Tag Archives: ayaan hirsi ali

VOX Smears And Endangers Muslim Reformers

image

I recently set my sights on Max Fisher over at VOX for stoking religious and racial tensions with his piece on three murdered ‘Muslims’. Not to mention his completely unfounded claims that Craig Hicks ‘expressed a paranoid hatred of religion’. Where did he express this? When?

Since publication, it turns out that one of the three murdered Muslims was actually a Christian and the police have also ruled out the possibility of a hate crime. I’ve yet to hear a response from Max Fisher or VOX about this, or learn of a correction being made to the false information they are currently spreading.

Even as a staunch critic of Islam, I think it’s irresponsible and foolish to assume everything a Muslim does is because they are a Muslim. Likewise, I would hope that others are also able to understand that not everything that happens to a Muslim is because they are a Muslim either. I’d rather wait on the facts than blow a trumpet in a concerto of uniformed noise.

Read more

Ed Husain Has Gone Off The Deep End

image

I recently highlighted the fact that Ed Husain chose Darwin Day to out himself as an evolution denier. This was particularly disappointing as I had considered Husain to be an ally of secularism and enlightenment (he co-founded Quilliam with Maajid Nawaz). Many had hopes that this would prove to be a temporary ailment and Ed would ‘get well soon’ so to speak.

Well, in response to the public drubbing he received for his evolution comments, Ed appears to have now completely gone off the deep end. Or ‘gone full Werleman’ if you will:

image

 

Read more

What’s A ‘Real Muslim’ Anyway?

image

It’s clear to me that the problem of Islamic fundamentalism will not be solved by non-Muslims. It’s going to take a great number of liberal, secular, progressive Muslims to reform their own religion from within. That’s not to say that non-Muslims do not have a valuable role to play in this process, but given that this process has already begun, I think it’s worth asking whether we are helping it or holding it back.

One of the biggest hurdles appears to be getting non-Muslims to accept that there even is such a thing as a liberal, progressive, secular Muslim. Pointing out examples invariably leads to cries of ‘no true Scotsmen’. How can they be Muslims if they don’t wish to push their faith on society? Surely they are not true Muslims if they favour secularism over theocracy.

I’ve noticed a double standard at work here when we consider the legitimacy of progressive thinkers within the Islamic faith. Non-Muslims are quick to decry Islamic fundamentalism on the one hand, yet hold all Muslims to a literal, fundamentalist understanding of Islam on the other. Any deviation betrays a lack of authenticity in the mind of the non-Muslim.

Read more

Ep#70 – Dave Rubin – The Regressive Left

Another fantastic guest on this week’s #GSPodcast. Dave Rubin (@RubinReport) from The Rubin Report joins me to discuss a whole host of topics including: Stand-up comedy, the state of American news media, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Israeli/Palestine conflict and the regressive left. Dave will also be talking about his relationship with Cenk Uygur and why Cenk has been a “genuinely bad actor” in the discussion on ‘new atheism’. I also ask to what degree being gay informs his politics and worldview.

Also available on iTunes and Stitcher.

Support the podcast at www.patreon.com/gspellchecker

Listeners get a free audiobook and trial with Audible at http://www.audibletrial.com/gs


Direct Mp3 Download

Taking The Myth – Zionist Shoe Theft! 14 June 2015

 

This week on Taking The MythStephen Knight and AScotsman Abroad discuss the big topics with guest callers: Did Zionists Steal My Shoe? We ask whether Asghar Bukhari is a lunatic, or if those pesky Jews, um, Zionists really are stealing his footwear. Also, what are the 5 things detailed in Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s new book ‘Heretic’ which she feels are essential for Islamic reform? Can they work? And we bang the drum about Raif Badawi. #MossadStoleMyShoe

Also available on iTunes and Stitcher.

Support the podcast at www.patreon.com/gspellchecker

 


Direct Mp3 Download

BBC Guidelines on Depicting Muhammad

BBC_GatesIn the wake of the appalling Islamist terror attacks (still currently unfolding at the time of writing) in France this week over apparent cartoon based satire of Muhammad – one deeply obscene question is doing the rounds yet again; ‘Should news channels show the cartoons in question?’.

The fact that this question is even asked, and indeed that most news channels will not show the cartoons integral to their reporting proves we’ve already lost our freedom of expression in this area.  It’s gone.

I was appalled to learn this week that depicting Islam’s prophet on the BBC is actually prohibited as per their own stated editorial guidelines:

“The prophet Mohammed must not be represented in any shape or form.”

Full of bluster, indignation & aspirations of petitioning – I was half way through a ranty blog post on the topic when the BBC pulled the guidelines in question from their website and announced they were making revisions:


They’ve spared you my unlettered ramblings at least, but I do wonder at which point was prohibiting depictions of Muhammad considered ‘in date’ or acceptable?  It wouldn’t be the first time I’ve reported on their refusal to promote freedom of expression over the ‘hurt feelings’ of the godly.

I await the revised guidelines with anticipation1. When will a mainstream news channel take a brave stance on this?  Or even an honest one?  Let’s no longer pretend we are concerned about upsetting the sensibilities of the religious – we’re scared we will be killed.  And for good reason.  Only when you admit the problem can you even hope to combat it.

As Ayaan Hirsi Ali has said, now is the time to ‘spread the risk’.

UPDATE: 09/01/15

The updated guidelines are in.  The relevant section reads:

Any content dealing with matters of religion and likely to cause offence to those with religious views and beliefs must be editorially justified as judged against generally accepted standards and must be referred to a senior editorial figure or, for independents, to the commissioning editor.

To me, this seems like a long-winded way of refusing to clarify the actual issue at hand whilst keeping the previous position alive – but unstated.  I can’t help but think this has simply been an exercise in reducing the BBC’s embarrassment at having their cowardice and self censorship exposed in plain black & white for all to see.  Let me know what you think in the comments.

You can listen to The Godless Spellchecker Podcast here, and support it by becoming a patron here.