Thinking of Barcelona, Cambrils, and Turku

This has been a week where, as a US blogger, I have been wrapped up in the confrontation in Charlottesville this past weekend and apprehensive of the coming events this coming weekend, to have addressed the attacks in Barcelona and Cambrils, and also in Finland.  However often such events occur, they are always senseless, and say nothing of politics or religion so much as the desperate and violent nature of the wretched people who carried them out. And I have always been amazed at the ability of communities to come together in strength and love, lean on one another, and rise above the terror and shock. 

My regards to these places and my condemnation of such violence are my only offering. Sympathy for the stricken and condemnation of violence being, I think, the least and most basic human position for such terrors. Anything more, perhaps, is too much, and unnecessary. I mourn with you and us all, in a world where terror and stupidity are like currency, but actual lives are spent.

My Thoughts are With London

Latest updates on the deadly vehicle attack and stabbings in London: https://t.co/AuMADn4QtM pic.twitter.com/Yo0fpjN8v8

— NBC News (@NBCNews) June 4, 2017

I offer condolences to those affected by these appalling attacks--violence is not signal but noise. It wreaks confusion and sorrow and anger, it can end lives and take away solace, but it can not build. It can not create. And it can not endure. Following on after the attack in Manchester, there may be those who believe that divisive, segregating, punitive acts need to be done against people of a certain faith or ethnic background to bring an end to this senselessness and hurt. But bigotry is no cure for bigotry, and violence is no cure for violence, and injury against innocents is no corrective answer to violence against innocents. There is only justice against those who did this monstrosity, and letting others know they can never win against free, strong people. Terrorism is a dead end. The greatest revenge against it is carrying on.

When ISIS Targets Islam

When politicians mistakenly insist that we need to identify the rise of ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, al-Qaeda, and other militant groups that formed within majority-Muslim nations as "radical Islam", they are using a framing that reinforces the claims those groups make towards being genuine practitioners of their faith and in some respects "disappears" the reality that these groups largely prey on Islamic populations.

Senator and former presidential candidate Ted Cruz has made this error, and current presumptive GOP candidate Donald Trump has made this language a particular criticism against the Obama Administration. It's basically a nonsense declaration, and the sort of rhetoric for which Trump is well-known makes him sort of a favorite among the terror-minded.

But when radicalized people make their assaults within Saudi Arabia, and particularly at the Mosque of the Prophet in Medina, then it becomes a little harder to say these are people who revere the culture and holy places of Islam. When we look at the actions of ISIS-claimed attacks in Istanbul, in Dhaka, and in Baghdad, it becomes harder to say that the war ISIS is waging is particularly against "the West". The problem doesn't seem to be merely geographical or religious--it is political and it is based in hate.

This comment by writer Xeni Jardin pretty much sums up what is incredibly wrong with the claim that ISIS is simply "Islamic":

Dude ISIS is bombing Muslim people in Muslim communities during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan how is ISIS Muslim no they're psychopaths

— Xeni Jardin (@xeni) July 3, 2016

All of these events during this holy month of Ramadan probably have their own political loci--but the character of their being heinous and also directed at Muslims suggests clearly, to me, that categorizing such terrorism as "radical Islam" is woefully incomplete. While it might be useful to address regional issues to some extent, the diversity and range of ISIS-claimed attacks makes understanding why they are happening basically useless in any religious context whatsoever.

These attacks are "radical" in the sense of being abnormal and violent, and "Islamic" in the sense of being carried out by people professing (for what it's worth) that religion. But they might as well be anarchists, nihilists, fascists, or any other-ists. To create such misery, their worldview is obviously trash, whatever they want to call it.

The World Actually Hears US Politicians, Mr. Trump

An al-Qaeda affiliate has now woven clips of Donald Trump's rant against Muslims with a narrative about anti-black police brutality because why wouldn't they? It's wrong to assume that just because one's selected audience is (white) Americana that anyone else with a television or internet access can't hear you.

This video wasn't made because Hillary Clinton, for example, suggested someone should make it--it was made because Trump's statements always were exactly what Islamic extremists want to depict the US as.

America--united, is great. America divided by bigotry, is weakened.

It is Normal Now, Though

One of the things that bothers me about running the kind of blog I do is that when certain events occur, I can't seem to blog past them. That is to say, unless they are addressed, I can't just go ahead and blog about something else, but then again, I also can't write about the big story until I know what I want to say. Yesterday, I didn't have enough information to make any kind of post about it at all, and simply dropped a poem (which is, for me, a kind of structuring of thoughts that I can do based on feelings without feeling false). I still feel like there's something absent regarding the San Bernardino massacre, but no doubt, whatever doesn't ring right at this moment will suddenly settle into history like a pair of socks in a drawer.

President Obama, after the Planned Parenthood shooting, said that we can't let this become normal. But, in a wrenching way, I think it already has. We now have had a year where in 332 days, there have been 355 mass shootings. If something is happening on a more-than-daily basis--how normal is that? Consider when we all, in shock and horror, faced the example of twenty dead mostly kindergarten and first-grade-aged babies dying one December day, probably many of them with Christmas presents already wrapped in a closet, set aside by their parents, for a happy surprise that never came.

And people bought more guns. And no significant legislation to do anything about the proliferation of arms among regular and irregular folks was done. And it keeps happening, and we have thoughts and prayers and forgetting and the next tragedy, and each time, some people shut down in more fear and silent anguish and nothing, not ever, gets changed. And some people speak out in a sense of righteousness and vocal anguish, and still, nothing, not ever, gets done.

In the face of a possible home-grown radicalized Muslim mass shooter, we still have folks in Congress who are okay with people considered too suspect to get on an airplane getting all the guns they want. God forbid they should fly--as if it's safer they should be terrestrial terrorists in their locality?  Not that we have more than speculation yet, by law enforcement, as to the exact motive of the shooters. Maybe it was workplace-related, maybe it was jihad. Maybe it was six of one, a half dozen of the other. Maybe regardless the results don't change.

Daesh and The Dance With Death

Overlooked in the concern over the Parisian attacks are the attacks that occurred quite as recently, the Beirut suicide bombings, which claimed over 40 people, and a suicide attack that claimed 26 in Baghdad, and for the survivors and the family members of those attacks, I would also like to extend my sympathies, ineffectual as they are. We are basically stupid if we try to view the conflict with Daesh as being some idiotic "clash of civilizations": they don't represent all of Islamic civilization, and based on some of the foul shit they do, they don't represent any civilization at all. They've slaughtered many more Muslims than they have Westerners. There's reasonable theory behind the idea that they mean to aim at the "grey zone"-- the area of tolerance wherein Christians or Hindus and Muslims can get along in peace.

In February this year, in a chilling editorial in its propaganda magazine, Dabiq, Isis laid out its own strategy to eliminate what the writer, or writers, called “the grey zone”.

This was, Isis said, what lay between belief and unbelief, good and evil, the righteous and the damned. It was home, too, to all those who had yet to commit to the forces of either side.

The grey zone, Isis claimed, had been “critically endangered [since] the blessed operations of September 11th”, as “these operations showed the world” the two camps that mankind must choose between.

Over the years, since successive violent acts had narrowed the grey zone to the point where by the end of 2014 “the time had come for another event to ... bring division to the world and destroy the grey zone everywhere”.

Ansar al-Islam is Still Targeting Secular Publishers/Writers in Bangladesh

A publisher, Faisal Arefin Dipon, was killed, and two writers were wounded, in a terrorist attack. These attackers are basically a disgrace to civilization because they do not understand that freedom of speech is the beginning of education and civilization. Bangladesh must crack down on these killers of writers and thinkers if they mean to have a civil society. If the government does not, they can only expect worse to follow. Extremists only ever build upon what they get away with.

Update: Via The Friendly Atheist, the Bangladesh Home Minister calls these slayings "isolated incidents". This is patently absurd.  Things that happen over and over again are no longer "isolated".  And if he can't connect the dots, Ansar al Islam has thoughtfully already done that.

This Saudi Arabia Thing--I Might not be Off, Here.

When I talked about the crackdown that seems to be happening regarding Saudi Arabia and dissidents, like the treatment of Raif Badawi and Ali al-Nimr, I suggested their crackdown on dissidents wasn't without a potential threat to their existence--after all, there are signs, They are pumping oil like mad even if that's like beating a horse you know has a tumor. So reading this prediction of a collapse in Saudia Arabia of the current government is pretty interesting. My basic belief is that, because so many Middle Eastern people today being young and having access to internet through phones and such, they want more access to liberty. And they will find a way.

I felt the same way regarding the idea of a "Green Revolution" for Iran though. I'm very romantic about the idea of a positive democratic wave happening in the Middle East. We aren't so separated in our needs or our likes, once the voice of radicalism is bypassed. I don't think Saudis are so generally fond of their repression than Iranians or any other culture held back by religion.

I know this too, means a destabilization, but the fall of a regime that won't even let ladies drive or be out of the house without male escorts is hard to prop for.

We Are Almost Fighting Alongside Russia in Syria

Yes, that'sTom Cotton, reminding us that there were politics in the 1980;s and the 1930's. What I find interesting, as a student of history and politics, is that Russia and the US were aligned in the conflict that Cotton is alluding to--the fight against Nazi Germany, and were cautiously allies.

What the simpleton from Arkansas doesn't understand is that we--the United States, have been dealing with Syria via diplomacy or direct warfare, for a couple years now. That would be under the leadership of our current president, Barack Obama. We have to be leading from behind in the sense that being the US (not being the leader of the US, Barack Obama, but a representative thereof) is regarded negatively in the world because of things like the Iraq invasion which made so very many things regionally worse for people in the Middle East.  There have been Iraq and Syrian refugee crises.

But here is an interesting thing. Iran, Russia and some Iraq military are allied in going into Syria to allegedly whack ISIL. Ask yourself--what does Russia even want with the dirty candy that is being on Assad's side?

Mike Huckabee says Something Appalling

I'm a big fan of the multilateral Iran deal because I happen to not be a jackass. I understand that we don't actually know what Iran's current nuclear capability is, but it might not even be as dire as alleged and that anyhow, anything that gets them to dial it back and lets us verify it looks like progress. And let's not be stupid--we've been pretending for how long Israel doesn't have nukes?

Do we think that is for real?

So, when pretend presidential candidate former FOX News contributor Mike Huckabee says something like, President Obama is "marching Israelis to the oven door", that is exceptionally distasteful. I guess in some way it might be a step up from exploding Disney characters. And maybe he doesn't understand that sanctions really don't stop nuclear capability. It's not magic. And the threat of military force may actually create an incentive for Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. His over-the-top statement has no clear logic.

He should drop the hell out for that comment: comparing President Obama to Hitler is beyond the pale and nonsensical.

I Stand with Atena Farghadani Even if I'm a Crap Artist

 

Twelve years is an awfully long sentence for a cartoonist to face for sketching out the truth as she saw it. The Guardian offers a means of solidarity--sharing one's own cartoon regarding the issue. Iran is supposedly a kind of democracy--but without free speech, this is a useless exercise. If political leaders can't be criticized, then anything they do is pre-emptively sanctioned.

I tooled about for five minutes in MS Paint, and I admit, I wouldn't have sketched much better. But my little contribution is to say that images don't hurt anyone--they might be a smidgen snarky, but that doesn't harm anyone or damage society.  But sentencing caring and eloquent and talented people because they care, because they are eloquent, because they have something to say--damages society in every way. This cartoonist should not lose such a chunk of her life. No. The political figures being mocked should understand that this criticism is a part of their job. They may not like it--who would? But if they do not like to be depicted as asses, the ideal solution would be to perform as less of an ass, not to punish the person who points it out.

The Public Flogging Sentence of Raif Badawi has been Upheld

This editorial from The Guardian basically says everything. As I've noted, blasphemy laws are not about religion--they-re about state power.

I don't suppose I need to point out how I feel about this.

And for the record, I am very interested to know what's in the classified section of the 9/11 report pertaining to Saudi Arabia. I'm not sure how keen we should be on "allies" like these.

Saudi Arabia Should Free Raif Badawi

The freethought blogger, Raif Badawi, remains in a Saudi Arabian prison to eventually fulfill a sentence of 1000 lashes altogether combined with ten years incarcerated. 

That is, he will expect to be physically tortured and held a prisoner for having done the sort of thing I take for granted whenever I point out that imaginary friends can't grant absolution for heinous acts or that religion is generally coupted by greed, sensuality, politics, or just plain being fake to begin with.

The nation of SA is altogether too be-heady at the moment, it seems.

Death Sentence for Tsarnaev

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving perpetrator of the deadly Boston Marathon bombing, has been sentenced to death, which is about as predictable as a very predictable thing can be. The deliberate, calculated nature of the crime is unquestionable--the pressure cooker bombs were placed, fashioned, and detonated, in such a way that they would kill or maim the most people and cause the most damage possible. The act was brutal and thoroughly intended to cause shock and horror. Although Tsarnaev is young and was very possibly led about by his brother, the fact remains that having any sense of right and wrong, or shred of humanity--this act should have been unthinkable, but he participated in it anyway.

Even Hate Speech is Protected Speech

So, there was a little "Draw Muhammed" free-speech thing held by Muslim-hater Pam Geller, and featuring Geert Wilders, so, really, what could go wrong?

Uh, what one might expect if one was impressed with the furor over the Jyllands-Posten cartoons and the fatwa against Lars Wilks, or the fairly recent Charlie Hebdo massacre?  There was a shooting, but a security guard was shot non-fatally, and both the suspects were killed. And this is a shitty thing to happen, but as outcomes go, it certainly could have been worse.

You know, I had been trying to work in a Charlie Hebdo post regarding the PEN Awards abstainers. It's not that I give a fig about whether Charlie Hebdo had great satire or good cartoonists, it's just that I don't think it makes sense to slag people when several of their number actually died, having even received threats, for doing the kind of commentary they believed in and which was understood by people who "got" the joke as actually anti-racist.

I don't celebrate Pam Geller's Muhammed to-do the same way. I think she is unnecessarily incendiary in her rhetoric, and I think she provokes.

Which still doesn't mean I condone a shoot-out as the answer to her rhetoric. I deplore the kind of single-minded dope who just added legitimacy to her rhetoric, by once again highlighting how some speech is deemed punishable by death by intolerant Islamists. (And yet, I can imagine even a similar event, where the threat of a distortion of the image of Jesus might at least garner death threats. Single-mindedness in the service of faith isn't any one creed's bugbear.) But would it not be much better to let the speech go, so as not to make Geller and her coterie able to claim martyrdom-status?

I believe in free speech. I think armed assault is not free speech, but terrorism. I can excuse one, even if I disagree with it. I can not condone the other. Shoot your mouth off all you like--just not guns and bombs.

Religious McCarthyism

In the above (h/t, TPM), Franklin Graham, son of seemingly ubiquitous and well-loved televangelist Billy Graham, is using his media access to discuss the people he believes to be surrounding the current president who are some kind of Israel-hating Muslims. About which he has no solid proof and can name no names, but he's pretty damn sure "radical Islamists" have infiltrated the US government.

I'll never not stop pointing put that there is a clear racialist component to the point of view alleged by Franklin Graham, because Franklin Graham has decided that crusading (ahem) is his appropriate legacy and because something about Obama just looks "Muslim-y". But it's also political in that he seems to want the President to agree with, say, Netanyahu regarding what to do about Iran, when the right answer may very well be continuing to try and get a diplomatic solution because a military solution is, actually, bonkers.  Which I think would be more apparent if this "what side are you on" game weren't being played.

Raif Badawi May be Facing a Death Sentence--Again

Just as thousands have begun to mourn the passing of Avijit Roy, a freethought blogger who was highly critical of the negative influence of the irrational in religious thought (and our sympathies at the Strangely Blogged household also go out to his spouse Rafida Ahmed Banna, who was also wounded in the attack), there's word that the Saudi Arabian blogger, Raif Badawi, who was sentenced a brutal and physically treacherous 1000 lashes, may be facing trial once again for the crime of apostasy,  which would mean death by beheading.

This is a reminder that if religious extremism in itself is bad, as it no doubt is when practiced by self-appointed judges and executioners, it can be equally terrible when the extremists actually are the government--except wholly lawful.

Religious Extremists Killed Avijit Roy

Avijit Roy was an atheist blogger who was brutally hacked to death for being an atheist blogger.

Being an atheist is not reason for being hacked to death--I hope.

Being a blogger is not reason to be hacked to death, I hope.

Being an American atheist and blogger a couple days younger than Roy, I realize I haven't challenged religion in the in-your-face way he did, but I feel no less like the kind of religious movement that would kill him, would kill me. And am, not surprisingly, very much against that kind of extremist--the same kind that made a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, that follows Lars Vilks to this day, and that slew several contributors to Charlie Hebdo magazine.

The willingness to slaughter people for words is the weakness that will make religious extremism collapse, because they lead people to the gallows, and there is, no kidding, a humor for that. And this little humor of mine, this bile....this little bile of mine, I'm going to let it shine. Let it shine, let it shine, let it shine.

I'm Not An Expert in Terrorism, But...

Weighing a handful of opinions altogether regarding "what ISIS really wants", as is the title of Graeme Woods' piece for The Atlantic, I'm afraid I want to back up from part of the main premise--that they are apocalyptic.

I'm not just looking at what Nihad Awad has to say about it, although his point about these being desperate people with no belief in worldly justice strikes me as exactly accurate. But leaving aside whether ISIS is drawing directly from Islam (and sure, maybe, enough of it is "really Islamic" but I'm not qualified to speak to that religion--I think it's more in the way Aum Shinriko is Buddhist, or the Rajneeshis are Hindu) if one were just looking at who is recruited and what they are doing, I think one would get a far better picture of what they are about than from taking their religious-flavored propaganda at face value.

The Copenhagen Dip

The gunman who shot up a free speech conference and later a synagogue has been killed and identified as Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein, a 22 year old who was already on the criminal radar as running with gangs.

He seems to meet the description of a "lone wolf" so far. It's not unlikely that he was inspired by the Charlie Hebdo attack to do what he did, but he's dead and there seems to have been no accomplice or connection to any larger organization.

I would not be surprised if this inspired additional attacks on Muslims in Europe, though. We've had a bit of that sort of thing here and in Europe post-Hebdo attack.