News

Barbarism, Allah and the Sultans of Bling

Barbarism, Allah and the Sultans of Bling

A NEW penal code in Brunei based on sharia comes into force tomorrow. The Sultan of Brunei, 67, an absolute ruler of the oil-rich country of 400,000 and one of the world’s wealthiest men declared:

Today, I place my faith in and am grateful to Allah the almighty to announce that tomorrow, Thursday May 1, 2014, will see the enforcement of shariah law phase one, to be followed by the other phases.

Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah said in a speech that sharia penalties will be introduced over time and will eventually include flogging, severing of limbs and death by stoning for various crimes.

While many members of the Muslim ethnic Malay majority have voiced cautious support, the sharia move has sparked concern among many non-Muslim citizens and led to a rare burst of criticism by Brunei social-media users earlier this year.

The sultan responded by ordering a halt to such criticism, which has largely gone silent.

The dotty dictator added:

Theory states that Allah’s law is harsh and unfair, but Allah himself has said that his law is fair.

The UN’s human rights office said earlier in April it was “deeply concerned”, adding that penalties such stoning are classified under international law as:

Torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Nearly 70 percent of Brunei’s 400,000 people are Muslim Malays, while about 15 percent are non-Muslim ethnic Chinese.

The sultan has warned of pernicious foreign influences such as the Internet and indicated he intends to place more emphasis on Islam in the conservative Muslim country.

While on the subject of Allah, an unholy row has erupted at Rocky Mountain High School in Fort Collins, Colorado after it allowed a member of their “Cultural Arms Club” to lead the student body in an Arabic version of the Pledge of Allegiance, replacing the words “under God” with “under Allah”.

Principal Tom Lopez denies any attempt to push an Islamic agenda, saying:

 These students love this country. They were not being un-American in trying to do this. They believed they were accentuating the meaning of the words as spoken regularly in English.

Lopez said he has been getting a variety of accusations levelled at him, including being called a traitor. He said of angry parents, and an assortment of patriots:

 They claim they are outraged, that this is blaspheming a real major tenet of our patriotism – which in their mind the Pledge of Allegiance is only in English.

America’s Muslim advocacy group CAIR is now involved. Spokeman Ibrahim Hooper claimed the use of the word Allah is :

 Not necessarily specific to Islam and Muslims.

Really? Not according to  a ruling by the King of Malaysia, Sultan Abdul Halim Mu’adzam Shah, another Muslim clown who looks like a perambulating Christmas tree.

king_-sultan-abdul-halim

Hooper added that he was dumbfounded by complaints about the Arabic version of the pledge.

How on earth is it un-American to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in another language. It doesn’t make sense unless the people complaining are anti-Muslim or anti-middle eastern bigots.

Muslim Protestors display a banner during a demonstration against a Malaysian Catholic newspaper using the word 'Allah'. (AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

Muslim Protestors display a banner during a demonstration against a Malaysian Catholic newspaper using the word ‘Allah’. (AFP Photo / Mohd Rasfan)

50 responses to “Barbarism, Allah and the Sultans of Bling”

  1. charlie says:

    Stupid, it is non-fixable.
    Man, the sultan and that king sure love to play dress up, don’t they?
    As to those good ‘Merikkkans who kicked up a fuss, get over yourselves, it is just a stupid pledge to a piece of colored cloth. big damn deal what language it is said in. for those idiots, i served honorably in the USMC and spent my “all expenses paid southeast Asian vacation” (Vietnam war) with 5th Marine Regiment, 1970-71. I’ll say, or not, that pledge in any language i wish, or, even a parody version. they can all go piss UP a rope.

  2. Ivan says:

    They do know that “god” and “allah” are the same word in different languages used by Abrahamic monotheists when referring to Yahweh?

  3. Adam Tjaavk says:

    Sharia Watch UK is highlighting and
    exposing sharia law in British society

    http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/

    _____

  4. Bubba T Flubba says:

    The sultan is a truly great spectacular prick. Here the purpose of religion is in plain view……..to terrorise and suppress the common man. How else is the sultan going to hang onto his lucre.

    And in the USA ………the usual deadly combination of half educated gun toting religiots.

  5. barriejohn says:

    President Obama has been in trouble for praising Malaysia as a “moderate Muslim country” on his recent visit:

    http://english.astroawani.com/election/news/show/wrong-to-call-malaysia-a-moderate-muslim-country-ngos-tell-obama-34860

    Does he really believe what he says, or is this pure politics?

  6. barriejohn says:

    They should all be happy in the UK, where we will all be consuming halalalalala food before long:

    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/subway-adopts-sharia-law-185-uk-outlets-halal-175537311.html

  7. Broga says:

    I note that Charles Windsor’s medals are all given to him by mummy or via her military sycophants. He really does love fancy dress, doesn’t he?

  8. Paul Cook says:

    He’s got the date wrong. He’s out by month.
    He means 1 April

  9. AgentCormac says:

    Another body blow to santy, decency, morality and humanity. Sigh.

  10. AgentCormac says:

    Not sure what ‘santy’ is. It was supposed to be sanity.

  11. Bubba T Flubba says:

    I don’t want to eat meat slaughtered by primitive bloodthirsty cruel sadistic ritualistic methods. I am a British citizen and I don’t want to eat halal meat. I think I am in the majority tool. So I want a ban on halal and I don’t care if every islamist in the country squeals, shrieks and wails in hysterical feigned outrage. I want halal meat out of the food chain so that when I eat I can be sure that the meat is humanely prepared. Human decency must trump religious intolerance. Want halal? Then fuck off to a whatever primitive fly blown failed flea pit islamic country will have you. Or grow up, integrate and contribute to the well being of this country rather than leeching from it and befouling and burdening it with primitive islamofacist hatred, division and intolerance.

  12. Carl Kolotylo says:

    Sharia law? Sounds like what the republicans would like to install in the USA, except they call it biblical law. Muslims have nothing on christians when it comes to punishment for breaking rules from their book of lies.

  13. Carl Kolotylo says:

    How do you reason with fanatics? I used to work with a 3rd generation Canadian of Palestinian descent. A guy I went to university with, played hockey with, just a regular Canadian or so I thought. After Rushdies satanic verses came out and the ayatollah issued a fatwa on him I asked my colleague what he thought of it. Much to my surprise he agreed whole heartedly with the ayatollah, and this is from a moderate muslim. I have learned through the years there is no such thing as a moderate muslim. This and other religions can turn a seemingly normal person into a raving lunatic.

  14. Oy Vey says:

    I have been amusing myself by imagining the Sultan naked.

  15. barriejohn says:

    This and other religions can turn a seemingly normal person into a raving lunatic.

    From my own experience I believe this to be true – and frightening. Never trust anyone who subscribes to any religious belief – however “mild” it might appear to be.

  16. barriejohn says:

    I don’t want to eat meat slaughtered by primitive bloodthirsty cruel sadistic ritualistic methods.

    But you’re going to whether you want to or not, and would you like to know why? Because the subtext to all this (see what Carl Kolotylo says) is that if businesses stock foods that are not halal they are going to get bricks through their windows and worse. Everyone knows that this is true, and their weasel words fool no one.

  17. why do i have to share this planet with religious idiots says:

    The little prick looks like the organ grinders monkey dressed up in american hotel bell hop uniform. I guess he is deeply insecure about his physical appearance and has to compensate with all the pompous regalia. Mind you it looks like most of it came from ebay.

    What a tosser. Gargantuan conceit. Spectacular arrogance.

  18. Robster says:

    The sultan’s wee country is a pretty, tropical place with lots of beaches, mountains and palm trees. The added Sultanic bling is designed so he stands out against the green jungle background. He just wants to be noticed so is hitching his flag with that nasty muzzy god fetish and will enjoy the added power and joy of putting all the women in black garbage bags, waking at 5:00am to make silly noises and bang his head on the floor five times a day facing West. What fun!

  19. remigius says:

    Not sure what ‘santy’ is…

    Santy is him wot bring us presents on crismus day.

    Yeah Santy!

  20. Maggie says:

    A(nother) backward step in world civilisation.

  21. Matt Westwood says:

    Not to worry, it took but a mere 600 years or so for the worst excesses of xtian fascism to be overthrown since its peak, and that after a deadly schism which left half of Europe devastated. The same will inevitably happen to Islam, so (as long as anyone survives at all) Islam will be a safe little flower-arranging club where they argue about the hand to use to shake their excretory orgams with by, say, 2600 or so. By which time the world will be caught up in an insane frenzy of blood-soaked strife between the European Pastafarians on the one hand and the United Reformed Tagliatellians (California rubric) on the other.

  22. barriejohn says:

    Further to the remarks regarding the pernicious effect of religion on the human mind, it is difficult to imagine that this man was educated at Sandhurst. Not only is he head of state, but head of government as well, which is outrageous (“He has recently favoured Brunei government democratization and declared himself Prime Minister and President”, so no contradiction there then), yet we in the West give him maximum respect, including honorary titles bestowed by Her Majesty – a woman who seems besotted with all these tinpot dictators all over the world.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassanal_Bolkiah

    Under Brunei’s 1959 constitution, the Sultan is the head of state with full executive authority, including emergency powers since 1962. On 9 March 2006, the Sultan was reported to have amended Brunei’s constitution to make himself infallible under Bruneian law. Bolkiah, as Prime Minister, is also the head of government. In addition, he holds the portfolios both of Minister of Defence and Minister of Finance. As Minister of Defence he is therefore the Supreme Commander of the Royal Brunei Armed Forces, as well as an Honorary General in the British and Indonesian armed forces and an Honorary Admiral of the Fleet in the Royal Navy. He appointed himself as Inspector General of Police (IGP) of the Royal Brunei Police Force.

    In any other context these people would be considered delusional and locked up. And no surprise to see that the full force of sharia law (stoning, supposedly) will be used against “homosexual acts”!

  23. barriejohn says:

    Read this:

    http://time.com/#15320/the-sultan-of-brunei-intends-to-stone-adulterers-wait-what-century-is-this/

    Apparently, it may only be flogging for homosexual acts – my bad. Allah is SO merciful!

  24. barriejohn says:

    More on the Queen’s visit, and scandal surrounding the Sultan:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/173357.stm

    Let’s hope the oil runs out soon.

  25. tuqann says:

    Hello,
    A Jordanian Arab and the son of a linguist, I’d like to put my two cents in:

    Cent #1:
    Brunei does not speak Arabic. In fact the following is the list of countries that speak Arabic and has Arabic as their official language (irrespective of accent divergence)
    Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi-Arabia, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Yemen and Egypt

    Most Muslim countries outside the Middle East (i.e. the Arab peninsula + Egypt) do not speak Arabic, but a dialect which is a hybrid of their original native tongue that has assimilated Arabic as part of the importing of Islamic religious culture. For example, in Morocco and Algeria, both considered Arab countries, their language is a melange of Arabic, Barbar (African dessert Nomad tongue) and French (or Italian, depending on which country was colonizing them at the turn of the 20th century).

    Cent #2:
    The word Allah is literally translated as “the god”.
    ‘Al’ is definite article which is the equivalent of “the” in English or “le/la/les” in French.
    ‘Elah’ means god in Arabic (whether G should be capitalized is irrelevant as Arabic doesn’t have capital or small letters), the plural being ‘A’aleha’ (Feminine form is ‘Elaha/Elahat’ for singular and ‘A’alehaat’ for plural). The masculine form of god or gods appear in the Quran in ample examples, usually in stories depicting prophets arguing/preaching with/at their people about their gods; such as the story of Abraham, Joseph, and Moses. I am not 100% sure about the occurance of the feminine form in the Quran.

    In Arabic, like in French liaison pronunciation rule, it is often the case that consonants are merged or pronounced in silent form in order to make the sentence sound more fluid (Arabs always has a penchant for flow of tongue and a rich history in Poetry, which is also mirrored in the Muslim holy book, this is a subject unto itself and those who are interested can read up about it). For example in French “Les Ports” is pronounced “leh-pokht” while “Les amis” is pronounced “leh*za*-mi”, notice how in the first example the ‘S’ was silent and in the second it was not.

    Such is the case with ‘Al-Elah’, in which the consonant Al and the the first syllabol of the word god ‘El’ are very similar and so they were merged into ‘Allah’.

    Islam was a strictly an oral tradition faith for the first half century of its inception. Because of that the Quran was not archived in writing during the life of Muslim prophet Mohammed, and there are little clues as to when and how exactly did the word Allah evolved. The “merged form” in the Quran is always used to denote the Islamic god, and as such can be mistaken to be his name, despite the fact that it is also written in the Quran that Allah, along with 99 other “Beautiful Names” are just titles used our of respect, and that Allah’s true name will be revealed to those occupy the higher degrees of heaven. However, those who mistake it for a name have their excuse as often the scripture uses the word Allah in the context of a Name-Title or a Namesake, a special form of title of the highest reverence, where the lines between the title and the name are removed.

    The mentality behind this is that the title (and the position it entails) is not bestowed upon that person/deity, but spring to existence from within the existence of the person/deity. As achieving the title means the person/deity was at an inferior state prior to achieving the title, and consequently, can be reverted back to that inferior state and stripped of the title. In layman term, it’s like calling somebody “the first, the last and only king during all of time that exists”

    I also would note that Arabic translations of none-islamic scripture, like the Bible or the Torah, both were part of my dad’s library, and many non-Abrahamic religions, the translations use the word Elah and Allah to denote god in various forms (first person, third person, propositional, etc..).

    For those who are wondering, my family is Muslim, yes, but I’m a scientist first and foremost, and there is nothing too sacred when it comes to science apart from seeking the truth (whatever that means to you).

  26. barriejohn says:

    @tuqann: As an ex-evangelical Christian, my personal view is that Mohammed possibly “borrowed” the name Allah from the Jewish faith, as he revered the Jewish scriptures as a revelation from God – though he gets a lot of the facts wrong (or right, if you’re a Muslim!) as he seems to rely upon his fallible memory, possibly because he really was illiterate as they claim. The following is very interesting, though I obviously wouldn’t agree with the conclusion, as I don’t believe that these people are “worshipping” anything at all. (The argument as to whether all religions really worship the same god has gone on since people first realized that different religions existed in the world.)

    http://www.plim.org/1Allah.html

    I also believe now that although JHWH might have been a deity specific to the Hebrews, the different “names of god” in the Old Testament (eg Adonai) probably referred originally to DIFFERENT GODS. Many ancient peoples worshipped different gods to ensure that all bases were covered!

  27. Adam Tjaavk says:

    1] Israel has two official languages: Hebrew and Arabic.

    2] Maltese is an Arabic dialect.

    3] …despite the fact that it is also written in the Quran
    that Allah, along with 99 other “Beautiful Names”…

    According to Abul Kasem by

    Who Authored the Qur’an? – an Enquiry

    http://www.faithfreedom.org/who-authored-the-quran-an-enquiry/

    …Please note that nowhere in the Qur’an Allah says
    that He has 99 additional names including Ar-Rahman. …

    4] ‘Allah’ is not the name of the Muslim god;
    it is the Arabic word for god. All Arabs use it,
    whether Muslim, Christian or Jew – even the
    italianised and anglicised Arabic dialect of
    devoutly Roman Catholic Malta retains it.

    _____

  28. Adam Tjaavk says:

    …and there is nothing too sacred when it comes
    to science apart from seeking the truth…

    Good-on-yer!

    The Young Atheist’s Handbook | Alom Shaha

    http://alomshaha.com/

    _____

  29. Paul Cook says:

    Oral traditions.
    Every primitive society had/has them.
    The main religions had oral stories and borrowed from many other cultures around them before they made any form of written records. And those ‘records’ were written hundreds of years later from those so called events. I cannot recall what I said two days ago let alone what someone I never met said a hundred years ago – even a relative.

    For any one with an ounce of humanity, decency, honesty, common sense and logic to refer to these things as fact, true or accurate is a simple lie. It is criminal.

    Islam began out of Arabic conquest. It was then spread east. It is not easy to understand how it grew but it is likely from judeo/christain beginnings. References to those religions are very clear.

    Isn’t it interesting that despite mhd [so called] being alive at the alleged times, writing having been invented and papyrus available, that there is not ONE record of this koran, his sayings, any hadith, any reference to this wonder man at all – all of these were recorded over 100 years later? At least. From 722 onwards.
    Slam begins in 622. But no records of mhd until much much later. And that can all be debated.

    As to mhd: The earliest record of ‘him’ may be on a stone reference at kabala. But that is over 100 years later. And it could be any one or a reference to ‘god’. But that is contested – [well you cannot contest or debate these matters – you will simply be killed for questioning this]. As to the kabala the revered place for islams, that began as hundreds of shrines and pagan temples. Recycling, as in christinaty was widespread.

    The koran –it explains nothing much of anything. The hadiths explain what to do and how to do it. And how illogically ridiculous is that. Where most were written over a hundred and some hundreds of years later than the Koran, and allegedly [factually] state the exact same words spoken verbatim by mhd to explain the religion. To believe this is moronic in the extreme. It is like us, today agreeing what Queen Victoria said at breakfast on the day of her coronation – and then using that to say what she ate and it is the truth and a fact.

    It is such a shame that few can see the stupidity of what they say is the word of mhd and revere him so, putting those stupid words after his name, and say these are the words of gawd. To even think that means instant death at the hands of lunatics. And as to the comments above – there are NO moderate muslims – it is a fanatical religion. What is a moderate muslim anyway?

    Just like jeesous, mhd has little or no contemporary records. And like the cafflicks, slamic scholars [whatever that is supposed to mean – it’s just silly] cannot agree on him his life or anything much else except what was written hundreds of years later. However, note, that no one inside ‘slam can say anything of the religion, call it into question, or mhd, without fear of being killed. Is that a moderate tolerant religion?

  30. Stuart H. says:

    It may be of interest that Malaysia’s economy is extensively aided by a company whose products are certainly considered immmoral and possibly actually illegal according to the Muslim codes of that country. Their worldwide ’empire’ is built on gambling and having a good time at hotels, casinos and a large fleet of cruise ships owned either openly or through a large network of offshore companies controlled by them.
    While this does keep a large number of office administrators employed in Malaysia, as far as I can gather none of their product is available in that country. Also worth noting that in a country dominated by respect for your ‘betters’ it is common practice for, say, members of the ruling family to be honoured guests at or on that company’s facilities whenever they find themselves outside Malaysia.
    I also doubt if the luxury London property holdings of many Muslim rulers, again controlled through offshore companies fronted by London lawyers, are quite in the spirit of the sharia law they impose on their own citizens. Strangely, I don’t notice such despots offering to chop off their own hands.

  31. barriejohn says:

    When I was a young Christian, I was taught quite emphatically that the gods worshipped by those of other religions were “false gods”, this despite Paul’s clear statement on the Areopagus in Acts 17 (though I doubt very much that that event ever took place, of course!):

    And Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus, and said, Ye men of Athens, in all things, I perceive that ye are very religious. For as I passed along, and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. What therefore ye worship in ignorance, this I set forth unto you.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areopagus_sermon

    It is amazing what facts the religious are able to either overlook or distort in their quest to force everything to conform to their predetermined system of belief.

  32. barriejohn says:

    Paul Cook: It is, indeed, interesting. There is a link on Jesus Never Existed to the following article:

    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122669909279629451?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB122669909279629451.html

    As you say, it is no wonder that scholars are not rushing to investigate the theory!

  33. barriejohn says:

    Re the sources of Islamic ideas:

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/islam2.html

  34. Paul Cook says:

    BarrieJohn
    I am just reading about how many islamic scholars have been killed for even suggesting questions for islam to face such as:
    why do we have extensive hadiths on where to go to the toilet in the countryside yet nothing on alleviating poverty.

    It’s a religion of fanatics for fanatics.

    What is incredible is that, for the word of gawd some 20% or more of the Koran (which was written 100+ years after the alleged oral stories by mhd) is actually incomprehensible. (And why hadiths are needed). Incomprehensible in its modern language form and more so in it’s original from – a lot because Arabs altered the way Arabic script is written. The modern form has been greatly altered from the so called ‘original’. The version today is not what was written when it was first ‘written’, (much like the bible) and like the bible there are different and contradictory versions. But they don’t admit that. Scholars get killed for that too.

    Therefore, if it is not understood in it’s original language or the Arabic language it is now in, how then is it translated for anyone to understand. I have read that even very well educated Arabic speakers today could not understand the original.

    One funny fact I did read is that Moses is mentioned in it some 100 times. But Mhd just four! [And the references to him were added later].

  35. barriejohn says:

    Why do we have extensive hadiths on where to go to the toilet in the countryside yet nothing on alleviating poverty.

    Look no further than the “Books of Moses”. Whoever made up all these ridiculous and petty regulations was just mimicking what they had read there. “Moses had thousands of ritualistic regulations covering every aspect of human life so we’ll have the same”. As with the Apostle Paul or William Shakespeare, if it wasn’t Mohammed then it was someone else. There is a type of immature mind to which this sort of thing appeals. God is the big daddy in the sky who dictates how they should behave and if they do exactly as they are told (“Don’t step on the cracks in the pavement”) then unforeseen disasters won’t overtake them. Pathetic!

    We are unqualified to criticize the Koran because we don’t speak the original Arabic. How often I have heard that! As you say, the similarities with the “interpretation” of the Bible are obvious. From Catholics to the Plymouth Brethren they have their “anointed” leaders who are the only ones capable of guiding them aright. Again – do as they say and the divine light will shine upon your path; do otherwise and you will experience divine judgment (if not now in the “hereafter”, just in case it concerns anyone that bolts of lightning appear not to be raining upon the disobedient!). Religion is for those incapable of, or unable to accept responsibility for, thinking for themselves.

  36. barriejohn says:

    PS The rituals make them feel safe, so the more they have the better they like it. It’s like an acceptable form of OCD!

  37. Broga says:

    I was listening to interviews with women clergy who have been on a march in London. They are expecting a woman C. of E. bishop next year. Not a word about the nature of their faith and the incredibility of their beliefs.

    Quite extraordinary that the core issues including “What do you mean by God” and “How do you reconcile your belief in the word of your God with the contradictions, absurdities and cruelties in your bible?.”

  38. barriejohn says:

    Broga: Over 2,500 buried by landslides in Afghanistan – one of the most religious countries in the world. Where was their Allah, then? Please don’t tell me that “there is a purpose in these things but we don’t understand it”!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-27268860

  39. Broga says:

    @barriejohn: I like the quote:

    “Sir, I exist,” said the man to the cosmos.

    “That,” said the cosmos, “creates no obligation in me.”

    The Earth is a spec in a vast cosmos and neither humans nor the planet is of any consequence. The belief in a benevolent God is a bizarre attempt to seek comfort from the realities, including death, of being alive. The fact that any one of us is alive is the most phenomenally unlikely event.

    Is there any greater lie than, “In the sure and certain hope of the resurrection.” Is the comfort of a blatant lie better than facing reality? I don’t think so as repressing the truth comes at an emotional cost which, while unrecognised, takes a toll.

  40. Matt Westwood says:

    “The fact that any one of us is alive is the most phenomenally unlikely event.”

    If recent advances in mathematics and chemistry/physics are borne out by appropriate testing and peer review, not that unlikely, as it turns out. In fact, it’s beginning to turn out that life is pretty damn inevitable (if by “life” you mean self-perpetuating chemical reactions).

  41. barriejohn says:

    Is there any greater lie than, “In the sure and certain hope of the resurrection.” Is the comfort of a blatant lie better than facing reality? I don’t think so as repressing the truth comes at an emotional cost which, while unrecognised, takes a toll.

    I agree with you. I also think that Matt has a point, although the randomness of events doesn’t prevent me standing in awe at the wonders of life, the universe and everything. Even when I was a young Christian I was never taken in by those arguments about the impossible odds of everything falling just right for the emergence of life on earth – and that coming from people who would tell you in the very next breath that humankind just couldn’t grasp an infinite Creator. Infinite Creator, yes, but infinite universe throwing up infinite possibilities (to all intents and purposes), no!

    http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v1/n1/look-at-some-figures

  42. Broga says:

    @Matt Westwood: I think life in the cosmos is very likely and probably widespread. With billions of galaxies and billions of galaxies the opportunities abound. With multi verses, if they exist, it increases even more. I just hope it develops more wisely than our destructive exterminating species.

    No, what I meant was an individual human life, given the unlikelyhood of two individuals meeting and breeding, the requirement for all their ancestors to have succeeded in that, and the fight of the sperm to reach the egg.

  43. Broga says:

    @barriejohn: Fascinating link. I expressed myself badly. Tried clarify with Matt Westwood.

  44. Paul Cook says:

    Barriejohn

    the koran is in arabic now. It was not originally Arabic. It was perhaps translated into old arabic from Syriac. An ancient language from Syria and Iraq. and islam is not an arabic religion there is no archaeology or old texts to prove such a thing. There is a complete lack of that. As with the bible.
    The Arab conquests took islam from those they conquered. Hence Syriac as being the likely language of islam – and moreover the archaeology suggests that it was
    not at all an arabic religion but likely a christo/jew one. And kore christen than jew. And a collection of chritain sayings.

    It was, unlike the bible, written as one book. But it is incomprehensible (20% at least) for all the reasons above.

  45. barriejohn says:

    PC: Interesting ideas. I don’t know enough about Islam, though it’s obvious that many of its ideas came from early Christian sects, whose beliefs were suppressed by the more orthodox. As you say, we may never get to know the truth, partly because of death threats and partly because of the unwillingness of Muslim authorities to cooperate with anyone looking into things too deeply!

  46. Ronald says:

    Read this link & U will understand the mind of this religion. http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/books-warning-muslims-about-christian-agenda-distributed-at-allah-forum-in

    That is exactly what they r doing in Birmingham schools. Like what former PM Tony Blair mentioned, U need more than Operation Trojan Horse to understand deeply this religion before it is too late. Once locked into their system, good or bad, U can never get out. A religion lack of commonsense, rationality, Sensibility, morality, ..,