The madness that is Muhammad strikes, and strikes again. It induces a rabid frenzy in its followers, and rains horror upon believer and non-believer alike:

Thousands mourn Karachi bomb dead

Thousands of mourners have attended funerals for those killed in a double bomb attack targeting Shia Muslims in the Pakistani city of Karachi.

The death toll from Friday’s bombings rose overnight to 33, with 165 injured.

A police official told AFP news agency more then 10,000 people had attended a funeral for 14 Muslim victims. Five Christians are to be buried later.

The attacks – the second at a hospital where victims of the first attack were being treated – targeted Shia pilgrims.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani appealed for calm amid fears of growing tensions between Shia and Sunni Muslims.

Security was tightened in Karachi as the mourners gathered.

Security in a predominantly Muslim country where all sorts of crazies are running about ready to kill and die for their ridiculous beliefs must be a nightmare. And especially in Pakistan, a country primarily founded on Islam.

And by all accounts, Pakistan is among some of the worst offenders when it comes down to any kind of tolerance whatsoever:

An old blasphemy law, which was written in 1927 during during colonial days, banned insults directed against any religion. In 1986, dictator General Zia-Ul Haw modified the law to protect only Islam. The law require a life imprisonment or a life sentence for anyone who defiled the name of Muhammad or committed other blasphemy. In 1990, a religious court ruled that the penalty for crimes under the law (Section 295-C of the country’s Constitution) is execution. ₆ The law states: "Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by inputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly defiles the sacred name of the Holy prophet Mohammed…shall be punished with death and shall be liable to a fine." The law is being used in Pakistan to discriminate against religious minorities: largely Christians, and Ahmadis. Under the present law, a Muslim may blaspheme Christianity with impunity. But a Christian doing the same against Islam can theoretically be executed.

Small wonder that these uglinesses continue, considering that Pakistan was a country born in the blood of its people. The body count continues, and the texts of alleged ‘holy books’ continue to cut swathes through the populace to this day.

Religion – it brings out the best in people? When? Never. It’s gotta go.

Till the next post, then.

Sneaky bastards! A video from ABC News explains the latest indirect fundie proselytizing tactics:
ABC News – Secret Jesus Bible Codes on U.S. Military Weapons

and this

Michigan defense contractor is putting Bible codes on their weapons which Mikey Weinstein, president of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, says, “could give the Taliban and other enemy forces a propaganda tool: that American troops are Christian crusaders invading Muslim countries.”

WASHINGTON – Combat rifle sights used by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan carry references to Bible verses, stoking concerns about whether the inscriptions break a government rule that bars proselytizing by American troops.

Military officials said the citations don’t violate the ban and they won’t stop using the telescoping sights, which allow troops to pinpoint the enemy day or night.

The contractor that makes the equipment, Trijicon of Wixom, Mich., said the U.S. military has been a customer since 1995 and the company has never received any complaints about the Scripture citations.

Because not many know about it, you fucker!

“We don’t publicize this,” Tom Munson, Trijicon’s director of sales and marketing, said in an interview. “It’s not something we make a big deal out of. But when asked, we say, ‘Yes, it’s there.’”

Because if you did “make a big deal out of” it, many tax-paying citizens and secular organizations DO have a problem with it. And soldiers who know about it and disagree are afraid to speak up:

Weinstein said he has received complaints about the Scripture citations from active-duty and retired members of the military. He said he couldn’t identify them because they fear retaliation.

Here’s the trailer: [LINK]

As no doubt some of you are aware, recently a Muslim military psychiatrist went haywire, and shot (and killed) a number of people. Recently, CNN did a report on Hasan’s motive and background, and yes, it doesn’t look too damn good.

Humanity being a species of extremists, the days to come will no doubt illustrate polarization issues. And one of the worst cornerstones of the problem, is this idiocy we term religion, this superstition we are told to nod and murmur over and grant obsequiousness to.

It is no secret that I’m no fan of being told to be quiet when idiocy raises its ugly head. Most of you are like-minded. Those few of us who recognize the ideological blind spot are considered pariahs and told to shut up and sit on our hands, instead of vocalizing our criticisms. Even though 9/11 should have taught us collectively that unrestrained superstition is dangerous in any hands.

And to top off the scare-mongering, I found this deeply disturbing as well:

Within the fundamentalist front in the officer corps, the best organized group is Officers’ Christian Fellowship, with 15,000 members active at 80 percent of military bases and an annual growth rate, in recent years, of 3 percent. Founded during World War II, OCF was for most of its history concerned mainly with the spiritual lives of those who sought it out, but since 9/11 it has moved in a more militant direction. According to the group’s current executive director, retired Air Force Lieutenant General Bruce L. Fister, the “global war on terror”—to which Obama has committed 17,000 new troops in Afghanistan—is “a spiritual battle of the highest magnitude.” As jihad has come to connote violence, so spiritual war has moved closer to actual conflict, “continually confronting an implacable, powerful foe who hates us and eagerly seeks to destroy us,” declares “The Source of Combat Readiness,” an OCF Scripture study prepared on the eve of the Iraq War.

‘Spiritual battle’? We’ve heard that trope before. The troops blared that at the Crusades, the priests trumpeted that during every inquisition, in fact that fuckhead Woodrow Wilson alluded to it in his speech on Manifest Destiny.

Inevitably this ends in tears. Someone somewhere will be broken over the knee of ideology.

But another OCF Bible study, “Mission Accomplished,” warns that victory abroad does not mean the war is won at home. “If Satan cannot succeed with threats from the outside, he will seek to destroy from within,” asserts the study, a reference to “fellow countrymen” both in biblical times and today who practice “spiritual adultery.” “Mission Accomplished” takes as its text Nehemiah 1–6, the story of the “wallbuilder” who rebuilt the fortifications around Jerusalem. An outsider might misinterpret the wall metaphor as a sign of respect for separation of church and state, but in contemporary fundamentalist thinking the story stands for just the opposite: a wall within which church and state are one. “With the wall completed the people could live an integrated life,” the study argues. “God was to be Lord of all or not Lord at all.” So it is today, “Mission Accomplished” continues, proposing that before military Christians can complete their wall, they must bring this “Lord of all” to the entire armed forces. “We will need to press ahead obediently,” the study concludes, “not allowing the opposition, all of which is spearheaded by Satan, to keep us from the mission of reclaiming territory for Christ in the military.”

These people are undermining the SOCAS. They are most emphatically not putting their country first: they’re obviously putting it second to their superstitious drivel. If you’re a soldier, you put the country first. Otherwise, you’re an extremist, and need to be watched very carefully.

Every man and woman in the military swears an oath to defend the Constitution. To most of them, evangelicals included, that oath is as sacred as Scripture. For the fundamentalist front, though, the Constitution is itself a blueprint for a Christian nation. “The idea of separation of church and state?” an Air Force Academy senior named Bruce Hrabak says. “There’s this whole idea in America that it’s in the Constitution, but it’s not.”

Huh. Skipping over the fact that the Constitution states baldly that ‘no religious oath is required for office’, that there’s not one breath or iota of religious rhetoric contained in the whole damn thing, the only people who think that the SOCAS is in it are undereducated (and I’m being kind here).

If the fundamentalist front were to have a seminary, it would be the Air Force Academy, a campus of steel and white marble wedged into the right angle formed by the Great Plains and the Rockies. In 2005, the academy became the subject of scandal because of its culture of Christian proselytization. Today, the Air Force touts the institution as a model of reform. But after the school brought in as speakers for a mandatory assembly three Christian evangelists who proclaimed that the only solution to terrorism was to “kill Islam,” I decided to see what had changed. Not much, several Christian cadets told me. “Now,” Hrabak said, “we’re underground.” Then he winked.

Again, the target isn’t a single religion, it’s all of it. It needs to go. One of the more frightening asides in the article was this:

3. Warren’s bestseller sometimes displaces Scripture itself among military evangelicals. In March 2008, a chaplain at Lakenheath, a U.S. Air Force–operated base in England, used a mandatory suicide-prevention assembly under Lieutenant General Rod Bishop as an opportunity to promote the principles of The Purpose-Driven Life to roughly 1,000 airmen. In a PowerPoint diagram depicting two family trees, the chaplain contrasted the likely future of a non-religious family, characterized by “Hopelessness” and “Death,” and that of a religious one. The secular family will, according to the diagram, spawn 300 convicts, 190 prostitutes, and 680 alcoholics. Purpose-driven breeding, meanwhile, will result in at least 430 ministers, seven congressmen, and one vice-president.

Obviously these ‘numbers’ were retrieved from that mysterious place where the sun don’t shine.

Here’s a high note, though:

Mikey Weinstein, for his part, doesn’t mind being called demonic by officers like Boykin. “I consider him to be a traitor to the oath that he swore, which was to the United States Constitution and not to his fantastical demon-and-angel dominionism. He’s a charlatan. The fact that he refers to me as demon-possessed so he can sell more books makes me want to take a Louisville Slugger to his kneecaps, his big fat belly, and his head. He is a very, very bad man.” Mikey—nobody, not even his many enemies, calls him Weinstein—likes fighting, literally. In 1973, as a “doolie” (a freshman at the Air Force Academy) he punched an officer who accused him of fabricating anti-Semitic threats he’d received. In 2005, after the then-head of the National Association of Evangelicals, Ted Haggard, declared that people like Mikey made it hard for him to “defend Jewish causes,” Mikey challenged the pastor to a public boxing match, with proceeds to go to charity. (Haggard didn’t take him up on it.) He relishes a rumor that he’s come to be known among some at the Pentagon as the Joker, after Heath Ledger’s nihilistic embodiment of Batman’s nemesis. But he draws a distinction: “Don’t confuse my description of chaos with advocacy of chaos.”

I think we need more Mikey Weinstein’s in this world. Of course, the ‘dog loves you unconditionally’ crowd responded with their usual ‘love thy neighbor’ tactics:

But as Mikey’s client base grows, so too do the ranks of his enemies. The picture window in his living room has been shot out twice, and last summer he woke to find a swastika and a cross scrawled on his door. Since he launched MRFF four years ago, he has accumulated an impressive collection of hate mail. Some of it is earnest: “You are costing lives by dividing military personnel and undermining troops,” reads one missive. “Their blood is on your hands.” Much of it is juvenile: “you little bald-headed fag,” reads an email Mikey received after an appearance on CNN, “what the fuck are you doing with an organization of this title when the purpose of your group is not to encourage religious freedom, but to DENY religious freedom?” Quite a bit of it is anti-Semitic: “Once again, the Oy Vey! crowd whines. This jew used to be an Air Force lawyer and got the email”—a solicitation by Air Force General Jack Catton for campaign donations to put “more Christian men” in Congress, which Mikey made public—“just one more example of why filthy, hook-nosed jews should be purged from our society.”

The abuse has become a regular feature of Mikey’s routine in public appearances. There’s a sense in which Mikey likes it—not the threats, but the evidence. “We’ve had dead animals on the porch. Beer bottles, feces thrown at the house. I don’t even think about it. I view it as if I was Barry Bonds about to go to bat in Dodger Stadium and people are booing. You want a piece of me? Get in line, buddy. Pack a lunch.” Mikey sees things in terms of enemies, and he likes to know he’s rattling his.

Charming. Again, there’s religion, bringing out the best in people.

It’s a huge article, so I’ve only quoted snippets. But it’s downright scary – the military should be entirely secular. Mind you, secular, not religion-free – that would be a violation of the SOCAS, to encroach on people’s rights. But the freedom of religion also constitutes a freedom from religion, otherwise the former would be meaningless.

In the meantime, be afraid. Because extremists with guns are taking over the military. And that bodes well for no one except those who march in lockstep with them.

Till the next post, then.

I found this article via American Atheists. In response to the article, one commenter wrote: “this law was passed in extreme haste by the outgoing administration right before the far more moderate leaders who were voted in earlier this year take over.” But will Sharia Law be overturned with the new administration? It’s mind-blowing that these sorts of things can even be considered in today’s world, and once again based on ancient superstitious beliefs and religion-fueled bigotry and prejudice.

Indonesia: Stoning for adultery – Aceh passes Sharia law

Aceh, a province of Indonesia, passed a new law making adultery punishable by stoning to death. The law, an ominous sign of creeping Sharia, also imposes severe sentences (up to 400 lashes) for homosexuality, alcohol consumption and gambling. Married people convicted of adultery can be sentenced to death by stoning. Unmarried people can be sentenced to 100 lashes with a cane. Human rights activists are condemning the new law as being cruel and degrading.

I did more research on this story and found dozens of links.

September 14, 2009 BBC News reports:

The legislation was passed unanimously by Aceh’s regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid.

“This law will be effective in 30 days with or without the approval of Aceh’s governor,” he said.

The governor of Aceh, a former rebel with the Free Aceh Movement, is opposed to strict Sharia law. He had urged more debate over the bill.

*snip*

Previously, Aceh’s partially-adopted Sharia law enforced Muslim dress codes and mandatory prayers.

“This law is a preventive measure for Acehnese people so that they will avoid moral degradation,” said Moharriyadia, a spokesman for the Prosperous Justice Party.

A new parliament will be sworn in next month, after local polls saw the moderate Aceh Party win the most seats in the provincial assembly.

The Aceh Party has said it will review the law once the new parliament is sitting.

“It needs more public consultation. We need to involve the ulemas – the Islamic clerics – in drafting the law,” said Adnan Beuransah, a spokesperson for the Aceh Party.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially since the new government will be “consulting” with the Islamic clerics.

says, Christopher Hitchens in his recent article in Slate online.

“Living in the Islamic Republic,” wrote Azar Nafisi in her book Reading Lolita in Tehran in 2003, “is like having sex with a man you loathe.” This verdict has gathered extra force and pungency as the succeeding years have elapsed and as more women have been stoned, hanged, beaten, raped, and silenced. Lately has come the news that Iranian men in prison are being raped, too, for trying to exercise their right to vote. And now the U.S. government has come to a point where it must ask itself: What is it like to enter negotiations with a man who loathes you and who every Friday holds public prayers that call for your death?

Last Friday brought the news that the Obama administration had accepted an offer from Tehran, delivered the preceding Wednesday, for the holding of what the New York Times called “unconditional talks.” It was further reported that the administration had spent “less than 48 hours” deliberating whether to respond to the invitation, which yields the interesting if minor detail that this must have been the most significant decision taken by Obama’s people on or about the eighth anniversary of the attacks of Sept. 11.

Hitchens goes on to state his concerns about Iran and its uranium-enrichment program and its theocracy’s hatred of the West.

First, it has become ever clearer that Iran’s uranium-enrichment and centrifuge program has put it within measurable distance of the ability to weaponize its nuclear capacity. Second, it has become obscenely obvious that the theocracy is prepared to govern by force alone and to employ the most appalling measures to remain in power without a mandate.

While Hitchens says he is all for talks without preconditions, he presents these two questions:

Do we seriously expect the Islamic Republic to be negotiating in good faith about its nuclear program?

What do we know about the effect of these proposed talks on the morale and the leadership of the Iranian opposition?

Read on and then share what you think about what Hitchens has to say.

Yet another example how religion can be dangerous. Hundreds of infants were dropped from the roof of a mosque in western India in the belief that the fall (assuming they are caught in the bedsheet held by volunteers below), would ensure good health and prosperity for their families.

India’s National Commission for Protection of Child’s Rights issued a notice Thursday to the local administration in Sholapur and has begun investigations into the practice.

Thanks to our friend ChuckA for bringing this to our attention.

Chuck writes:

Yet another reason pointing up WHY, in particular, the insanity of Islam is so ULTRA dangerous to the world! The totally brainwashed boneheads just don’t get. And the media spends all of its time on the totally hyped attention given to things like the death of Michael Jackson; whilst millions of people die, daily, often from religious related insanity (Iraq bombings?)…with almost no notice whatsoever. Even the so-called “Liberal” Iranian demonstrators don’t get it,,,with their “God is Great” shouts…that until they totally leave and discard the Islamic bullshit, and pull the Ayatollah fucktards off their privileged pedestals, nothin’s gonna change in that forlorn part of the World.

Muslim Women, Vitamin D and Osteomalacia

Here is part of what the article says:

In her classic work Let’s Eat Right to Keep Fit (140), Davis also states:

“Sir Robert McCarrison, the great English physician, wrote of osteomalacia in India among the Mohammedan women observing the custom of purdah. These women veil their faces at adolescence and rarely go outside their homes.”

In this same regard, in Deficient Sunlight in the Aetiology of Osteomalacia in Muslim Women, Dr. OP Kapoor states:

“…in most of the Sunni Muslim women (who form majority of the Muslims), in spite of high intake of calcium, osteomalacia is often seen. There are two reasons for this:

“1. Use of burkha which prevents sunlight reaching the skin.

“2. Living indoors – most of the Muslim women specially those staying in the Muslim localities, do not move out of the house and thus are not exposed to the sun and often develop osteomalacia.” [my emphasis]

As we now know, vitamin D is necessary for a variety of other metabolic processes in a healthy individual. Moreover, sunlight has other positive effects besides vitamin-D production. For one, it is necessary for the production of the hormone melatonin through the eyes. Thus, Muslim women who wear the full burkha* are deprived of this health-bestowing chemical as well, which is necessary for proper sleep and, consequently, mental health. Also, merely taking vitamin D or melatonin supplements would not make up for other potential health benefits associated with adequate exposure to sunlight, and supplements are not the best choice for optimal health in any event.

In addition to developing bone and other problems from a lack of vitamin D and melatonin, covered women are deprived of fresh air on their skin, which is the body’s largest organ. Hence, the skin is not given the opportunity to breathe adequately. Furthermore, the color of choice in covering up women because of “religious” purposes is often black and sometimes blue, undoubtedly creating much sweltering and heat stroke in the very hot regions in which this clothing is traditionally worn.

While the emotional, mental and spiritual problems with forcing a woman to veil herself may be increasingly clear, the grossly under-explored factor in the burkha/niqab debate is the toll on women’s physical health. The bottom line is that veiling women and depriving them of life-giving sunlight and air represents physical torture – especially in heat-absorbing dark colors – on a mass scale. How many women are suffering horrendous health problems, exacerbated by being forced to give birth repeatedly, because of this oppressive custom? In the veiling of women, then, we are looking at a serious and appalling health crisis affecting millions worldwide.

Read the full story at Acharya S’s blog HERE.