of child care, stress and lack of time, and it affects the quality of their life. "There's also a lot of inequality, with many indigenous, overseas-born and poorer people at the Marrickville end of the electorate - though often they can be the happiest."
That bit about the insularity of young Left leaning voters rings very true. As is the bit about their inability to believe anyone could disagree with them. This is all a part of many on the Left's rather "precious" belief that their version of morality in action is the only rational one.
The above article from the Sydney Morning Herald looks at why inner West Sydney, which is a very safe Labor area, comes up as the unhappiest place in Australia.
Anthony Albanese thinks it is because they all care too much:
The MP, Anthony Albanese, said the malaise of his constituents could be explained partly by their sense of compassion: "Most of them don't know anyone who voted for John Howard - or so they think - and they're frustrated," he said. "They can't believe there are people in Australia who don't support asylum seekers. Combine that with high mortgages, two working parents, a lack of child care, stress and lack of time, and it affects the quality of their life. "There's also a lot of inequality, with many indigenous, overseas-born and poorer people at the Marrickville end of the electorate - though often they can be the happiest."
That bit about the insularity of young Left leaning voters rings very true. As is the bit about their inability to believe anyone could disagree with them. This is all a part of many on the Left's rather "precious" belief that their version of morality in action is the only rational one.
Just in time for Valentines Day
The Australian: Marriage rollercoaster mostly downhill [February 13, 2006]
I am not sure how seriously to take this study, but I am pretty sure there have been similar ones with slightly different results.
(I thought I had read that some scientists believe that the timing of marriage breakups is related to the average time it takes children to become somewhat independent of parents - around 5 to 7 years. I could be wrong, though.)
I am not sure how seriously to take this study, but I am pretty sure there have been similar ones with slightly different results.
(I thought I had read that some scientists believe that the timing of marriage breakups is related to the average time it takes children to become somewhat independent of parents - around 5 to 7 years. I could be wrong, though.)
A Mark Steyn moment
Toon-deaf Europe is taking the wrong stand
Tim Blair has already extracted a bit from the above Mark Steyn column, but the concluding paragraphs are more important:
"The issue is not "freedom of speech" or "the responsibilities of the press" or "sensitivity to certain cultures." The issue, as it has been in all these loony tune controversies going back to the Salman Rushdie fatwa, is the point at which a free society musters the will to stand up to thugs. British Muslims march through the streets waving placards reading "BEHEAD THE ENEMIES OF ISLAM." If they mean that, bring it on. As my columnar confrere John O'Sullivan argued, we might as well fight in the first ditch as the last.
But then it's patiently explained to us for the umpteenth time that they're not representative, that there are many many "moderate Muslims.''
I believe that. I've met plenty of "moderate Muslims" in Jordan and Iraq and the Gulf states. But, as a reader wrote to me a year or two back, in Europe and North America they aren't so much "moderate Muslims" as quiescent Muslims. The few who do speak out wind up living in hiding or under 24-hour armed guard, like Dutch MP Ayaab Hirsi Ali.
So when the EU and the BBC and the New York Times say that we too need to be more "sensitive" to those fellows with "Behead the enemies of Islam" banners, they should look in the mirror: They're turning into "moderate Muslims," and likely to wind up as cowed and silenced and invisible."
Tim Blair has already extracted a bit from the above Mark Steyn column, but the concluding paragraphs are more important:
"The issue is not "freedom of speech" or "the responsibilities of the press" or "sensitivity to certain cultures." The issue, as it has been in all these loony tune controversies going back to the Salman Rushdie fatwa, is the point at which a free society musters the will to stand up to thugs. British Muslims march through the streets waving placards reading "BEHEAD THE ENEMIES OF ISLAM." If they mean that, bring it on. As my columnar confrere John O'Sullivan argued, we might as well fight in the first ditch as the last.
But then it's patiently explained to us for the umpteenth time that they're not representative, that there are many many "moderate Muslims.''
I believe that. I've met plenty of "moderate Muslims" in Jordan and Iraq and the Gulf states. But, as a reader wrote to me a year or two back, in Europe and North America they aren't so much "moderate Muslims" as quiescent Muslims. The few who do speak out wind up living in hiding or under 24-hour armed guard, like Dutch MP Ayaab Hirsi Ali.
So when the EU and the BBC and the New York Times say that we too need to be more "sensitive" to those fellows with "Behead the enemies of Islam" banners, they should look in the mirror: They're turning into "moderate Muslims," and likely to wind up as cowed and silenced and invisible."
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Just for a bit of colour
I saw someone demonstrating Corel Painter last week, and decided to play around with some much simpler software that came with a tablet I brought to play with last year. (Graphics tablets, even a little cheap one like mine, are a lot of fun.) The above picture is meant to be an "oil painting", but on here it sort of just looks like a grainy photo. (It should look a little better in a larger version if you click on it.) Corel Painter, though, really does a good job of letting you make an oil painting from a photo. (You have to do the paint strokes yourself, not just a "one click" choice.)
Update: I originally had different version of the picture here, but I have improved it and replaced with the one above.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
More on the Cartoon Wars
It really is impossible to not comment on this matter, especially as I saw further demonstrations on SBS news tonight (which apparently took place after Friday prayers around the globe.)
Especially if you have never seen the Arab world's history of appalling cartoons of Jews and Israel, I suggest you have a look at an excellent post at The Thin Man Returns. It deals with the issue purely pictorially, and they have done an excellent job.
Of course, Tim Blair has been keeping track of the commentary from the press, and I have not felt a need to repeat what he and others have covered. However, I don't think he has linked to Matt Price's piece in the Australian today, which was quite personal and therefore more interesting than some of the punditry.
Last Wednesday, Philip Adams on Radio National interviewed Robert Fisk about the issue. Unfortunately, there are no transcripts of that show available; you have to listen to a recording of it on the Web. In the following recollection of the show, I may not be perfectly precise with the words, but I am confident it is generally accurate.
As shown in some appearances last year on ABC's Lateline, Fisk has become terribly rambling in the way he answers interviewers questions. He was at his worst with Adams.
Adams read out to Fisk an email that he (Adams) had received from a listener which made the point that it appeared that Europeans should be concerned that Muslims want to undermine the separation of Church and State which Europeans had to fight hard to achieve, and only achieved relatively recently in historical terms.
Fisk's response was a long ramble about how in Lebanon (he lives in Beirut) he is able to get on quite well with all the Muslims he has to interact with (including his maid, who was cooking his pizza lunch) and people he works with and knows on the street. He really went on and on about this, as if politeness demonstrated to a white male in Lebanon really answered the issue.
Then, towards the end of the ramble, Fisk stated that Muslims and Christians in Lebanon cannot marry. They have to go to Cyprus to do that. And he mentioned that the Lebanon Christian minority (although at 30-something percent, a pretty big minority) are badly discriminated against. (I presume he meant in other ways, but he gave no detail).
I immediately thought - "doesn't this support the letter writer's point?". But of course, Adams is notoriously sympathetic to Fisk's view of the world, and made no challenge at all. In fact he ended with a comment along the lines "so it is not an appropriate time to be bringing up Huntington's garbage about clash of civilisations." To which Fisk replied "exactly Uncle Phil [he definitely used the term "Uncle Phil"]..and I am glad you said 'garbage'".
(For the US take on religious based discrimination in Lebanon, see this link. They obviously don't view it as all that dire [perhaps especially for a Middle East country], but it is clear that the political and judicial system, with its ties to religion, is still a million miles for the separation of church and State that was the point of the email read to Fisk.)
To be fair, I would not have called myself a fully paid up subscriber to the "clash of civilisations" idea either; but what is so fascinating about the cartoon controversy is that what should be such a trivial matter is pushing me (and I suspect most of the Western populace) towards that school of thought much more than, say, a moderate sized terrorist attack like that on the London Underground. The latter is easily put down to a handful of madmen, but the cartoon issue causes one to despair at how thousands or millions of Muslims appear so capable of manipulation by their religious and political leaders.
(Of course, Muslims are not uniquely capable of manipulation - the German populace paid the price for its decade of madness in the 1930's. But with Islam, it seems to have been stuck in a medieval mind frame for some long, there is no obvious way that a liberal enlightenment is going to take hold within a similar time frame that the mad German quasi-religious nationalism was dealt with.)
UPDATE: I have now found a Robert Fisk opinion piece in which he makes all the same points he made in the interview above (but without the ramble about how is treated politely in Lebanon.)
The similarity he draws to the controversy 20 or so years ago over "The Last Temptation of Christ" (or for that matter, "The Life of Brian") is vastly exaggerated. Those movies attracted media discussion, some angry letters to the editor, and (apparently) one death when one person (not a mob) set fire to a cinema. But thousands on the streets torching US or British embassies? Demands that the movie makers be killed? I didn't notice much of that myself.
(Incidentally, I thought "Life of Brian" was likely to have a worse effect on belief than "Last Temptation", but that is a discussion for another time.)
Both the reaction to, and the nature of, the insult perceived by the faithful was vastly different. I think most Westerners seeing the cartoon of Mohammed with a bomb in the turban would realise it just as likely can be taken as a dig against the militant side of Islam alone, rather than at Mohammed himself. Or indeed it may reflect a Western perception of Islam overall that moderate Muslims could have chosen to try to refute, instead of allowing their radical parts help confirm it by violent reaction, and entering into the freedom of speech argument in a way which indicated that they do have a problem with separation of Church and State.
I suppose the meaning or intent of the cartoon is ambiguous, but it is hardly as if the Muslim leaders who chose to use it to inflame anti western sentiment were going to go on a TV talk show with the cartoonists to discuss it.
Anyway, the other point is that Fisk really seems to be trying to have it both ways in his article. He denies that the cartoons have anything to do with a "clash of civilisations," while also pointing out that radical Islam (which he seems to agree is dangerous) is making inroads in government in the Middle East as a result of Western approved democracy. He indicates that many Muslims want more moderation in their religion (let's hope that is true), but does not the political ascendancy of the radical elements helps support the notion of a forthcoming "clash of civilisations"?
Update 2: Readers of Tim Blair would already have been directed to a very critical review of Fisk's recent book on the Middle East. I am somewhat surprised to find that the Saturday Sydney Morning Herald (in "Spectrum") has printed a shorter, but almost equally savage, review of the book (although this is actually a re-print from the Daily Telegraph). At the moment I can't find a link to it. But I have found one to the New Youk Times review. It is more sympathetic, but still finds many faults with Fisk's approach:
"Journalists are not automatons but sentient men and women, and the "extinction of self" that supposedly scientific German historians once preached is an illusion. And yet Fisk's brand of reporting-with-attitude has obvious dangers. His ungovernable anger may do his heart credit, but it does not make for satisfactory history. His book contains very many gruesome accounts of murder and mutilation, and page after page describing torture in almost salacious detail. This has an unintended effect. A reader who knew nothing about the subject - the proverbial man from Mars - might easily conclude from "The Great War for Civilisation" that the whole region is mad, bad and dangerous to know, which is presumably not what Fisk wants us to think. Nor does he much abet the argument by George W. Bush and Tony Blair that Islam is essentially a peaceful and gentle religion. Most of the Muslims met here seem cruel and crazy, exemplifying Shelley's line about "bloody faith, the foulest birth of time." "
Especially if you have never seen the Arab world's history of appalling cartoons of Jews and Israel, I suggest you have a look at an excellent post at The Thin Man Returns. It deals with the issue purely pictorially, and they have done an excellent job.
Of course, Tim Blair has been keeping track of the commentary from the press, and I have not felt a need to repeat what he and others have covered. However, I don't think he has linked to Matt Price's piece in the Australian today, which was quite personal and therefore more interesting than some of the punditry.
Last Wednesday, Philip Adams on Radio National interviewed Robert Fisk about the issue. Unfortunately, there are no transcripts of that show available; you have to listen to a recording of it on the Web. In the following recollection of the show, I may not be perfectly precise with the words, but I am confident it is generally accurate.
As shown in some appearances last year on ABC's Lateline, Fisk has become terribly rambling in the way he answers interviewers questions. He was at his worst with Adams.
Adams read out to Fisk an email that he (Adams) had received from a listener which made the point that it appeared that Europeans should be concerned that Muslims want to undermine the separation of Church and State which Europeans had to fight hard to achieve, and only achieved relatively recently in historical terms.
Fisk's response was a long ramble about how in Lebanon (he lives in Beirut) he is able to get on quite well with all the Muslims he has to interact with (including his maid, who was cooking his pizza lunch) and people he works with and knows on the street. He really went on and on about this, as if politeness demonstrated to a white male in Lebanon really answered the issue.
Then, towards the end of the ramble, Fisk stated that Muslims and Christians in Lebanon cannot marry. They have to go to Cyprus to do that. And he mentioned that the Lebanon Christian minority (although at 30-something percent, a pretty big minority) are badly discriminated against. (I presume he meant in other ways, but he gave no detail).
I immediately thought - "doesn't this support the letter writer's point?". But of course, Adams is notoriously sympathetic to Fisk's view of the world, and made no challenge at all. In fact he ended with a comment along the lines "so it is not an appropriate time to be bringing up Huntington's garbage about clash of civilisations." To which Fisk replied "exactly Uncle Phil [he definitely used the term "Uncle Phil"]..and I am glad you said 'garbage'".
(For the US take on religious based discrimination in Lebanon, see this link. They obviously don't view it as all that dire [perhaps especially for a Middle East country], but it is clear that the political and judicial system, with its ties to religion, is still a million miles for the separation of church and State that was the point of the email read to Fisk.)
To be fair, I would not have called myself a fully paid up subscriber to the "clash of civilisations" idea either; but what is so fascinating about the cartoon controversy is that what should be such a trivial matter is pushing me (and I suspect most of the Western populace) towards that school of thought much more than, say, a moderate sized terrorist attack like that on the London Underground. The latter is easily put down to a handful of madmen, but the cartoon issue causes one to despair at how thousands or millions of Muslims appear so capable of manipulation by their religious and political leaders.
(Of course, Muslims are not uniquely capable of manipulation - the German populace paid the price for its decade of madness in the 1930's. But with Islam, it seems to have been stuck in a medieval mind frame for some long, there is no obvious way that a liberal enlightenment is going to take hold within a similar time frame that the mad German quasi-religious nationalism was dealt with.)
UPDATE: I have now found a Robert Fisk opinion piece in which he makes all the same points he made in the interview above (but without the ramble about how is treated politely in Lebanon.)
The similarity he draws to the controversy 20 or so years ago over "The Last Temptation of Christ" (or for that matter, "The Life of Brian") is vastly exaggerated. Those movies attracted media discussion, some angry letters to the editor, and (apparently) one death when one person (not a mob) set fire to a cinema. But thousands on the streets torching US or British embassies? Demands that the movie makers be killed? I didn't notice much of that myself.
(Incidentally, I thought "Life of Brian" was likely to have a worse effect on belief than "Last Temptation", but that is a discussion for another time.)
Both the reaction to, and the nature of, the insult perceived by the faithful was vastly different. I think most Westerners seeing the cartoon of Mohammed with a bomb in the turban would realise it just as likely can be taken as a dig against the militant side of Islam alone, rather than at Mohammed himself. Or indeed it may reflect a Western perception of Islam overall that moderate Muslims could have chosen to try to refute, instead of allowing their radical parts help confirm it by violent reaction, and entering into the freedom of speech argument in a way which indicated that they do have a problem with separation of Church and State.
I suppose the meaning or intent of the cartoon is ambiguous, but it is hardly as if the Muslim leaders who chose to use it to inflame anti western sentiment were going to go on a TV talk show with the cartoonists to discuss it.
Anyway, the other point is that Fisk really seems to be trying to have it both ways in his article. He denies that the cartoons have anything to do with a "clash of civilisations," while also pointing out that radical Islam (which he seems to agree is dangerous) is making inroads in government in the Middle East as a result of Western approved democracy. He indicates that many Muslims want more moderation in their religion (let's hope that is true), but does not the political ascendancy of the radical elements helps support the notion of a forthcoming "clash of civilisations"?
Update 2: Readers of Tim Blair would already have been directed to a very critical review of Fisk's recent book on the Middle East. I am somewhat surprised to find that the Saturday Sydney Morning Herald (in "Spectrum") has printed a shorter, but almost equally savage, review of the book (although this is actually a re-print from the Daily Telegraph). At the moment I can't find a link to it. But I have found one to the New Youk Times review. It is more sympathetic, but still finds many faults with Fisk's approach:
"Journalists are not automatons but sentient men and women, and the "extinction of self" that supposedly scientific German historians once preached is an illusion. And yet Fisk's brand of reporting-with-attitude has obvious dangers. His ungovernable anger may do his heart credit, but it does not make for satisfactory history. His book contains very many gruesome accounts of murder and mutilation, and page after page describing torture in almost salacious detail. This has an unintended effect. A reader who knew nothing about the subject - the proverbial man from Mars - might easily conclude from "The Great War for Civilisation" that the whole region is mad, bad and dangerous to know, which is presumably not what Fisk wants us to think. Nor does he much abet the argument by George W. Bush and Tony Blair that Islam is essentially a peaceful and gentle religion. Most of the Muslims met here seem cruel and crazy, exemplifying Shelley's line about "bloody faith, the foulest birth of time." "
Friday, February 10, 2006
Why stop at 100?
Aljazeera.Net - Leaders call for calm in cartoon row
From the above report:
"As Muslim protests over the cartoons subsided on Thursday, a Taliban commander in Afghanistan warned that 100 fighters had enlisted as suicide bombers and Denmark said it feared for the safety of its troops in Iraq."
These guys seriously need to get a life. So to speak.
From the above report:
"As Muslim protests over the cartoons subsided on Thursday, a Taliban commander in Afghanistan warned that 100 fighters had enlisted as suicide bombers and Denmark said it feared for the safety of its troops in Iraq."
These guys seriously need to get a life. So to speak.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)