Video: Hitchens clashes with CAIR leader over Pace Koran prosecution; Update: Robert Spencer responds to Hooper

posted at 9:05 pm on July 31, 2007 by Allahpundit

From tonight’s Paula Zahn. This one dragged on for 12 minutes so I’ve got to do in two parts. Part one is the main event: arguably the world’s foremost atheist butting heads with CAIR tool extraordinaire Ibrahim Hooper over how, in a world where Ayaan Hirsi Ali needs 24/7 protection and American news bureaus censor their own coverage of the Danish cartoons for fear of stirring up jihad, Hooper can dare suggest that putting a Koran in a toilet is an “act of intimidation.” As you’ll see, his logic is nonsensical on its own terms: he hones in on the difference between destroying one’s own Koran and destroying someone else’s, but that has no bearing on the intimidation factor, particularly where, as here, the Korans in question didn’t belong to Muslims.

His insistence that Yusuf Islam, a.k.a. Cat Stevens, didn’t say what he said about Salman Rushdie is also, of course, a baldfaced lie.

Part 2 coming up.

Update: As promised. Dennis Prager makes a cameo to talk about his column today on Islamophobia. Hooper’s rhetorical parry? Dragging a guy into the conversation who’s not there to defend himself.

Tough day for him, incidentally.

Update: Robert Spencer has responded to Hooper at Jihad Watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Islam offends me. The quran is hate speech. Calling Christians and Jews apes and pigs? Calling women ‘deficient’? Not just in an outdated book but this is what Imams are currently preaching all over the world in this day and age. The bible is not exactly all roses but I never heard my minister say anything remotely as hateful as what Islam Imams preach. I’m highly offended. Its hate speech. Who do I sue?

Keli on August 1, 2007 at 10:23 AM

I knew before I posted that some deluded theist would say “Hitler, Mao and Stalin”.

I have destroyed that argument so many times, I am tired of retyping it.

But consider this, even if I concede that those 3 were among the most evil people ever to live, how does that prove the existence of your personal deity?

I agree wholeheartedly that Naziism and Communism are poisonous ideologies.

However, historically, manmy more people have been killed by committed religionists.

It is no game, Christians are just as scary as Muslims.

You never know what someone will do when their belief in a mythical creation is more important than empathy for their fellow human beings.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 AM

It is no game, Christians are just as scary as Muslims.

Wake up. Stop wasting other people’s time with your games. Ignorant and offensive is no way to go through life.

TheBigOldDog on August 1, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Ignorant and offensive is no way to go through life.

TheBigOldDog on August 1, 2007 at 10:40 AM

There is no doubt that I offend people that have dedicated their life to worshipping a fictional character. It is unavoidable. I either speak the truth or I try to avoid offense. Just as I am sure Muslims are offended by many of the comments in this thread. I have no problem with offense. No one has a right to not be offnded.

But, Ignorant?

One of us believes that all of the unchangeable secrets of the universe were were written into scrolls by middle eastern sheepherders 2000 years ago. And one doesn’t.

If I was ignorant, I would probably join you in your religion. Problem is, I am not ignorant, and therefore I will not delude myself.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:51 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Things slow at dKOS today? Try DU. I bet there’s something good going on there.

TheBigOldDog on August 1, 2007 at 10:55 AM

You are obviously new to HA, if you think I am a leftie. In fact, with your non sequiter attacks (of which your last post was an example), you have more in common with KOS and DU than I do.

Politically, I am to the right of most people on this board. I just am not deluded by religion.

My desire to defend America is greater than my contempt for the religous, so I am a Republican.

How well do you think the Republicans will do if the bible thumpers chase away the secular conservatives. How many elections will we win?

Don’t confuse religion and politics.

I still prefer George W. Bush with all of his religous delusions over any candidate the Dems would put up.

However, in spite of all that, whenever I realize that politically I am on the same side as people like you, I do get a little queasy.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 11:02 AM

It occurs to me that Muslems must feel a certain embarassment having the details of such a barberic religion unveiled in such a public, worldwide forum as the internet.

Another thing I wonder about is what ever happened to the Women’s Lib movement. I haven’t heard any women’s group standing up to denounce Islam for it’s treatment of women.

Of course this Orwellian/PC atmosphere that has engulfed America doesn’t lend itself to criticism of much of anything. (Throwing a Koran in the crapper a felony? Whew.)

Ernest on August 1, 2007 at 11:06 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 AM

The whole message of Christianity involves love for human beings. Contrast that with Islam’s message of submit or die. You know not whereof you speak.

infidel4life on August 1, 2007 at 11:08 AM

One of us believes that all of the unchangeable secrets of the universe were were written into scrolls by middle eastern sheepherders 2000 years ago. And one doesn’t.

See, that’s the misunderstanding of the Bible. The Bible is a HISTORY document. That’s why it says this person begat that person and so forth. It is a guide book with stories in history and what. Is it unchangeable to say the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776? Would you be ‘stupid’ for believing that historical fact?

There is no one person that is in the Bible where people point to and say, we have to live like this man. Jesus went around performing miracles so nobody could live like he lived unless they could turn water into wine, walk on water, raise the dead, heal the sick, etc. etc. etc.

The Koran is a book of history too. The problem is that it is the example for everyone to live by. It therefore is offensive to those that the book and its author deem ‘unclean’. One book leaves justice to God. . . The other book tells followers of ‘god’ to do justice for Him. The Koran is offensive by its nature.

ThackerAgency on August 1, 2007 at 11:12 AM

Hitchen’s is right on the money with his criticism of Islam and he is equally correct with his criticisims of Judaism and Christianity. JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 9:52 AM

Christianity has given the world civilization. Your hospitals come from Christians. Your Schools come from Christians. In the U.S. our government comes from Christians. Modern science comes from Christians.

Quit trying to draw equivalence between the barbarity of a death cult and followers of Jesus Christ.

Mojave Mark on August 1, 2007 at 11:30 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie:
I appreciate your comments about religion, and those of C. Hitchens. It’s stimulating (though hardly new) to think about and discuss God and religion, just like other important aspects of human nature.

I’m not completely sure where I stand on all this. I guess I’m something like a secular gnostic. But for many people in America today, religious faith provides the rationale for moral and ethical behavior, and a source of personal strength in the face of life’s adversities. If you try to strip this away suddenly, you will face opposition. Facing life without god and religion raises the kind of fundamental questions about the ultimate purpose of life that most people are unwilling and/or unable to address. IMHO, people ought to be either on the quest to find God, or the quest to disprove him. In either case, the issue is central to humans.

I know none of these comments are new or novel. But IMHO, you would do better to go around this particular wall

JiangxiDad on August 1, 2007 at 11:51 AM

Hooper is allowed by his religion to freely lie to nonbelievers if it promotes the advance of Islam. He is doing a great job.

Valiant on August 1, 2007 at 11:53 AM

JiangxiDad on August 1, 2007 at 11:51 AM

I actually grok what you are saying here and in a way I do agree in principle.

Christianity is less poisonous than Islam in much the same way that a common cold is preferable to the Black Plague.

However, I believe that civilization in the west evolved in spite of Christianity, not because of it. The pagan greeks had Democracy long before any Christians did.

I am torn in the end between my desire to help lift the veil of religion from my fellow man and my understanding that the average man is far too fearful and ignorant to allow that veil to be lifted.

In the end, we may never rise above religion, too many people get too much power from keeping the huddled masses in the pews singing hymms.

So, in the the modern sense, Christianity is less toxic than Islam but it is no less of a delusion and for that reason, I can’t accept either.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Hitchens is spot on to be anti-theist or against religion as all religions that I have studied all preach they are the true church and all else will burn in everlasting hell or condemned to eternal death.

I really enjoyed watching him rip Hopper a new one. Hopper is a con like many organizational leaders. They twist your words and lie to the public and I’m glad Hitchens and Prager were able to show him for the liar he is. There is no tolerance in Islam.

Mojave,

I think you need to do a bit more research on your claims about where civilizations, law, governments and science come from. As a matter of fact, early Christians didn’t like science and many “scientists” of their day were considered heretics or practicing black magic… many were put to death for their beliefs.

Civilization was pre-Christian and formed by many governments even prior to the Roman Empire, where they were not Christian but believed in many gods.

You are right that today Christians preach love and peace and most try to live by these teachings but the first established churches were by are no so tolerant and peaceful and brought about a lot of bloodshed in the name of god.

TFM

ThinkingForMyself on August 1, 2007 at 12:42 PM

“Islam is not a race, it’s an ideology.” – paraphrase of Ibrahim “honest abe” Hooper.

forest on July 31, 2007 at 11:25 PM

No one should be surprised that Hooper admitted this. It’s only a half-truth, after all.

The old cliche says “It takes one to know one.” This exchange is a splendid example. It takes a hate-monger like Hitchens to expose the hate-mongering defenders of Islam for what they really are. Ya’ gotta give that b*st*rd Hitchens credit on this one, he was spot on. It is the 1st amendment that is THE ISSUE here. Maybe I can clarify this by correcting Hooper’s statement with THE WHOLE truth.

Islam is not a race, it’s an ideology that is diametrically opposed to the 1st amendment of the constitution of the United States. Islam is an ideology that can not and will not coexist peacefully with ANY other competing idealology on the planet, including ANY secular or religious idealology that tolerates freedom of religion or freedom of speech.

There, Hoop’. Fixed that for ya’. No need to thank me. Just bein’ neighborly.

it’s the message RECEIVED that matters, and that is in the mind of the receiver…
…I didn’t say it was the only terrror tactic…
eclark1849 on August 1, 2007 at 10:03 AM

If you continue to go down that particular path of illogical lunacy, you eventually MUST concede that the blogging itself here at HotAir performed by AP, Bryan, Michelle, et.al. are acts of terrorism (as well).

Hmmm. I feel threatened by your posts. Therefore (by your own rules of reasoning), I hereby brand you a terrorist.

CyberCipher on August 1, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Quick aside…

The correct phrase is boldface or boldfaced lie and not baldface or baldfaced lie.

Boldface refers to the typeset used — which is a larger font in bold, obviously, rather than regular or italic type — when someone is making a declaration or bold claim … like a Headline.

I’ve never seen “baldface” type before.

So, a boldface lie is one that is easily detected due to its either outlandish or contradictory nature.

eanax on August 1, 2007 at 12:55 PM

The stupidist part of the interview was when Paula Zahn asked Hitch if it was Racist to be against Islam.

Shouldn’t a highly paid, national reporter know the diference between a religion and a race?

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 12:55 PM

Hitchens rocks. That is all…

eanax on August 1, 2007 at 1:00 PM

Indeed, Hitchens does rock. Having issues with viewing the 2nd clip, but Hooper will never be able to go toe to toe with my man Christopher.

Krydor on August 1, 2007 at 1:22 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 11:02 AM

I pity you. It must be really difficult carrying around all that hatred for the vast majority of your fellow man. It must make you a real joy to be around.

You are obviously new to HA

You can’t be that narcissistic as to not notice fellow posters who have been here for years now are you?

Politically, I am to the right of most people on this board

Since this is where I come to get the Left of Center take on things, that’s not saying much.

My desire to defend America is greater than my contempt for the religous

You want to defend a country filled with people you think are delusional? A bunch of people who are as “scary as Muslims?” You must be a masochist too.

One of us believes that all of the unchangeable secrets of the universe were were written into scrolls by middle eastern sheepherders 2000 years ago. And one doesn’t.

And one of us was a graduate engineer who worked for many years on SDI, and once of use likely, wasn’t.

Ignorant and offensive is no way to go through life. Let go of all your hatred and your life will change.

TheBigOldDog on August 1, 2007 at 2:32 PM

“Whether Hitch likes it or not……
God bless him.”
ROFLMAO
Yes, Hitch does rock a good portion of the time. I agree with his anti-organized religion viewpoint but not his atheism. Anyone as smart as he is should now that there is a higher power behind the intelligent design. There must have been poor potty training or something.
As for Robert Spencer, I agree with everything he says, especially that we should make it extremely hard for RADICAL Muslims to live in this country. Actually, their culture of Islamic super-sensitivity cannot exist peacefully with ours.
We will not submit to their religion that preaches racism, sexism and senseless violence or give up our first amendment, so they should move where they can live under Sharia law.

Christine on August 1, 2007 at 2:38 PM

I’m still waiting for a media outlet where whoever’s running it has the balls to tell these people to just go f*ck themselves.

Until then it’s all just a lot of powder-puff bullsh*t.

thareb on July 31, 2007 at 9:18 PM

Right now they hide behind Hitchens and let him take the bullets. Hitchens has a death wish anyway and is willing to walk into fire for his beliefs. I admire him for it. At least the media is willing to let Hitch debate. When Hitch debates fools the outcome is assured
———

I guess according to Ibrahim Hooper we can and should prosecute and sue anybody who holds up a sign in public that says behead all who insult Islam since that is offensive and is intended to intimidate.
…..

“What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist”
Salman Rushdie …
Speakup on July 31, 2007 at 11:38 PM

We should be rescinding citizenship and deporting them immediately. By not removing death threat makers from our shores we endanger outselves and send a signal. Originally I thought Rushdie was stupid to publish his book. Now I believe he did it to reveal the danger we face

I agree wholeheartedly that Naziism and Communism are poisonous ideologies.

However, historically, manmy more people have been killed by committed religionists.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 AM

That urban legend still around? Mao gets credit for a kill of at least 20 million. Stalin also 20 million, 5 million in the Ukraine and Kazakhstan when he forced the people into famine after the farms were confiscated. Hitler killed 6 million Jews alone. Communists win hands down, followed by barbarians. The Crusades, and Inquistions numbered victims in the tens of thousands – we do not have the death counts from islamic invasions to compare.

However, I believe that civilization in the west evolved in spite of Christianity, not because of it. The pagan greeks had Democracy long before any Christians did.

I am torn in the end between my desire to help lift the veil of religion from my fellow man and my understanding that the average man is far too fearful and ignorant to allow that veil to be lifted.

In the end, we may never rise above religion, too many people get too much power from keeping the huddled masses in the pews singing hymms.

So, in the the modern sense, Christianity is less toxic than Islam but it is no less of a delusion and for that reason, I can’t accept either.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 12:27 PM

Democracy and libery are two different concepts. The Romans could chose who would live or be slaughtered in the colliseum. The Christians in the arena would have spared the victims. Despots operating in the name of Christ were and are self declared Christians. That is the same as someone calling himself a vegetarian even though he eats meat. People can use a symbol anyway they want. It doesn’t make them honest brokers.

However I have decided that I wil go into a restroom in a Mormon university and flush Book of the Mormon down the toilet. Assuming I do not plug up the toilet, will the Mormons:
a. issue a fatwa of death against me
b. declare a hate crime and attempt to have me prosecuted for threatening their faith via toilet flushing
c. send in missionaries to witness to me in attempt to convert me, while they rescue the toilet

entagor on August 1, 2007 at 2:43 PM

typo – I meant Democracy and liberty

sorry

entagor on August 1, 2007 at 2:44 PM

“The pagan greeks had Democracy long before any Christians did.” They also condemned Socrates to death for corrupting the youth of Athens and disbelieving in the ancestor gods.

Contrast Jesus’ admonition to “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and unto God that which is God’s” and our First Amendment, against the Islamic idea of the Caliphate fusing state and religion. Yes, some political leaders have tried to hijack Christianity for their purposes, but we generally don’t have Lutherans and Baptists killing each other in the name of the Prince of Peace.

The Monster on August 1, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Oh, and since when is doing ANYTHING to a book, intimidation? (By the way, Hooper obviously doesn’t know the definition of “intimidation” either. Ignorant Git!

Rant over. :)

tickleddragon on August 1, 2007 at 10:06 AM

I think it’s intimidation to the book…

Miss_Anthrope on August 1, 2007 at 3:14 PM

Phrenzie is killing me.

Will you qualify your statement that committed religionists have killed more than communism and fascism combined? The Crusades are estimated to have killed between 1 and 9 million people. You have a long way to go toward proving that another 100 million have been killed by any combination of religious conflicts.

Phrenzie??? (crickets chirping)

ConstantSorrow on August 1, 2007 at 3:15 PM

The Monster on August 1, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Haven’t heard from you in awhile.

ConstantSorrow on August 1, 2007 at 3:15 PM

Depends on how much you want to talk about Islam. The Mughals killed roughly 80 million Hindus on the subcontinent over a 500 year period. Who knows how many the Arabs and Turks killed?

PRCalDude on August 1, 2007 at 3:34 PM

Michelle has got to do something about Bill O’Reilly.

If you’ve read Robert Spencer’s rejoinder, you’ll learn that Hooper was doing what O’Reilly has been doing of late, picking up selective user contributed comments to a blog or community site and demagoguing the reputation of the owner or manager(s) of the website.

I believe DailyKos is worthy of much criticism. But O’Reilly’s lazy use of guilt by association and inappropriate attribution is shameful.

Michelle, given your affiliation with The Factor, I implore you to educate O’Reilly on this issue!

It’s nice if Michelle now has sufficient funding and manpower to police comments on her websites. But such a practice, if elevated to a requirement, is a stranglehold on nascent sites. If all sites must act preemptively against untoward content, rather than prospectively (or taking a principled position that they will not act at all, perhaps in conjunction with a rating system), it will be the death of innovation in the user contributed sector, and a sad day for free speech in this country.

Allahpundit, I would request that you bring this comment to ask Michelle Malkin’s attention.

Anil Petra on August 1, 2007 at 3:39 PM

PRCalDude on August 1, 2007 at 3:34 PM

Well there ya go…:p

ConstantSorrow on August 1, 2007 at 3:47 PM

excuse me, intimidating…

(there went my joke for the day…$%#@)

Miss_Anthrope on August 1, 2007 at 3:50 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 10:10 AM

Misapplying Godwins law is typical of those wishing to dismiss valid arguments and only succeeds in making the invoker of Godwins law look ignorant and foolish.

Godwin’s Law does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime. Instead, it applies to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one’s opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions.

Godwin’s Law itself can be abused, as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent’s argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate


Godwin’s Law

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 3:53 PM

And one of us was a graduate engineer who worked for many years on SDI, and once of use likely, wasn’t.

It’s pretty clear you weren’t an English major.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 3:57 PM

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Godwin does apply.

The discussion was religion not genocide.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:10 PM

I am surprised that with so many devout Cristians on this board, so many fail to turn the other cheek.

I understand this, it is always easier to criticise someone else than to live up to your own standards.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:11 PM

eanax on August 1, 2007 at 12:55 PM

An aside on your aside….

According to this site (didn’t have time to double check the research, so, take it for what it’s worth)

http://www.mtannoyances.com/?p=384

Apparently the original was ‘barefaced liar’ the first recorded usage of which dates back to 1590. The earliest recorded usage of ‘boldfaced liar’ is in 1591, just one year later.

Of course, neither one of these is ‘baldfaced’, which can be seen in the 1940′s at the earliest, but, it appears that baldfaced came from the usage ‘barefaced’ and not as a mishearing of ‘boldfaced’. Since both ‘barefaced’ and ‘boldfaced’ are equally old, neither one can really be said to be the correct usage, from a linguist’s perspective, anyway. :)

JadeNYU on August 1, 2007 at 4:15 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:10 PM

So you claim, typical misuse I might add.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Somehow I am not surprised that you have no idea what the phrase “Turn the other cheek” means, here’s a hint for you, it doesn’t mean what you think it means.

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 4:22 PM

You can tell how much Hooper and CAIR respect the right of free speech of others by how many times he interrupts that free speech in action. Hooper is a thug represeting an evil religion which seeks to make the whole world submit to it either as converts or dhimmis or corpses. If Hooper were really concerned about religious intimidation, he’d be focusing his fury on all the Islamic plots to kill Americans which pop up every month in America.

Simply put, Hooper is the face of our Islamic enemy, lying and dissembling, doing what ever dirty trick needed to advance Islam at the expense of non-Muslims.

Tantor on August 1, 2007 at 4:25 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie: “The stupidist part of the interview was when Paula Zahn asked Hitch if it was Racist to be against Islam.”

It’s not so stupid as it looks. It’s a common tactic for Muslims to call critics of Islam racists. For example, when supporters of Hezbollah held a rally across from the White House a year ago, I watched as they encountered Christian fundamentalist counter-protestors who were calling Mohammed a false prophet. The Hezbollah crowd of mostly immigrant Arabs launched immediately and spontaneously into a chant of “RACIST! RACIST!”

Now, that doesn’t make any sense, as you noted, but Muslims know that Americans don’t like to be called racists. They know what buttons to push in America to get their way. Of course, on the other hand, Arabs don’t have any problem with being racists themselves. As Irshad Manji notes, Islam’s problems come from the Arabization of Islam, with many Arab Muslims considering non-Arab Muslims as lesser Muslims because of their race. It’s Arab racism that holds that the Koran can only be understood in its original Arabic, the language of Allah.

Tantor on August 1, 2007 at 4:36 PM

ConstantSorrow on August 1, 2007 at 3:15 PM

I’m Agnostic, and I could find these easy enough, which just means I’m not stupid or in denial about Atheist-based Socialism/Communism.

These are just ridiculous numbers; I mean, how did any of these guys get anything else scheduled? (that joke’s borrowed from Eddie Izzard – Death, Death, Death, Death, Lunch…)

Stalin:
Holodomor (Ukraine famine): 6-8 million
Executions: 800,000-1.5 million
Gulag deaths: 1.7-5 million
Kulak resettlements: 389,000-1.7 million
TOTAL: 9-16 million

Mao:
Land Reform: 1-5 million
Anti-Rightist Movement: 500,000 persecuted (deaths unknown?)
Great Leap Forward: 14-20+ million (unintended consequence of forcing industrialization on agrarian society)
TOTAL: 15-25 million

Pol Pot:
Redepositation/Killing Fields: 1.7-2.3 million

Note: None of these figures appear to include any deaths resulting from their respective revolutions.

Miss_Anthrope on August 1, 2007 at 4:42 PM

Somehow I am not surprised that you have no idea what the phrase “Turn the other cheek” means, here’s a hint for you, it doesn’t mean what you think it means.

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 4:22 PM

How about “judge not, lest ye be judged”, do I misunderstand that saying also?

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:48 PM

Hitch is a badass.

LtE126 on August 1, 2007 at 5:02 PM

The stupidist part of the interview was when Paula Zahn asked Hitch if it was Racist to be against Islam.

Shouldn’t a highly paid, national reporter know the diference between a religion and a race?

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 12:55 PM

She is highly paid, but she’s not a reporter. She’s lovely (or was), and so they have her read things on camera. Women look at her clothes; men think about having sex with her; otherwise: Bag of Hammers.

But, Jay, I gotta say…it seems that you live to have the “their is no God and religious people are brainless sheep” argument, for whatever reason, and that’s great fun.

But this comment — “which variation of a fictional character that we are going to worship” — might be a little stronger than you intended. If you are willing to place yourself in a group that is reportedly less than 10% of Americans, then denying the existence of a divine power — “God” — is fine, I guess. Almost everyone else in this country can see what I see, that the oddest position in any discussion of religion is that humankind and this universe are accidents of chemistry.

Even this position leaves unanswered the overwhelming questions of why and how matter exists and what explains the continuum of time. So is that your position, that God is “fictional”, along with Buddha, Jesus of Nazareth (in his Son of God form), Allah (or is Mohammad also fictional?) and whatever else is worshipped?

Jaibones on August 1, 2007 at 5:19 PM

If Hooper and CAIR are looking to tamp down religious intimidation, they might go looking for those mosques within sight of the World Trade Center on Sep 11 whose members ran out into the street and celebrated as the buildings burnt. I read one survivor of the WTC mention encountering such a mosque on 12th Street (?). I heard there was another across the river in New Jersey.

Tantor on August 1, 2007 at 5:49 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 4:48 PM

From the looks of it, the answer would be yes.

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 6:13 PM

I have very good, personal religions as to why I despise organized religions of all ilk and I am too educated to believe in fairies and gods, so by default I am an Atheist.

There is a very good reason why I brought the issue up in this thread and so far, every replying commenter has missed it.

I wanted to expose the irony and the hypocrisy of people that ridicule Muslims but get offended when you apply similar criticisms to them.

I am the least hypocritical person in the thread, I endorse every aspect of Hitch’s views on religion and I make no difference between whether he applies it to Muslims, Christians, Hindus or Sun Worshippers for that matter. Most people on this thread agree with Hitch on Muslims but they disagree with him on Christians.

Hooper is a wortheless charlatan. And so was Jerry Falwell.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 6:16 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 6:16 PM

I have very good, personal religions as to why I despise organized religions of all ilk and I am too educated to believe in fairies and gods, so by default I am an Atheist.

I am sure you do have your rationalizations for your hatred of religion, however this education you speak of is having a very difficult time making its existence known.

There is a very good reason why I brought the issue up in this thread and so far, every replying commenter has missed it.

On the contrary nobody missed it, nobody felt like arguing with you. This isn’t a thread about religion and nobody particularly wants to get into a religious pissing match with you in a thread that is all about Ibrahim Hooper getting his a$$ handed to him.

I wanted to expose the irony and the hypocrisy of people that ridicule Muslims but get offended when you apply similar criticisms to them.

No you didn’t, you just believed that you had an opportunity to lash out against one of the objects of your hatred.

Unfortunately unlike Hitch you only managed to come across as an angry, frustrated, not particularly well educated and quite possible inebriated youth.

This I would like to contrast to Hitch who often gives the physical impression of inebriation while displaying a savagely brilliant mental acuity.

You can and probably will believe that I am attacking you and like your beliefs regarding those scriptures you quoted you would be wrong.

doriangrey on August 1, 2007 at 6:39 PM

There is a very good reason why I brought the issue up in this thread and so far, every replying commenter has missed it.

I wanted to expose the irony and the hypocrisy of people that ridicule Muslims but get offended when you apply similar criticisms to them.

That’s the funniest thing I’ve read all day. Thanks for the laugh.

TheBigOldDog on August 1, 2007 at 6:50 PM

Most people on this thread agree with Hitch on Muslims but they disagree with him on Christians….

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 6:16 PM

The truth is that most of us are far more selective than YOU would lead people to believe. Your broad-brush gloss-over/gross over-simplification is worthy of a chimpanzee’s attempt at finger-painting.

As much as I don’t like Hitchens, I agree with him when he alludes to the fact that Islamic ideology is incompatible with the 1st amendment to the Constitution/Bill of Rights. I disagree with him, however, when he says religion is the source of all evil in the world. It is Hitchens that is being inconsistent here. In the first case, he is basing his argument on his reading of the rule of law as compared to the fundmentalist dogma contained in the Koran. The second argument (religion is root of all evil), however, can not withstand the scrutiny of the last 4000 years of recorded history. This hateful extremist position of his regarding religion should be classified as for what it is, simple hyperbole and rhetoric than is borne out of his irrational and emotional dread and fear of religion. Intellectually, one can argue that he is brilliant. But emotionally, his well-being rates/ranks right in there with the terms “train wreck” and/or “basket case” IMHO.

Based on your posts that I’ve witnessed here, I’d say that you are not far behind Hitchens. (You’ll take that as a compliment, no doubt.) Just don’t say that you haven’t been warned. All the different roads to hate (and there are many that lead there) all end up at the same place. Nothing good ever comes from going down any of those roads.

CyberCipher on August 1, 2007 at 7:03 PM

Personally, I think Human Nature is the source of all evil in the world.

That may sound extremely simplistic, but I think that religion, politics, upbringing, or almost anything can be used by people as a tool for evil (or bad behavior).

You can’t blame religion or politics or any influence, unless said influence is inherently destructive and detrimental to individual freedoms (or simply impossible to implement in reality, even if theoretically a “great idea”).

That’s why I feel perfectly justified in pointing the finger at the Quran, hadith, Socialism, Communism…leaving out other ideologies without guilt.

Because those ideologies at which I point the finger are inherently destructive and detrimental to individual freedoms. Period.

Miss_Anthrope on August 1, 2007 at 9:13 PM

Miss_Anthrope on August 1, 2007 at 9:13 PM

Because those ideologies at which I point the finger are inherently destructive and detrimental to individual freedoms. Period.

To make it simple: evil.

jdawg on August 1, 2007 at 9:57 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 6:16 PM

Jay, I’m not looking for a fight, I was just curious if you said what you really meant in that post. But I’m not sure if your response addressed that.

As for your original post, I don’t know if I even saw it. Hitchens’s commentary in this post had nothing to do with atheism and the Muslim faith, if I recall. I believe he was addressing the specific issues of this hate crime BS as it relates to CAIR, and the larger issue of the antisocial behavior of Muslims in general, not their faith.

He never even got that far. So any celebration of his commentary by Christians or Jews here would have no hypocritical element related to faith.

I think.

Jaibones on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 PM

Jaibones on August 1, 2007 at 10:28 PM

Having read “God is Not Great” twice already, it is pretty clear that Hitchens thesis is that all religions are poisonous, toxic institutions and that he does not give Christianity a free pass.

His opinions of Islam and his opinions of Christianity have the same root.

He rejects the, so called, good works of Christianity along with most other religions and meticulously shows what a corrupting, destructive force it is.

So, when he makes criticism of Islam, many of his same points would apply to Christianity as well. And for that matter would also apply to: Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Paganism, Mormonism, Scientology, Wicca, Statue Worship, whatever.

Now, I know that I will most likely not enlighten a single person. Intellectual enlightenment is a gradual process that, in my case, took decades to fully develop.

That being said, I will not humor Christians (or any other faith) by pretending that their delusion is real. The billions of bible thumpers may take great solace in the fact that their delusion is the number one delusion in the world, but popularity is not truth.

And lastly, there are far more enlightened people in the worl than you would guess.

People tend to be very social and they adjust to their comunity.

An enlightened person in a neighborhood of deluded religionists is likely to wear a cross and carry a bible and pop into church occasionally. There is great safety in blending in with the masses of hamnaity.

Lazarus Long, a character in some of Robert Heinleins best novels, pnce said (and I paraphrase) – If I found myself on an island and every day at sunset, all the people on the island rub red clay in their bellybuttons in a group. You can be damn sure that I will be the first one rubbing red clay in my bellybutton each day, to do otherwise is suicide.

If I found myself living in Pakistan, I would say prayers 5 times a day, If I found myself living in the inquisition, I would wear a cross and go to confession each week. To do othrwise would be suicide.

Thankfully, I live in a country and in a time where I can be myself and not worry about being killed by deluded fanatics.

So, with that in mind, I am not going to restrain my opinions in order to avoid offense. And I have no expectation of any theists doing the same.

Sometimes as these threads get longer, the fanatics start foaming at the mouth and getting more and more ridiculous and I have to bow out of the thread. this thread is mild compared to those.

If you have not read “God is Not Great”, I suggest you do. You have nothing to fear, I have read the bible a couple times and have tried to struggle through the Koran.

And for the person that claims that the bible is an “Historical text”, I suggest you read “Lost Christianities” by Bart Ehrman. You might be surprised to learn how the bible of today became canon.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 11:49 PM

Enlightenment personified, but does it work? Was this the lefty propaganda of its day? Hippies, communes, tune in turn on and drop out were the talking points of that era. There are thousands of half way house residents as well as uban outdoorsman (homeless) that prescribed to that message the sell outs are in Washington and Hollywood.
Beatles trivia: Just as the Democtat debate was the first television/internet fusion simucast the video in the link was the first ever global telecast of any media. Similar the Wizard of OZ being the first technicolor movie the Beatles chose to start the video black and white and end up in vivid color. Can you spot a cameo appearance by another Brit rocker of the day?

sonnyspats1 on August 2, 2007 at 12:57 AM

Wow, Jay, that was … surprising, inasmuch as it was nearly illiterate, despite your repeated boasts of extensive education and having achieved *enlightenment* and all.

I am writing that post off to the ale. Let’s try to stay focused this time. When I said this about Hitchens:

I believe he was addressing the specific issues of this hate crime BS as it relates to CAIR, and the larger issue of the antisocial behavior of Muslims in general, not their faith.

… I was addressing his specific argument about the conduct of Islamists, which I did not recognize as having anything whatsoever to do with his own atheist views, nor with his book detailing his disenchantment with organized religion, but rather with Muslims burning buildings, blowing up innocent civilians, murdering hostages, etc.

So then when you reply with this:

So, when he makes criticism of Islam, many of his same points would apply to Christianity as well. And for that matter would also apply to: Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Paganism, Mormonism, Scientology, Wicca, Statue Worship, whatever.

…it seems like we are talking about different points. So be it. I am fully aware of Hitchens’s views on religion, and do not care to debate them at this time.

Jaibones on August 2, 2007 at 1:22 AM

Jaibones on August 2, 2007 at 1:22 AM

As I said, I do not expect to change even one persons views and in fact, am not even attempting to do so.

Since my example from Heinlein was probably too subtle for you, let me expound.

People that live in a community that is composed of a majority of a certain religion will often attend services and adopt other outward symbols of the religion in order to blend in and avoid persecution. This is done out of simple self preservation.

Just as in Nazi Germany (someone else already Godwin’ed this thread earlier, so now it’s my turn) many average citizens joined the Nazi party and said “Heil Hitler”. This was done out of simple self preservation.

A significant portion of your coreligionists fall into this category whether you realize it or not.

In any event, while I do not possess the writing skills of Christopher Hitchens, I have made my points. If the clear meaning of my words continues elude you, there is little point in attempting further discussion.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 2:01 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 2:01 AM

As I said, I do not expect to change even one persons views and in fact, am not even attempting to do so.

So in other words what you are saying is that you just enjoy insulting those who you believe to be your intellectual inferiors.

I have made my points. If the clear meaning of my words continues elude you, there is little point in attempting further discussion.

There never was any discussion, just you spouting insults in a childish tirade filled with hate and bile.

doriangrey on August 2, 2007 at 2:11 AM

You perceive any criticism of your religion as “hate and bile”. In this way you are much like Ibrahim Hooper.

Thus, the thread has come full circle back to the original video that spawned it.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 2:29 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 2:29 AM

You perceive any criticism of your religion as “hate and bile”.

You haven’t criticized my religion, you have insulted the intelligence of anyone who chooses to have faith. While sadly you cant tell the difference between attacking an individual and attacking an idea not all the rest of us suffer that same intellectual deficiency.

It is no game, Christians are just as scary as Muslims.

You never know what someone will do when their belief in a mythical creation is more important than empathy for their fellow human beings.

If I was ignorant, I would probably join you in your religion.

I am torn in the end between my desire to help lift the veil of religion from my fellow man and my understanding that the average man is far too fearful and ignorant to allow that veil to be lifted.

You are not attacking religion, you are slandering those who are religious as being ignorant fearful deluded and lacking in intelligence. So much for your much vaunted education and intelligence because it isn’t coming through in your posts, all that is coming through is smug arrogance and childish angst.

doriangrey on August 2, 2007 at 3:11 AM

doriangrey on August 2, 2007 at 3:11 AM

I am not slandering. I am telling the truth. Truth can be painful. Since you do not like my opinion you call it slander.

People do not like their world views challenged, especially when they base their world view on beliefs they know there is no evidence for.

If you truly had, “faith”, then nothing I type should possibly faze you in the slightest. The reason you are angry, is that deep down, you know I am right. But, you and your “brethren” willnever admit THAT.

Amen.

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 9:43 AM

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 2, 2007 at 9:43 AM

I am not slandering. I am telling the truth. Truth can be painful. Since you do not like my opinion you call it slander.

Claiming that you are right does not make it so, it’s your opinion nothing more. You are however correct that its not slander, it’s libel.

The definition of libel is the written or published defamation of another individuals character. Which is exactly what you have done.

Your remarks have nothing what so ever to do with religion and are purely attacks on the character of those of religious faith.

In characterizing those of faith as being ignorant fearful deluded and lacking in intelligence you have not attacked religion, but defamed the character of those of religious faith.

doriangrey on August 2, 2007 at 11:28 AM

doriangrey on August 2, 2007 at 11:28 AM

Claiming that you are right does not make it so, it’s your opinion nothing more. You are however correct that its not slander, it’s libel.

Worse, it’s just downright ignorant (as in woefully and willfully uninformed) and condescending.

jdawg on August 2, 2007 at 5:41 PM

…I will not humor Christians (or any other faith) by pretending that their delusion is real. The billions of bible thumpers may take great solace in the fact that their delusion is the number one delusion in the world, but popularity is not truth…

JayHaw Phrenzie on August 1, 2007 at 11:49 PM

Dude. Have you no idea how ridiculous and imperious you sound here? Declaring that you have the ultimate knowledge that Christianity and, indeed, the very concept of a higher being is “delusion” makes you sound like you haven’t really thought this through and don’t know where else to go with it.

It’s ok to believe that there is no God, Jay. Really. You don’t have to try and trump that belief by declaring that you know all believers to be delusional and stupid. Everyone involved in the discussion except you understands that this is your (very strong) opinion.

But to finally get back to the discussion of Islam, how do you justify comparing American Christians to people who murder for Allah? Are you, like Glenn Reynolds, just waiting for that moment – any instant now – when we rise up and begin slicing off atheists’ and Muslims’ heads and placing them on pikes outside of the National Cathedral? Because, what, some nut killed an abortionist 10 years ago?

Get a grip, Jay.

Jaibones on August 3, 2007 at 12:22 AM

The last time I saw mouth-foaming like Hooper’s, they shot the dog.

Hey, that’s a thought!

Me? An Islamophobe? YUP!

thejackal on August 3, 2007 at 1:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2