This blog was originally published on Friday, 9 August 2013 on a different site
On 7th August 2013, Richard Dawkins tweeted about an article by Steven Pinkler titled "Science is not your enemy". Mr Dawkins was clearly impressed and exited about the article. Within hours Mr Dawkins tweeted that Mr Pinkler had accepted to receive 2013 Richard Dawkins Award.
In between the above tweets, Mr Dawkins also tweeted the following:
"Double standards so palpable as to be embarrassing. But to point this out makes me racist of course".
The tweet had a link to an article by Samuel Westrop, titled Freedom to Criticise". The article, published on the Gatestone Institute website, criticised British government for banning Mr Robert Spencer, a self proclaimed expert on Islam and known Islamophobe. The article is also critical of educational institutions for allowing Muslim students to invite scholars on the campuses. The Article is also critical of student unions and educational establishments. There crime, opposing Islamophobic propaganda.
The Chairman of the Gatestone Institute is a well known hawkish neocon, John R Bolton, a former US ambassador to UN. Mr Bolton, in his biography, boasts that his many accomplishments included, the rescission of the UN's 1975 "Zionism is Racism" resolution and US renunciation of International Criminal Court. He is also a Fox News Contributor.
The board members of the Gatestone Institute include a Britain, Douglas Murray, another well known critic of Islam. Douglas Murray had previously called for demolition of mosques in Europe. He is another person who claims that there is no such thing as Islamophobia. Mr Dawkins often tweets links to Douglas Murray’s article against Islam, Muslims, United Against Fascism (UAF) and Mehdi Hasan. Since his encounter with Mehdi Hasan on Aljazeerah, Richard Dawkins has made several comments ridiculing him. He even suggested that Mehdi Hasan shouldn't be allowed to work in public service.
Clearly Mr Dawkins is opposed to the entry ban imposed on Mr Robert Spencer. Question is why? He knows that Mr Spencer, who has declared himself as a crusader against Islam, only want to spread hate.
Mr Spencer, in his biography, says he is a catholic and admits that catholic church does not want anything to do with him. Mr Spencer has neither any specific qualifications of subject of Islam nor of Arabic language. He claims to be self taught expert on Islam. What I can make out is that he cites selected texts of Quran and Hidith (sayings attributed to the prophet). The fact is that Mr Spencer and racist organisations like EDL BNP and Douglas Murray, etc. get these selected translated materials from suppliers in Israel. In the last twenty years, a whole industry has developed around Islamophobic agenda and Robert Spencer, Douglas Murray, etc. are beneficiaries of it.
Let’s go back to Mr Dawkins tweets. Later, on 7th August, he tweeted:
""Muslims gave you Alchemy and Algebra!!!!!!". Indeed where we be without alchemy? Dark Age achievements undoubted. But since then?"
On 8th August Mr Dawkins tweeted:
"All the worlds Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge."
Later on, he grudgingly admitted that Muslims had achieved great things and retreated a little on the Noble Peace Prize. He accepted that the Noble Prize committee needed to change their criteria. It’s not the first time Mr Dawkins has said something and then back tracked.
On 9th August Mr Dawkins wrote an article on his website, defending his position on the Noble prize controversy, he fails miserably. He acknowledged that Noble Peace Prize has a history of awarding prizes to undeserving people.
In between the above tweets, Mr Dawkins also tweeted the following:
"Double standards so palpable as to be embarrassing. But to point this out makes me racist of course".
The tweet had a link to an article by Samuel Westrop, titled Freedom to Criticise". The article, published on the Gatestone Institute website, criticised British government for banning Mr Robert Spencer, a self proclaimed expert on Islam and known Islamophobe. The article is also critical of educational institutions for allowing Muslim students to invite scholars on the campuses. The Article is also critical of student unions and educational establishments. There crime, opposing Islamophobic propaganda.
The Chairman of the Gatestone Institute is a well known hawkish neocon, John R Bolton, a former US ambassador to UN. Mr Bolton, in his biography, boasts that his many accomplishments included, the rescission of the UN's 1975 "Zionism is Racism" resolution and US renunciation of International Criminal Court. He is also a Fox News Contributor.
The board members of the Gatestone Institute include a Britain, Douglas Murray, another well known critic of Islam. Douglas Murray had previously called for demolition of mosques in Europe. He is another person who claims that there is no such thing as Islamophobia. Mr Dawkins often tweets links to Douglas Murray’s article against Islam, Muslims, United Against Fascism (UAF) and Mehdi Hasan. Since his encounter with Mehdi Hasan on Aljazeerah, Richard Dawkins has made several comments ridiculing him. He even suggested that Mehdi Hasan shouldn't be allowed to work in public service.
Clearly Mr Dawkins is opposed to the entry ban imposed on Mr Robert Spencer. Question is why? He knows that Mr Spencer, who has declared himself as a crusader against Islam, only want to spread hate.
Mr Spencer, in his biography, says he is a catholic and admits that catholic church does not want anything to do with him. Mr Spencer has neither any specific qualifications of subject of Islam nor of Arabic language. He claims to be self taught expert on Islam. What I can make out is that he cites selected texts of Quran and Hidith (sayings attributed to the prophet). The fact is that Mr Spencer and racist organisations like EDL BNP and Douglas Murray, etc. get these selected translated materials from suppliers in Israel. In the last twenty years, a whole industry has developed around Islamophobic agenda and Robert Spencer, Douglas Murray, etc. are beneficiaries of it.
Let’s go back to Mr Dawkins tweets. Later, on 7th August, he tweeted:
""Muslims gave you Alchemy and Algebra!!!!!!". Indeed where we be without alchemy? Dark Age achievements undoubted. But since then?"
On 8th August Mr Dawkins tweeted:
"All the worlds Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge."
Later on, he grudgingly admitted that Muslims had achieved great things and retreated a little on the Noble Peace Prize. He accepted that the Noble Prize committee needed to change their criteria. It’s not the first time Mr Dawkins has said something and then back tracked.
On 9th August Mr Dawkins wrote an article on his website, defending his position on the Noble prize controversy, he fails miserably. He acknowledged that Noble Peace Prize has a history of awarding prizes to undeserving people.
As far as the Noble Prize is concerned, it commenced in 1901 to promote peace in Europe. It did not prevent two deadly wars which engulfed whole world. The second world war saw atrocities of kind not seen before. This included the genocide of Jews in Europe and Genocide of Japanese in Asia.
In 1901 most of world, including Muslim world, was under colonial rule. Although it seems most of the word is free of colonial tyranny, it is still trying to recover from the trauma. Furthermore, there is continuous interference by colonial powers hindering progress. Don't forget it took US 250 years to get to the position she is now.
It may be that there were no significant advances by Muslims after the 11th century but it does not mean that Muslim did not contribute to the development of humanity. We must not forget Islamic contributions to Art, Culture, Philosophy, Architecture, Literature, Civil Society, Waterways, Trade and Trade Routes, etc. Ironically Mr Pinkler's Article, mentioned above, admits that science does not have all the answers and offers an olive branch to Arts and Humanities.
Back to the Mr Dawkins and people he defends and quotes:
- Robert Spencer has MA in religious Studies with a thesis on history of Catholicism. That means he is an expert on Catholicism. He says his writings on Islam have been influenced by a catholic priest. How does that make him an expert on Islam?
- Douglas Murray attended Eaton and Oxford but we don't know if he actually attained any qualifications. Mr Murray’s expertise in religion are like his qualifications, ambiguous.
Richard Dawkins has admitted that he has not read much about Islam or Quran but he has read the Bible. I believe he has read, both the first and second testament. If he had read the Quran, he would have realised that all three Ibrahamic religions have same/ similar texts, teachings and laws. As an academic he owes to himself to read on the subject before commenting. He should not rely on tit bits of information provided by people, who have their own agenda.
I have tried to confront some of the people often used by Mr Dawkins as source on Islam, with facts and their hypocrisy but they blocked me. I also confronted a Jewish writer with teachings of Torah, Jewish law and Rabbinic teachings and she blocked me too.
So what are the reason for Mr Dawkins obsession with Islam and Muslims? Is it purely from scientific and atheist point of view or is it something sinister? Who is he targeting? Muslims in far flung places, with little or no access to technology, or those living in the west.
Finally to my question Is Mr Dawkins Sincere? Is he sincere when he says he is simply criticising Islam as religion like other religions? Is he sincerely telling the whole truth or is he deliberately telling half truths and creating tensions? Is he sincere when he says his comments are not racist? Is he sincere when he says there is no such thing as islamophobia? Is he sincere when he uses sources with questionable motives? Is he sincere when he uses criminal acts, in remote places to criticise Muslims, while ignoring similar practices in other countries? Is he sincere when he refuses to acknowledge life and culture in deprived and illiterate communities? Is he simply an English nationalist (His Wikipedia entry states he is English not British, although he was born in Kenya)? Is he sincere when he says he criticises all religions but:
I have tried to confront some of the people often used by Mr Dawkins as source on Islam, with facts and their hypocrisy but they blocked me. I also confronted a Jewish writer with teachings of Torah, Jewish law and Rabbinic teachings and she blocked me too.
So what are the reason for Mr Dawkins obsession with Islam and Muslims? Is it purely from scientific and atheist point of view or is it something sinister? Who is he targeting? Muslims in far flung places, with little or no access to technology, or those living in the west.
Finally to my question Is Mr Dawkins Sincere? Is he sincere when he says he is simply criticising Islam as religion like other religions? Is he sincerely telling the whole truth or is he deliberately telling half truths and creating tensions? Is he sincere when he says his comments are not racist? Is he sincere when he says there is no such thing as islamophobia? Is he sincere when he uses sources with questionable motives? Is he sincere when he uses criminal acts, in remote places to criticise Muslims, while ignoring similar practices in other countries? Is he sincere when he refuses to acknowledge life and culture in deprived and illiterate communities? Is he simply an English nationalist (His Wikipedia entry states he is English not British, although he was born in Kenya)? Is he sincere when he says he criticises all religions but:
- He finds church bells soothing but opposes Muslim adhan on Channel 4
- He says, he met CoE Priests and found them pleasant, but he has never met any Muslim Imam/ scholar. He, however, endorses view that all Muslim scholars are hate preachers.
- He admires recent Jewish achievements but ridicules Islamic history and achievements over 1400 years.
- He finds all crimes in far flung "Islamic" countries barbaric but does not comment on similar crimes/ practices in other countries.
- He agrees with EDL, Douglas Murray, Zionists, Neo-Cons that no such thing as Islamophobia.
- He tweets links to videos/ articles also tweeted by EDL and other Islamophobes.
Please feel free to ask your own questions and of course leave your comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment