Mayweather has had at least seven domestic violence incidents that resulted in arrests

Oh what a surprise – two reporters who had talked about Floyd Mayweather’s history of domestic violence were banned from reporting on that big match. I’ve been growling for days about all the ridiculously excited and eager publicity for a boxing match, even from the BBC, and this item just adds to the disgust. Yay, folks, let’s get overjoyed about a “sport” that cuts out all the frills and folderol of trying to put a ball into a net and just goes straight to the part about guys punching each other. After that lets all go watch people torturing animals for amusement.

As the boxing world watches the hotly anticipated fight between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao—two fan favorites meeting for the first time—there are a few people who won’t be there: The sports reporters who’ve spoken openly about Mayweather’s history of domestic violence, and have publicly questioned or spoken out against supporting him as an athlete.

[Read more…]

They responded with applause

Loyalty is nice, but…

On April 30, Pastor Jim Staley plead guilty to multiple counts of felony wire fraud. The charges stem from Staley’s involvement in a complex scheme, which used phony life insurance policies, front companies, deceptive contracts and other dubious methods to defraud elderly investors out of millions of dollars. Many of those who were taken in by the scheme later said they believed that Staley was a ‘nice, religious man.’

The statements of Staley’s victims, the detailed federal indictment, even Staley’s acknowledgement of guilt in open court, seems to have had no impact on his religiously obsessed followers. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that:

“The courtroom overflowed with so many Staley supporters Thursday that some federal agents and court staff were relocated to open up more seats. After the hearing, Staley thanked members of the crowd for coming. They responded with applause.”

That’s from Addicting Info. Interesting, isn’t it – they “support” him despite knowing that he defrauded people of millions of dollars.

It’s almost as if people don’t always have good judgement.

Desperately seeking more killers

AQ in the subcontinent says they did it.

The leader of Al Qaeda’s branch in the Indian subcontinent has published a video claiming responsibility for the death ofAvijit Roy, an atheist Bangladeshi-American blogger who was killed by a group of men with machetes on Feb. 26 as he was leaving a book fair in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

In a nine-minute video posted on jihadist forums on Saturday, the leader of the branch, Asim Umar, said followers of his group were responsible for the killing of several people he called blasphemers: Mohammad Shakil Auj, an Islamic scholar fatally shot in Karachi, Pakistan, in 2014; Aniqa Naz, a Pakistani blogger; Rajib Haider, a blogger killed in a machete attack in Dhaka, the Bangladeshi capital, in 2013; and Mr. Roy.

“They have taught a lesson to blasphemers in France, Denmark, Pakistan and now in Bangladesh,” Mr. Umar said in the video, which was translated and published by the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors extremist activity online.

He went on to urge his followers to carry out more attacks, saying, “Where are those who would kill these blasphemers, wherever they may be found, even if it has to be done using a dagger or a knife, and by doing so record their names on the Day of Judgment among the devotees of the prophet?”

Nope. There is no record. There is no day of judgement. That’s all a fiction, just as Harry Potter is a fiction. The murderers won’t get any high fives from the prophet in the great hereafter.

Refrain from laughter

News from Malaysia:

An Islamic mufti has warned Malaysian comedians against telling jokes that cause excessive laughter. According to the mufti, Islam urges emotional moderation and refrain from excessive laughter, crying, or other emotional expressions.

How hellish. I can honestly not think of anything more calculated to make life grim. Maybe a rule that all food should be devoid of flavor, or a rule that sex should be like doing sit-ups, but other than that…nothing. “Excessive” laughter is a great thing, and that which causes it is a great thing. (Ok not if you’re one of those horrible people who laugh when someone falls.) If Islam urges emotional moderation then Islam is badly wrong. I’ve always disagreed with the Stoics about this, too.

Islamic law is largely based on the hadiths, which are the written narratives of Mohammad and his early follower’s lives, and Sunnah, which refers to the life and example set by the Prophet Mohammad.

The ban against excessive laughter appears to come from a statement made by Mohammad stating: “Do not laugh too much, for excessive laughter kills the heart [spiritually].”

Because it’s impure, right? Purity is being calm and dull and stable. The hell with that.

Inflammatory theme

So not helpful.

Texas police shot dead two gunmen who opened fire on Sunday outside an exhibit of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad that was organized by a group described as anti-Islamic and billed as a free-speech event.

It’s Pamela Geller’s group; Geert Wilders was there. It was a far-right event as opposed to a secular-left event. Not helpful.

The exhibit was organized by Pamela Geller, president of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI). Her organization, described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group, has sponsored anti-Islamic advertising campaigns in transit systems across the country.

Organizers of the “Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” said the event was to promote freedom of expression. They offered a $10,000 prize for the best artwork or cartoon depicting the Prophet, as well as a $2,500 “People’s Choice Award.”

…

The mayor said the city had permitted the event even though officials knew its inflammatory theme could provoke an attack.

“There was concern, which is why we had heightened security in the area, but we all swear to uphold the Constitution, free speech, free assembly and in this case perhaps, free religion,” Athas said. “So in this case they were free to use the building.”

God what a mess. This is bound to strengthen mistaken people in their opinion that Charlie Hebdo is the same kind of thing as Geller’s contest.

Being pushed into ever-narrower definitions

I’ve been reading Salman Rushdie’s Joseph Anton again, and I keep finding poignant ironies and echoes de nos jours.

Like when he goes to Stockholm to receive the Kurt Tucholsky Prize, “given to writers resisting persecution.”

The Swedish Academy met in a beautiful rococo room on the upper floor of the old Stockholm Stock Exchange Building. Around a long table were nineteen chairs upholstered in pale blue silk. One was for the king, just in case he showed up; it stood empty if he did not, which was always. On the backs of the other chairs were Roman numerals from I to XVIII…He* had been granted permission to enter literature’s holy of holies, the room in which the Nobel Prize was awarded, to address a gravely friendly gathering of gray eminences. Lars Gyllenstein (XIV) and Kerstin Ekman (XV), the academicians who had withdrawn from this table to protest their colleagues’ pusillanimous lack of response to the fatwa, did not attend. [Read more…]

Donations of up to $500,000 a year

An article from the Spectator last August, by Andrew Brown…who has written many things I’ve disagreed with strongly, usually in a blog post. I think many of them were attacks on Richard Dawkins and defenses of religion.

His article contains a startling piece of information.

[T]he Richard Dawkins website offers followers the chance to join the ‘Reason Circle’, which, like Dante’s Hell, is arranged in concentric circles. For $85 a month, you get discounts on his merchandise, and the chance to meet ‘Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science personalities’. Obviously that’s not enough to meet the man himself. For that you pay $210 a month — or $5,000 a year — for the chance to attend an event where he will speak. [Read more…]

Back to 1989

The always-wonderful Joan Smith beez wonderful again with her take on Charlie Hebdo.

Almost 150 well-known writers, including the novelists Joyce Carol Oates and Peter Carey, have written a letter protesting the award. They say they are sickened by the murders but claim the decision to honour the magazine is “neither clear nor inarguable”. They accuse Charlie Hebdo of mocking “a section of the French population that is already marginalised, embattled, and victimised” and causing “further humiliation and suffering” among France’s Muslims.

Seeing this, my mind flashed to The Satanic Verses. Back in 1989, I was dismayed by the number of people who said that the death sentence passed on Salman Rushdie was wrong, but he shouldn’t have offended Muslims. The historian Lord Dacre even declared that he wouldn’t shed a tear if some British Muslims “were to waylay [Rushdie] in a dark street” and teach him some manners. Defending free speech is easier in principle than in practice, it seems.

[Read more…]