Thursday, December 16, 2010

Maliki says Chevron in contact with Iran

Maliki claims Chevron raised the issue of cross-border oilfield development with Iran:
The PM said he is currently in negotiations with Chevron to develop various oil fields, to include a cross-border oil field with Iran. The PM claimed that Chevron had told him that it had already raised the issue of a cross-border development with Tehran as well. ... The PM asked the CDA about the political feasibility of such a deal involving a U.S. firm working both sides of a cross-border field, given current USG policies toward Iran. The CDA noted that U.S. law on sanctions would apply, but added that the Administration was reviewing its policies on Iran.
Chevron has denied any wrongdoing.

The US Baghdad Embassy cable from March 2009 doesn't name the oilfield in question but a few months later (Dec 2009) Iranian troops occupied a disputed oil well from the Fakka oilfield a few hundred meters inside Iraq, an incident which left everyone in Iraq scratching their heads at the time.

Incidentally, Iranian media reported just today that Iraq and Iran have finally reached an agreement on plans to develop five of the eight cross-border oilfields. Majnoon (now being developed by Shell and Petronas) and Fakka are the largest border fields, with other smaller undeveloped or abandoned fields that straddle the border from al-Siba, south of Basra, to Naft Khaneh, northeast of Baghdad.

So far, Halliburton seems to be the only American company to get anything out of these Iraqi development deals, since Shell (and others) have already awarded them subcontracts to drill new oil wells in the Basra government.

Maliki also said he will ensure any oil reform proposals would not go through parliament for approval:
The CDA asked the PM about the status of the reform proposals from the oil symposium hosted by Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh in early March. She said that it was a good sign that the government had formalized the symposium's conclusions into recommendations for government decision, and asked if the package would need only COM agreement or would also have to go to the COR for approval. The PM said no, he does not intend for the reform proposals to go to the COR and that he would do everything to avoid this, commenting that the COR would "take us into a political maze," which was completely unnecessary.
Of course, the much-touted oil reform law is yet to pass, mostly due to political wrangling between officials in Baghdad and the Kurdish region.

*

Regarding the Mujahedin e-Khalq residents of Camp Ashraf, Maliki "frustrated" on behalf of Iran:
The PM then expressed some frustration and questioned why the GOI had to act so responsibly towards a organization determined to be a terrorist group by both Iraq and the U.S.. He noted that this created daily problems within the GOI. ... "It is not because of Iran," he said. "We have great internal pressures to resolve this matter." ... He said that Iran had asked how the GOI could support cross border military actions by Turkey against the PKK, but not allow Iran to take similar action against the MEK at Camp Ashraf.

More


63 comments:

Marcus said...

Here's a pretty interesting article about the Sadrists:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/world/middleeast/20sadr.html?hp

A bit contradictory in parts though.

work and travel said...

i don't think that maliki says truths ?

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Snowing, snowing, snowing again!

Gotta go dig out my car. I'll read the rest of the post tomorrow...

Petes said...

Regarding the wrangling between Baghdad and the KRG, I noted a couple of weeks back (and posted on it, but I think Blogger zapped it) that Shahristani -- who was one of the thorns in the side of the KRG -- will be replaced in the oil ministry job. But he's reported to be in line for a new job of energy adviser to Maliki, which will have some kind of oversight role for oil, transport, power generation et al.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

He said that Iran had asked how the GOI could support cross border military actions by Turkey against the PKK, but not allow Iran to take similar action against the MEK at Camp Ashraf.

If I remember right, doesn't the PKK advocate an independent state formed from land that is now part of Turkey and Iraq? To allow them to operate would encourage the breaking off of pieces of Iraq. I can see where the GOI would not like that. As for the people at Camp Ashraf, if they are not using that as a base to attack Iran then they have in effect been neutralized and pose no threat to Iran.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Don't know if I'll get a chance to check back here before Christmas is over, so...HAPPY HOLIDAYS! :)

Um Ayad said...

It will not be "HAPPY HOLIDAYS!" for Iraqi Christians. It used to be a Happy Christmas....Sadly, not any more!

Lindsey Hilsum's been to Iraq to record the traumatic experience of the country's beleagured Christian community. They've been subjected to a series of bloody terrorist attacks in Baghdad and Mosul - and thousands are being forced to flee to safer ground in Kurdistan and beyond. There's not a lot of Christmas celebrations going on there, this year.

Video: Channel 4 News.
Christmas in Iraq: living in fear

Only 40 people turned up for mass at Our Lady last Sunday. They sang and chanted, a forlorn gathering of survivors, the walls around them spattered with blood and cratered by bullet-holes. The bloodied hand prints of those who failed to escape marked the door in an ante-room.
The Islamist extremists who attacked the church see Christians as infidels, although Christianity existed in the region several centuries before Islam. The Chaldeans and Syriac Christians of today speak Aramaic, the language Jesus would have spoken.

"We were happy before the war," said Hanna Khoder, who fled after her neighbour's house was bombed and her sons threatened.
"But now the terrorists say, 'the Americans are your people, they are Christians. You brought them here.' And they kill us for it."

http://www.channel4.com/news/christmas-in-iraq-living-in-fear

Petes said...

Iohannes Canadensis -- proof positive that not everyone in Ontario is a cynical toe rag.

Chicago cleaning said...

wow nice information. I needed this information . At last i got this information in this site. thanks for sharing

John said...

Shameous: 'cynical toe rag'??

How very unchristmasy of you!

If you had a better understanding of some of the nuances of Canadian culture you'd realize that anyone confronted with the misfortune of having to eat at a 'Foodcourt' would usually require a robust rendition of 'Messiah' to help in their digestion process.

"Hallelujah: for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth. The kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever. King of Kings, and Lord of Lords. Hallelujah and blessed be New York Fries!"

Bruno said...

Popping in for a second.

Noting typical murkin hypocrisy:

"As for the people at Camp Ashraf, if they are not using that as a base to attack Iran then they have in effect been neutralized and pose no threat to Iran."

Naturally, murkin warmongers would scream bloody murder if THEY themselves were held to those standards. Murkin warmongers reserve the right to strike at any "terrorists" anywhere, anytime, even if those "terrorists" are not involved actively in anything.

Why, let's not forget, murkins HAD to invade IRAQ because Iraq "might be a threat" and that some murkins on this board wanted Saddam's head on a plate no matter what because he "might one day be a threat" even if he "retired".

Merry Christmas Iraq.

Perhaps one day you will recover from the evil that has been inflicted upon you.

Bruno said...

I'll make sure to store that juicy comment for later use.

Prepare to see it often, Lynnette.

Um Ayad said...

Release of Mehdi army members renews fears in Baghdad

Members of Moqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi army have been released from jail and are making their presence felt in various Iraqi neighbourhoods.
Some of these men were suspected of involvement in some of the worst violence during the sectarian civil war.

Their release has been met with fear, particularly by the same Iraqi forces who were once trained to catch and imprison them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12057724

Petes said...

[Canuckian John]: "How very unchristmasy of you!"

How very adjectivally challenged of you. But I like it. :-)

"If you had a better understanding of some of the nuances of Canadian culture you'd realize that anyone confronted with the misfortune of having to eat at a 'Foodcourt' ..."

Well, I've never even been in Canadia, but I've still been within ten miles of that particular mall, and it sure as hell looks mighty familiar. Surely if you had a better understanding of some of the nuances of Canadian culture you'd realize that this particular piece of "culture" is not especially Canadian.

"Hallelujah: for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth. The kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever."

Hey, since you are quoting Revelation 11, didn't you notice this bit: "But exclude the outer [food] court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles". Must be about you! :-)

positive affirmation said...

I am happy that I found this blog., thanks for posting this.., it's very big help for my study..,

Petes said...

Peace and joy at Christmas time to all here.

Petes said...

Nativity Story for you social media types

Um Ayad said...

Iraqi Christians in Jordan have only prayers to mark Christmas

For many Iraqis in Jordan, the holiday brings back bittersweet memories of times when interfaith relations in Iraq were strong. Before the war, Christian Iraqis would visit their Muslim neighbours during Christmas to exchange sweets, gifts and season’s greetings, they said. Today, Iraq’s Christians are afraid of being seen entering a church.

“There were no differences between us, we were all relatives, all friends, all Iraqis,” Um Ersan said. “We were one nation.”

http://www.jordantimes.com/?news=32915

Um Ayad said...

Jesus was Palestinian and why it matters - Jehanzeb Dar

Because of modern alarmist reactions to the word “Palestine,” many non-Arabs and non-Muslims take offense when it is argued that Jesus was a Palestinian (peace be upon him).

Yeshua (Jesus’ real Aramaic name) was born in Bethlehem, a Palestinian city in the West Bank and home to one of the largest Palestinian Christian communities...

It is astonishing how so-called “Christians” like Ann Coulter call Muslims “rag-heads” when in actuality, Jesus himself would fit the profile of a “rag-head,” too. As would Moses, Joseph, Abraham, and the rest of the Prophets (peace be upon them all)....

Deliberately avoiding the use of the name “Palestine” not only misrepresents history, but also reinforces anti-Palestinian racism as acceptable. When one examines the argument against Jesus being a Palestinian, one detects a remarkable amount of hostility aimed at both Palestinians and Muslims. One cannot help but wonder, is there something threatening about identifying Jesus as a Palestinian? Professor Jack D. Forbes writes about Jesus’ multi-cultural and multi-ethnic environment:....

When the Romans came to dominate the area, they used the name Palestine. Thus, when Yehoshu'a [Jesus] was born, he was born a Palestinian as were all of the inhabitants of the region, Jews and non-Jews. He was also a Nazarene (being born in Nazareth) and a Galilean (born in the region of Galilee)… At the time of Yehoshu'a's birth, Palestine was inhabited by Jews-descendants of Hebrews, Canaanites, and many other Semitic peoples-and also by Phoenicians, Syrians, Greeks, and even Arabs.

And in that spirit, I wish you a merry Christmas. Alaha Natarak (Aramaic: God be with you).

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=345198

VISA said...

Hello All,

Merry Christmas and happy new year,i would like to introduce the new Iraqi news website...realtime news www.iraqobserver.com

Best regards

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

lol! Why am I not surprised that I resurrected Bruno with that comment about Camp Ashraf?

Why, let's not forget, murkins HAD to invade IRAQ because Iraq "might be a threat" and that some murkins on this board wanted Saddam's head on a plate no matter what because he "might one day be a threat" even if he "retired".

Don't be silly, we would have been quite happy if someone else had taken care of Saddam. If the Iraqis are watching and restricting extracurricular activities of the people at Camp Ashraf then Iran should be satisfied. Unless, of course, Iraq is actually on the side of the people in Camp Ashraf. In which case Iran may not be a happy camper. But then I think Iraq has a bone or two to pick with Iran about their interference in Iraq.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

I hear there is Snow with a capital "S" hitting eastern parts of the US. I hope you are snuggled in a nice warm place, Zeyad.

Peace and joy at Christmas time to all here.

Thank you, Pete. The same to you and all who are reading this. Yes, even you John.

Um Ayad said...

Iraq War DU dust birth defects compared to atomic bomb at Hiroshima

"Because conditions are so chaotic in Iraq, the medical infrastructure has been greatly compromised. In terms of both cancer and birth defects due to DU, only a small fraction of the cases are being reported." "Doctors in southern Iraq are making comparisons to the birth defects that followed the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII. They have numerous photos of infants born without brains, with their internal organs outside their bodies, without sexual organs, without spines, and the list of deformities goes on an on. Such birth defects were extremely rare in Iraq prior to the large scale use of DU. Weapons. Now they are commonplace. In hospitals across Iraq, the mothers are no longer asking, "Doctor, is it a boy or girl?" but rather, "Doctor, is it normal?"...

As a special advisor to the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, Dr. Ahmad Hardan has documented the effects of DU in Iraq between 1991 and 2002.

“American forces admit to using over 300 tons of DU weapons in 1991. The actual figure is closer to 800. This has caused a health crisis that has affected almost a third of a million people. As if that was not enough, America went on and used 200 tons more in Bagdad alone during the recent invasion.

I don”t know about other parts of Iraq, it will take me years to document that.

“In Basra, it took us two years to obtain conclusive proof of what DU does, but we now know what to look for and the results are terrifying.”
“By far the most devastating effect is on unborn children. Nothing can prepare anyone for the sight of hundreds of preserved fetuses ” scarcely human in appearance. Iraq is now seeing babies with terribly foreshortened limbs, with their intestines outside their bodies, with huge bulging tumors where their eyes should be, or with a single eye-like Cyclops, or without eyes, or without limbs, and even without heads. Significantly, some of the defects are almost unknown outside textbooks showing the babies born near A-bomb test sites in the Pacific.”

http://lecanadian.com/2010/12/26/horrific-iraqi-birth-defects-civilian-and-u-s-troop-casualties-linked-to-depleted-uranium-dust/

Petes said...

The Year Kenny Loggins Ruined Christmas

Truth Seeker said...

^

Garbage.

This is where it's at.

Petes said...

^

That bunch of misanthropic nutjobs? You gotta be shittin' me!

Marcus said...

More terrorist arrests in Sweden today. A group of 6 men were travelling from Stockholm, Sweden to Copenhagen, Denmark to kill as many as possible in the office of the newspaper Jyllandsposten. Because they had the audacity to publish a few cartoons.

I fear for this country not because of the threat posed by a few lunatics, but because of the crippling political correctness that doesn't even allow a debate about why terrorists is a new feature here.

When the Rote Armee Fraktion attacked the West German embassy in Stockholm in the seventies no one had any problems linking that group to the ideology behind it - communism. But woe to anyone who mentions Islamism in connection to these days terrorism. No, it's all because of "deranged individuals" with no connection to anything.

Our main streamm media reports that three of the attackers were "Swedes". The "terror Swedes", they call them. Google for 30 seconds tells me they were a Tunisian and two Iraqis.

I can't help to feel a tad bit angry at people who came here to seek asylum and got supported with housing and cash from the taxes I pay thanks us by trying to blow us up - over a f-cking cartoon! Probably that's just my xenophobia speaking, as our press would have me believe.

Marcus said...

Also. If a religion has such big problems with a cartoon of its prophet that high ranking believers issue fatwas and rank and file followers believe death on the artist is reasonable, then that religion has no place in a free society.

Christian priests used to harass peoople too. They camme for house calls to check that people had read their bible, they burned women as witches, they condemned innocents to horrendous punishments, all in the name of religion.

Secularists fought through centruries to limit the influence of that religion, and suceeded. The priesthood are de-fanged and put in their proper place. The plaace of preaching a tolerant version of religion to those who themselves decide to believe. I don't much care for the idea of having to go through that all over again just because the new intolerant dogma, Islam, has some kind of minority victim status.

   Lee C.  ―  U.S.A.       said...

 
      "…the crippling political correctness that doesn't
      even allow a debate about why terrorists is a new
      feature here.
"

We don't so much have that problem.  Glenn Hannibaugh is all over the radio (and FoxNews) reminding us that these guys are Muslims.
What's gotten my notice is that there doesn't seem to be much debate on the subject in Islamic countries.  I get no sense of an ongoing introspection there.  For hundreds of years there wasn't much in the way of terrorism against The West by Muslim fundies.  Then, all of sudden, comes the political rise of the fundies, and now there's the problem.
The thing I don't entirely get is why mainstream Islam isn't all over it.  I figure that if I could work that one out in my head I'd have a much better handle on what's going on.  I've got some theories, but I'm trying to keep an open mind on the subject; figure to keep my theories open to revision.

Truth Seeker said...

That bunch of misanthropic nutjobs? You gotta be shittin' me!

I presumed you would be offended by those who wish for peace.

Truth Seeker said...

What's gotten my notice is that there doesn't seem to be much debate on the subject in Islamic countries.

Why don't you ask somebody who can read Arabic if there's much debate about it in the Arabic media and blogosphere?

Petes said...

^

Hah! Agreement for once. I wouldn't pretend to know what is being hotly debated in the USA, and I speak the same language (more or less), receive half a dozen American news channels, and subscribe to a couple of journals (including a specifically religious one). As far as Arabic media is concerned, I can't even read the language, let alone hear and understand it. I'd be willing to bet Lee C can't either.

Petes said...

"I presumed you would be offended by those who wish for peace."

You mean subversive misandric hippie anarchists? Yeah, you're right, I am.

Petes said...

[Marcus]: "Christian priests used to harass peoople too. They camme for house calls to check that people had read their bible..."

Oh good, I presume we can blame your good Swedish Lutheran state church for that. Catholics are usually (wrongly) accused of checking that people didn't read their bible. You can credit your country's adherence to sola scriptura to the political machinations of King Gustav I.

"...they burned women as witches...

Unfortunately true... although it's also true that the first recorded witch hunts go back to the Iraqi Hammurabi in Babylonia and to the Egyptians. The Romans killed witches on a grand scale, until Christianity stopped it. The Jews did it, the Goths did it, the Saxons did it ... until Christianisation stopped them too. It wasn't until the general religious hysteria of the high middle ages that witch hunts took proper hold, and even then mostly in Germany and initiated primarily by secular forces.

"Secularists fought through centruries to limit the influence of that religion, and suceeded. The priesthood are de-fanged and put in their proper place."

The usual revisionist nonsense! Did any of those secularists by any chance benefit from the universities invented by the religionists? Did they enjoy any of the freedoms that sprang from religious teaching against totalitarian rule? Were any of them women who stopped being treated as chattels of their spouses because of religion? Any benefits from religious charity, education, contributions to science, medicine, the arts, and so on?

"The plaace of preaching a tolerant version of religion to those who themselves decide to believe."

Society has been put in its place too (mostly thanks to religion) -- the place of preaching a tolerant social order among those who choose to participate in the society.

"I don't much care for the idea of having to go through that all over again just because the new intolerant dogma, Islam, has some kind of minority victim status."

Tough titties. Radical Islam isn't the first, and won't be the last. Equating it with religion in general is just silly, though.

Marcus said...

Me: "I don't much care for the idea of having to go through that all over again just because the new intolerant dogma, Islam, has some kind of minority victim status."

Pete: "Tough titties. Radical Islam isn't the first, and won't be the last. Equating it with religion in general is just silly, though."

Oh? So religion isn't intolerant dogma? It's just the fanatics who sometimes get it wrong?

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me"

Better hope your great-great-great grand daddy never secretly worshiped some pagan gods, Pete.

   Lee C.  ―  U.S.A.       said...

   
      "Why don't you ask somebody who can
      read Arabic…
"

And how often should I do that before you'll agree that it's been done?   How many witnessess must I present to document the posing of the question?   Must you be one of the witnessess, or will Petes suffice?  Is there a particular Arabic reader I must ask, or will anyone do?  And precisely how should the question be phrased?  (I could ask some other questions, I suppose, but that'll do to start.)

More to the point, I notice that you haven't even denied the premise, but still think you've somehow scored a great point.  (A striking lack of basic logic that greatly appeals to Petes I noticed.)

Um Ayad said...

Indecent Burial: Rescuing History From Empire's Eraser

One of the most important books published in 2010 -- or indeed, in this century -- was Invisible War: The United States and the Iraq Sanctions. As I noted here a few months ago, Professor Joy Gordon's "detailed, richly sourced and morally horrifying account of the sanctions era must be read to be believed. However bad you thought it was, the reality was much worse."

The latter statement is one of the key elements of the book's importance. Even if you are one of the very few who have made yourself aware of the reality of this vast crime against humanity -- digging out whatever nuggets of truth you could glean from the mountainous slagheap of lies and myth and amnesia that bury it -- you will be staggered by the picture of cold-blooded inhumanity that Gordon brings to light.

Earlier this month, the UN Security Council formally voted to lift the 20-year-old sanctions against Iraq. Having launched a Hitlerite war of aggression against the country, plunging it into a living hell that has taken the lives of more than one million innocent people, displaced millions more and spread disease, ruin, terrorism, extremism and tyranny across the conquered land, the great defenders of Civilization in Washington lauded themselves for their magnificent act of clemency and mercy in ending the sanctions regime....

Petes said...

[Marcus]: Oh? So religion isn't intolerant dogma? It's just the fanatics who sometimes get it wrong?

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and fourth generation of those who reject me"

Better hope your great-great-great grand daddy never secretly worshiped some pagan gods, Pete.

____________

Well, well, ole' Marcus is a bible thumper after all. A fire 'n' brimstone Torah thumper, in fact. But I ain't Jewish, so yer quotin' the wrong book:

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
“Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.
(John 9:1-3)

Marcus said...

Doesn't the ten commandments apply to Catholics?

Whatever. I'm not going to debate theology in detail with you as I'm sure you know way more than me and I feel I know enough already. Let me just say that for me an important part, the most important part, of "freedom of religion" is freedom FROM religion.

And that's the beef I have with Islamists. They are presently way more likely than christians (at least here) to push their beliefs into everyday lives of people. And the result when confronted we see now. I think it's an artists right to draw Muhammed as a cartoon to highlight that our freedom of speach trumphs the sensitivities of people believing in a book I view as a fairy tale. They may object, they may critisise the artist, but they may not try to blow people to pieces or torch embassies in response. I didn't see many christians doing that sort of stuff when the same artist portrayed Jesus as a leather-gay.

Also I have a problem with the ever increasing demands that my society should conform to religous beliefs that have no history here. I wouldn't go to Saudi and demand to roast a pig and wash it down with beer. But here we have students suing the school for having the audacity to tell said student she could not study to beccome a teacher while wearing a burka. We have demands that swimming halls close for all men certain days so muslim women can have it to themselves. We have demands for halal-butchered meat in schools and on airlines. We have an intern who refused to shake hands with the female executive of a company where he was supposed to practice and therefore got expelled from his work studies suing the government - and winning. The list goes on and on. I never signed up for that!

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Just stopped by for a minute. Raining like crazy here. Supposed to change over to snow tomorrow with falling temps during the day. We're going to be one big skating rink... :(

Petes said...

Lynnette - I never thought I'd be so happy to see our miserable grey damp weather back, but it's truly a joy. It's 10°C and I'm going around in a teeshirt. The country's run out of water due to cold-related water bursts, but who cares. It's BALMY!

Petes said...

[Marcus]: "Doesn't the ten commandments apply to Catholics?"

Yes and no. Read the Book of Romans in the New Testament, if you care. It's all explained there. The ten commandments is just "the natural law" -- it applies to atheists too. It's not the be all and end all, e.g. "you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God" (Romans 7:4).

[Marcus]: "Whatever. I'm not going to debate theology in detail with you as I'm sure you know way more than me and I feel I know enough already."

Yeah, right. Just enough to misquote scripture in a parody of religion. Don't worry -- I blame the Protestants. They invented that approach of tossing out a line of scripture in isolation as if it meant something. It doesn't work that way ( - not for Catholics anyway).

   Lee C.  ―  U.S.A.       said...

 
      "The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens
      has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of
      Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes,
      wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures,
      can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes
      petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet
      this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence
      to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest,
      largest, and least productive industry in all
      history.
"
      R.A. Heinlein ― Time Enough for Love

Petes said...

^

Ok. It's not just the Protestants. It's Robert Heinlein too. And anyone else who constructs a pathetic strawman of religion so they can knock it down. Anyone thick enough to suggest that God needs flattery doesn't know their theological arse from their elbow.

Petes said...

[Marcus]: "Let me just say that for me an important part, the most important part, of "freedom of religion" is freedom FROM religion."

If you mean religious practice and ritual then I agree with you. If you mean infinite autonomy and freedom from all values, then I suspect that such a society without shared values will come apart at the seams.

"And that's the beef I have with Islamists... They may object, they may critisise the artist, but they may not try to blow people to pieces or torch embassies in response. I didn't see many christians doing that sort of stuff when the same artist portrayed Jesus as a leather-gay."

They seem to be missing some concept of the hierarchy of goods/truths/values. They think that the "good" of honouring the prophet warrants killing people. Killing people can never be "good" unless God/Allah is arbitrary and capricious. Sort of like Lee C/Robert Heinlein's god.

"Also I have a problem with the ever increasing demands that my society should conform to religous beliefs that have no history here... The list goes on and on. I never signed up for that!"

I presume you don't object to practices that don't affect you? Or would you be like the "liberals" in the States who are offended by Menorahs or Nativity displays etc. in public? The ones who think the prohibition on the "establishment of religion" means a prohibition on all religion in public?

Jack said...

Always about oil... its all very well and good when theres plenty of oil to go around.. but the higher the price per barrel goes the more these countries with "shared" fields will fight for it...

Truth Seeker said...

Petes

You hate those who yearn for peace and justice. Own it.

Sad New Year, you immoral dolt.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

[Marcus] I think it's an artists right to draw Muhammed as a cartoon to highlight that our freedom of speach trumphs the sensitivities of people believing in a book I view as a fairy tale.

And no doubt they would say that their freedom to practice their religion as they see fit trumps other people's freedom of speech. Both are rather uncompromising positions. Perhaps the compromise should have been a warning that the cartoons were being published so that those that would be offended by them would not accidentally stumble upon them in the media. And those that would be offended by them simply should not have viewed that material.

I do not consider a religious work such as the Bible or the Qu'ran to be a fairy tale. Nor do I consider either to be the literal word of God. With all due respect to Pete, of course. I suggest they are valuable written historical documents compiled from oral stories containing the mores(or desired mores) of society at the time. The Ten Commandmants are a prime example of that.

As PeteS pointed out here:

If you mean infinite autonomy and freedom from all values, then I suspect that such a society without shared values will come apart at the seams.

Society needs some kind of structure to survive in a civilized manner. I do believe that religion has played a role in that. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean it was, or is, free from the manipulation of those with less altruistic motives.

And while I do not believe the Bible or the Qu'ran to be the literal word of a higher power, that doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

PeteS,

I think we dodged an icy bullet. Thankfully, for the most part, the streets had a chance to dry off before everything froze. Now it's just a little chillier.

Have a Happy New Years Eve everyone! :)

Petes said...

[Lynnette]: "I do not consider a religious work such as the Bible or the Qu'ran to be a fairy tale. Nor do I consider either to be the literal word of God. With all due respect to Pete, of course. I suggest they are valuable written historical documents compiled from oral stories containing the mores(or desired mores) of society at the time. The Ten Commandmants are a prime example of that."

Couldn't have put it better myself! (Careful, or Marcus will be calling you a closet Catholic ... :-)

"I think we dodged an icy bullet."

Yikes! I see your forecast temps for the next couple of nights are -15 to -20°C.

Fadhilah MPA Online said...

your blog is good. visit my blog too

Truth Seeker said...

Petes

You are a coward to boot.

Petes said...

First east-bound Russian pipeline opens:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12103865

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

[PeteS] (Careful, or Marcus will be calling you a closet Catholic ... :-)

Ahhh, my roots must be showing. lol!

Yikes! I see your forecast temps for the next couple of nights are -15 to -20°C.


Like I said, a little chillier. ;)

Happy New Year! :)

Um Ayad said...

Research links rise in Falluja birth defects and cancers to US assault

A study examining the causes of a dramatic spike in birth defects in the Iraqi city of Falluja has for the first time concluded that genetic damage could have been caused by weaponry used in US assaults that took place six years ago.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/30/faulluja-birth-defects-iraq

Truth Seeker said...

^

Irrelevent as far as Petes is concerned. As long as the imperialists get to steal and control at will he is happy. If a few savages suffer well that's just too bad.

Marcus said...

@Lynnette

[Marcus] "I think it's an artists right to draw Muhammed as a cartoon to highlight that our freedom of speach trumphs the sensitivities of people believing in a book I view as a fairy tale."

Lynnette: "And no doubt they would say that their freedom to practice their religion as they see fit trumps other people's freedom of speech."

How does an artist paiting Muhammed hinder any muslim from practicing his religion? Can't you see the difference? The artist is practising freedom of expression and is violently assaulted. Arsons tried to burn down his house. His seminars were violently interrupted. Hate mail and videos on youtube promising his beheading abound. And NOT only the radical extremists freak out but more mainstream Islamic figures advocate shutting him up. This is an active assault on his freedom of expression and any precedent in that area is extremely dangerous.

In what way does the artists freedom of speech hinder any muslim from practicing their religion? It's not as if he tried to burn down a mosque because people were praying there.

Lynnette: "Both are rather uncompromising positions."

I don't agree. I say pray all you want, believe in what you want but accept that I don't believe in the same thing and is not bound by the rules of your beliefs. They say let me believe what I want and if you insult anything I believe in then I will behead you or try to blow you up. Can you not see the difference?

Lynnette: "Perhaps the compromise should have been a warning that the cartoons were being published so that those that would be offended by them would not accidentally stumble upon them in the media."

Stumble?! Arabic media beamed the story across the entire muslim world.

Lynnette: "And those that would be offended by them simply should not have viewed that material."

You think? Because the crowd I saw on CNN with torches outside a Danish embassy didn't look like a "Warning - may contain Muhammed imagery"-sticker on Jyllandsposten would have soothed their hurt widdle feelings much.

Um Ayad said...

Iraq Is Bleeding Every Day

Iraq enters 2011 – the year in which American forces are supposed to finally leave – with all too many wounds from our occupation. While we hear little here in the US about the effects of our war and occupation, Iraqis live with the results daily.

Take for example, the continuing level of violence. Western media keep reminding us that the casualty count is lower than at the height of the war – but for 2010, conservative estimates, from Iraqi government sources, place the dead and injured from violence at unbearable numbers:....

http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/02/iraq-is-bleeding-every-day/

Um Ayad said...

Glaspie Memo Leaked: US Dealings With Iraq Ahead of 1990 Invasion of Kuwait Detailed
Ambassador Assured Saddam of Bush's Friendship at July 25 Meeting

One of the crown jewels of secret pre-Gulf War negotiations was unveiled tonight when the notorious Glaspie Memo, or as it is now known 90BAGHDAD423, was released by WikiLeaks....

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/01/02/glaspie-memo-leaked-us-dealings-with-iraq-ahead-of-1990-invasion-of-kuwait-detailed/

Um Ayad said...

(Truth Seeker) "Irrelevent as far as Petes is concerned."

It is not "irrelevent" to me. But then I care about Iraqis. Ban the warmongers using their terrible weapons on anyone else....charge them with war crimes. The warmongers are the savages.

Truth Seeker said...

^

Agree.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Marcus,

How does an artist paiting Muhammed hinder any muslim from practicing his religion?

It doesn't.

Can't you see the difference?

I can. But I speculated that others cannot.

[Marcus]I think it's an artists right to draw Muhammed as a cartoon to highlight that our freedom of speach trumphs the sensitivities of people believing in a book I view as a fairy tale.

Lynnette: "Both are rather uncompromising positions."

It was your choice of phrase that I felt made your position seem uncompromising.

You seem to feel that freedom of speech is the be all and end all of freedoms. And they seem to feel that their religious beliefs are. It seems to me that simple consideration on both sides for others beliefs would not be a bad thing.

I say pray all you want, believe in what you want but accept that I don't believe in the same thing and is not bound by the rules of your beliefs.

I strongly agree. You are not so far from my position then.

Stumble?! Arabic media beamed the story across the entire muslim world.

I don't view Arabic media, so am not aware of what they were printing or showing. A lesson from how to Manipulate People 101. Probably taken out of Saddam's instruction book on propaganda.

Because the crowd I saw on CNN with torches outside a Danish embassy didn't look like a "Warning - may contain Muhammed imagery"-sticker on Jyllandsposten would have soothed their hurt widdle feelings much.

Of course not. That's why they are called extremists.

Musa Kocaman said...

Bütün şarkıcılara ait şarkı sözü ve onların biyografilerini bulabilirsiniz.

kasun perera said...

nice Nawayugaya