Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s response, and how to contact Brandeis

April 9, 2014 • 1:45 pm

If you are one of the many people who are upset at Brandeis University’s withdrawal of an honorary degree from Ayaan Hirsi Ali, you can leave a message with the President, Fred Lawrence. He has a public Facebook page, on which I’ve left the following message (you have to “like” the page first). My message will probably be removed quickly , but perhaps if many people left messages, they’d get the message (note: as of a few minutes ago, my message was still there, along with others).

Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 1.20.35 PM

 His email address is also public: lawrence@brandeis.edu, and you can find a general email contact form (a box to fill in) here.

I’ll be sending emails later, but I must now prepare for a talk.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has responded to the rescinding of her degree. Read her whole eloquent statement at the link, but here is an excerpt:

 I wish to dissociate myself from the university’s statement, which implies that I was in any way consulted about this decision. On the contrary, I was completely shocked when President Frederick Lawrence called me—just a few hours before issuing a public statement—to say that such a decision had been made.

. . . Having spent many months planning for me to speak to its students at Commencement, the university yesterday announced that it could not “overlook certain of my past statements,” which it had not previously been aware of. Yet my critics have long specialized in selective quotation – lines from interviews taken out of context – designed to misrepresent me and my work. It is scarcely credible that Brandeis did not know this when they initially offered me the degree.

What was initially intended as an honor has now devolved into a moment of shaming. Yet the slur on my reputation is not the worst aspect of this episode. More deplorable is that an institution set up on the basis of religious freedom should today so deeply betray its own founding principles. The “spirit of free expression” referred to in the Brandeis statement has been stifled here, as my critics have achieved their objective of preventing me from addressing the graduating Class of 2014. Neither Brandeis nor my critics knew or even inquired as to what I might say. They simply wanted me to be silenced. I regret that very much.

Not content with a public disavowal, Brandeis has invited me “to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue about these important issues.” Sadly, in words and deeds, the university has already spoken its piece. I have no wish to “engage” in such one-sided dialogue. I can only wish the Class of 2014 the best of luck—and hope that they will go forth to be better advocates for free expression and free thought than their alma mater.

Damn, did she deserve that degree! Brandeis’s behavior is reprehensible and cowardly. President Lawrence, are you not ashamed of your university?

I couldn’t resist posting this comment, from a Brandeis graduate, that appeared on President Lawrence’s page. I don’t know who Sam Hilt is, but good for him!

Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 2.38.07 PM

 

Is religion a superstition?

April 9, 2014 • 1:11 pm

I haven’t been able to read the comments as often as I should, but I gather that Eric MacDonald and Ben Goren are at each other’s throats about whether religion has value apart from its truth claims, whether it’s a “way of knowing,” and, whether religion is a “superstition.” Eric maintained that religion wasn’t a superstition, which prompted me to look up “superstition” in the Oxford English Dictionary, largely seen as an authority on meaning. (Yes, I know, à la Pinker, that usages change.)

Now I know this is largely a semantic issue, but have a look at the following definitions—every one that pertains to this issue—and decide for yourself.  Then vote below (of course nobody’s gonna say “yes” or “no”: there will be explanations and qualifications.

I’ve cut and pasted them directly from the dictionary.

1 2 3 3b 3c 4 4c

JAC: note how, in the last definition, religion is given a pass, but the exception is telling:

5

 

Surprise! New study by Australians shows that homeopathy is bunk

April 9, 2014 • 11:08 am
Attention Whole Foods and the Davis Food Co-op! According to the Guardian, a new review  of the efficacy of homeopathy by the Australian Government’s National Health and Medical Research Council shows that the whole enterprise is quackery. But we already knew that. Now if only left-wing and “natural” grocery stores knew the same.
The 200-page overview report (free pdf) is here; my copy is corrupted so I haven’t been able to read it. The authors were 7 distinguished academics and scholars, several of whom specialize in alternative and complementary medicine. Since I can’t read the official document, I’ll just report what the Guardian says about it:

Homeopathy is no more effective than a placebo, according to an extensive study by a peak science body.

The draft paper by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) assessed research into the effectiveness of the alternative medicine on 68 health conditions and concluded “there is no reliable evidence that homeopathy is effective”.

But of course it can’t be more effective than a placebo, because it’s just water, with perhaps a touch of starch or alcohol. And the idea that water molecules can retain a “memory” of something that was diluted out of them is, on its face, ludicrous. You can dismiss homeopathy on the laws of physics alone, but these tests put the nail in its coffin. More:

The Australian Homeopathic Association states the practice treats patients as a “whole person, taking into account personality, lifestyle and hereditary factors as well as the history of the disease.”

But the NHMRC review, conducted by a working committee of medical experts, said it had no impact on a range of conditions and illnesses including asthma, arthritis, sleep disturbances, cold and flu, chronic fatigue syndrome, eczema, cholera, burns, malaria and heroin addiction.

For the 68 conditions – including those listed – the review either concluded definitively that homeopathy was not more effective than a placebo, or at the very least there was no reliable evidence to suggest it was.

“No good-quality, well-designed studies with enough participants for a meaningful result reported either that homeopathy caused greater health improvements than a substance with no effect on the health condition (placebo), or that homeopathy caused health improvements equal to those of another treatment,” read the report’s summary.

And, I had no idea that there were homeopathic vaccination! What do they do—inject saline into people?

Professor John Dwyer, an immunologist and Emeritus Professor of Medicine at the University of New South Wales, told Guardian Australia that the report was long overdue.

. . . He said the greatest danger in homeopathy was in its use as a vaccination.

“In my point of view as an immunologist, the most serious issue was the spreading of the concept that homeopathic vaccinations were harmless and just as good as orthodox vaccinations. People who believe that are not protecting themselves and their children,” he said.

 Homeopathic “vaccinations” are offered for standard diseases, as well as some that there are no medical vaccines for, said Dwyer.

“Homeopathic vaccines were being offered for HIV, TB, Malaria… none of them were effective,” he said.

So how about it, Davis Food Co-op? As long as I’m in town, won’t you consider stopping the practice of bilking your credulous customers by selling them water at high prices—water that is totally misrepresented as medical cures? Your selling this stuff means that you’re promoting quackery, and perhaps injuring the health of your customers. Why don’t you sell cigarettes as well?

h/t: Amy

Brandeis University cancels plans to give Ayaan Hirsi Ali an honorary degree

April 9, 2014 • 7:55 am

This is reprehensible, unconscionable, and ridiculous. Yesterday’s New York Times reports that Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts, which was planning to award an honorary degree to author and anti-Muslim activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali—one of the bravest women on the planet—has cancelled those plans. Why? It’s pretty clear, especially given that Brandeis is one of the nation’s most “politically correct” universities. As the paper reports:

Facing growing criticism, Brandeis University said Tuesday that it had reversed course and would not award an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a campaigner for women’s rights and a fierce critic of Islam, who has called the religion “a destructive, nihilistic cult of death.”

“We cannot overlook that certain of her past statements are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values,” the university said in a statement released eight days after it had announced that Ms. Hirsi Ali and four other people would be honored at its commencement on May 18.

Yes, my dear readers, she was disinvited because her criticism of Islam’s excesses constitutes “Islamophobia,” which apparently does not comport with the “core values” of Brandeis University. I wonder if those core values include the suppression of dissent, the criminalization of homosexuality and blasphemy, and the oppression of women.

It’s worth reading the Times’s story in detail. Here are some bits (my emphasis):

At first, it was bloggers who noted and criticized the plan to honor Ms. Hirsi Ali, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Within a few days, a Brandeis student started an online petition against the decision at Change.org, drawing thousands of signatures. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a civil rights and advocacy group, took note, contacting its members though email and social media, and urging them to complain to the university.

On Tuesday, a student newspaper, The Justice, reported on the controversy, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations sent a letter to Dr. Lawrence, referring to Ms. Hirsi Ali as a “notorious Islamophobe.”

“She is one of the worst of the worst of the Islam haters in America, not only in America but worldwide,” Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the group, said in an interview on Tuesday. “I don’t assign any ill will to Brandeis. I think they just kind of got fooled a little bit.”

In its statement, Brandeis said, “For all concerned, we regret that we were not aware of” Ms. Hirsi Ali’s record of anti-Islam statements, though those comments have been fairly widely publicized.

“You would think that someone at Brandeis would have learned to use Google,” said Rashid Khalidi, a professor of Arab studies at Columbia University, who said he thought Brandeis had arrived at the right position: not awarding a degree, but welcoming Ms. Hirsi Ali to speak.

How could Brandeis not know? Ali has been speaking out against Islam for years, especially its marginalization and oppression of women, and for that her life has been repeatedly threatened. As far as I know, she’s in hiding in the Netherlands the U.S. under guard, though she does make some public appearances. And the only organization willing to employ her is the conservative American Enterprise Institute, which is a great shame, for to many people that conflates her message with darker currents of American conservativism.

What’s a greater shame is Brandeis’s cowardice. On what basis was she to be given the award in the first place, if not for her activisim and writings? And then, on perhaps the very same basis, they withdrew the award because her work is “Islamophobic.”

Islam happens to be the world’s most pernicious faith, in my mind edging out Roman Catholicism. Of course not all Muslims are bad people, or adhere to the life-degrading tenets of radical Islam, but the silence of many Muslims when, say, fatwas are issued against Salman Rushdie, suggest that many moderate Muslims enable the more radical ones through their silence.  And Islam’s oppression of women, apostates, gays, and nonbelievers is enshrined in many places in sharia law. (Note the previous post that Saudi Arabia has branded atheists as “terrorists.”) Sunni and Shia Muslims regularly slaughter each other over the most trivial issue: who is to be the head of the faith—the most qualified or the descendants of Muhammad?

The world’s people—especially the half of them that have two X chromosomes—would be better off without Islam, and that is Ali’s message.

For saying that, she’s branded an Islamophobe and her honor withdrawn, all because of the squalling of Muslims whose feelings are, once again, offended. Shame be unto Brandeis University and the cowards who caved into to those hurt feelings. I am ashamed that my fellow liberals, who prize freedom of speech and the right to dissent, nevertheless suppress that freedom by bowing to Muslim pressure.  This will only encourage the muzzling of anyone who has criticized Islam.

_______

UPDATE: Tw**ts on this from Popehat, Sam Harris, and Richard Dawkins:

Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 9.57.46 AM Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 9.57.14 AM

Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 10.15.31 AM Screen shot 2014-04-09 at 10.16.11 AM

h/t: Grania

Jesus ‘n’ Mo and ‘n’ those atheist terrorists

April 9, 2014 • 7:53 am

I haven’t written much about the new Saudi law designating all atheists as “terrorists,” for others have covered it amply and, mainly, I’m overworked and find it hard to write about everything. Still, you probably know about that law. As Yale Global explains:

A series of royal decrees and laws in Saudi Arabia are defining terrorists – and atheists, peaceful protesters, members of the Muslim Brotherhood as well as those who leave to fight wars in other country, particularly Syria, all qualify, suggests a Human Rights Watch report. The crimes can be published with prison sentences up to 20 years. “Article one of the new provisions defines terrorism as ‘calling for atheist thought in any form, or calling into question the fundamentals of the Islamic religion on which this country is based,’” reports Adam Withnall for the Independent. A Human Rights Watch spokesperson suggests that the new rules transform independent thought and critical expression into crimes, and “The organisation said the new ‘terrorism provisions contain language that prosecutors and judges are already using to prosecute and convict independent activists and peaceful dissidents.”

This is truly Orwellian thoughtcrime instantiated in our age, except that it’s nothing new in Muslim countries.

At any rate, that decree by King Abdullah is the subject of today’s Jesus and Mo:

2014-04-09

h/t: Linda Grilli (down to three black cats)

 

 

Reader’s cat pees in electrical socket

April 8, 2014 • 2:57 pm

First, no harm done to the cat, thank Ceiling Cat (praise be unto Him). This would have made a good story for the Cat Confessions Contest, but, sadly, it came in too late. (BTW, I’m slowly sending out books to the winners.) It was submitted by reader Lorena Moore (“ironwing”):

Here is a true story from our house, the Island of Misfit Cats.

Evidence for the Infernal Nature of Basement Cat:

A few days ago I heard a noise coming from the kitchen:  two short, harsh buzzing sounds in quick succession.  Everything seemed OK and all seven cats were standing around waiting to be fed.

Then I saw the electrical outlet with soot around the holes and a puddle on the floor.  Impy had sprayed the wall and the outlet had shorted out and burned.
I started cleaning up and the bleach fumes triggered the the outlet again.  It crackled and shot a fountain of sparks.

After seeing that, I checked Impy’s fur and found a dusting of ash on his tail.  I called an electrician.  An hour and $200 later, we had a new Impy-proof outlet.

Old and new outlets:

outlets

Here’s Impy standing on the patio wall and wearing his harness and leash.  We take him outside on the back patio for a walk every day.

Impy1

 

Impy was our first black cat and is about thirteen years old.  We trapped him as a stray in 2003.  Still our biggest and blackest, he is now Top Cat.

He came to us with an infected dog bite on his shoulder and impaired vision.  The vet diagnosed him with taurine deficiency retinopathy. He developed cataracts a few years later and is now nearly blind, though he can still see some contrast in very bright light outdoors. The black stripe in his right eye is an old claw wound from his time as a stray, and is nicknamed the “glint of evil”.

impyglint

 

In addition to the self-inflicted lightning strike, he has survived pancreatitis, acute toxoplasmosis, and giardia.

He is very gentle, loving, and affectionate.  When we adopted eight shelter cats over a period of several months, he welcomed them as buddies.

Here’s Impy (top of photo) with some of his friends on our bed.  This is an old picture and only four of these cats are still with us, including Impy’s best buddy Leon, who is looking at the camera.

sevenbedcats

I think Lorena beats Linda Grilli for the reader having the most black cats.